You DO NOT call anyone. You will eventually receive your own N180DQ and there will be a section in that about the mediation call. For now, just keep checking your MCOL history and when it updates to show that your N180DQ has been sent, just follow this advice:
Having received your own N180 (make sure it is not simply a copy of the claimants N180), do not use the paper form. Ignore all the other forms that came with it. you can discard those. Download your own here and fill it in on your computer. You sign it by simply typing your full name in the signature box.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/673341e779e9143625613543/N180_1124.pdf
Here are the answers to some of the less obvious questions:
• The name of the court is "Civil National Business Centre".
• To be completed by "Your full name" and you are the "Defendant".
• C1: "YES"
• D1: "NO". Reason: "I wish to question the Claimant about their evidence at a hearing in person and to expose omissions and any misleading or incorrect evidence or assertions.
Given the Claimant is a firm who complete cut & paste parking case paperwork for a living, having this case heard solely on papers would appear to put the Claimant at an unfair advantage, especially as they would no doubt prefer the Defendant not to have the opportunity to expose the issues in the Claimants template submissions or speak as the only true witness to events in question.."
• F1: Whichever is your nearest county court. Use this to find it: https://www.find-court-tribunal.service.gov.uk/search-option
• F3: "1".
• Sign the form by simply typing your full name for the signature.
When you have completed the form, attach it to a single email addressed to both dq.cnbc@justice.gov.uk and info@dcblegal.co.uk and CC in yourself. Make sure that the claim number is in the subject field of the email.
When the time comes to receive your mediation call, follow this advice:
For the mediation call, the only requirement is for you "attend" the call. It is not part of the judicial process and no judge is involved.
This is what I advise you to say when you receive the call from the mediator:
“Before I set out my position, please confirm from the claimant’s side:
• the full name of the person attending for them;
• their role/position at their legal representative’s firm; and
• whether they hold written authority to negotiate and settle today.
Please relay that back to me before we continue.”
After the mediator calls back...
If identified and authority confirmed:
“Thank you. I’m content to proceed on that basis. My settlement offer is £0, or I invite the claimant to discontinue with no order as to costs.”
If no/unclear authority:
“Please record that the claimant’s attendee has not confirmed settlement authority. My position remains that liability is denied and my offer is £0, subject to prompt approval by an authorised solicitor if they choose to discontinue.”
All you need to know is the name and the position of the person acting for the claimant and report that back to us. It will be over within minutes. Complete waste of time otherwise.
Respond with the following by email:
Subject: Re: Response to Letter of Claim
Dear Ms Owens,
Thank you for your response dated [insert date] and for the documents attached.
I acknowledge receipt of the following documents:
• A copy of the Notice to Keeper (NtK) issued by Euro Car Parks
• Photographs of signage and the vehicle
• A site plan showing the location of signs
• A file labelled "LOA" which could not be opened due to format or corruption
Having reviewed your reply and the accompanying material, I must reiterate that your client’s Letter of Claim remains non-compliant with the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims and the Practice Direction – Pre-Action Conduct. Your reply has not adequately addressed the deficiencies I previously raised.
1. The map showing the location of signs is undated and unsupported by any evidence that it reflects the signage layout at the time of the alleged contravention.
2. The photographs provided contain inconsistent and historical timestamps from various years. This raises serious doubt as to whether they reflect the signage in place at the material time. If your client intends to rely on signage as the basis of a contractual charge, it must provide time-relevant evidence.
3. You have still failed to confirm whether your client is pursuing me as the driver or the keeper, and whether it is seeking to rely on Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. As confirmed in VCS v Edward (2023) [H0KF6C9C], there is no presumption in law that the registered keeper was the driver.
4. You have not provided a copy of the contract with the landowner which your client must rely on to establish standing. This is required under the Private Parking Single Code of Practice and remains a key document that must be disclosed before proceedings are considered.
5. The “LOA” file you have provided is unreadable. If this was intended to demonstrate landowner authority, please resend a working copy. Otherwise, the absence of this document further undermines your client’s standing.
6. You have failed to properly explain or evidence the additional £70 surcharge. You confirm it does not relate to any supply of goods or services between the parties and is not subject to VAT, yet you have not provided an invoice or any evidence of work undertaken to justify this amount. This charge has been widely rejected by courts and cannot be recovered in addition to the parking charge.
7. The original Notice to Keeper is not PoFA-compliant, as it fails to meet the strict requirements under Paragraph 9 of Schedule 4. If your client is unable to rely on PoFA, then there is no keeper liability and the matter ends there.
Your letter dismisses my detailed requests as disproportionate without explaining which items were withheld or why. This obstructive stance does not satisfy the requirements of the Protocol, which requires both parties to act reasonably and proportionately. I remind you that I am entitled to request documents and information needed to understand and respond to the claim.
Unless and until your client complies with its obligations under the Protocol, I remain unable to respond substantively. If your client proceeds to issue a claim without first supplying the requested information and documents, I will seek an immediate stay of proceedings pursuant to paragraph 15(b) of the Practice Direction and ask the court to impose appropriate sanctions under paragraphs 13, 15(c), and 16.
For the avoidance of doubt, no payment will be made on the basis of the current Letter of Claim. If a compliant Letter of Claim is issued with the information previously requested, I will respond within 30 days of receipt as required.
Yours faithfully,
[Your full name]
Follow the advice and you won't be paying a penny to ECP. First, respond that Letter of Claim (LoC) by email to info@dcblegal.co.uk and also CC yourself with the following:
Dear Sirs,
Your Letter Before Claim contains insufficient detail of the claim and fails to provide copies of evidence your client places reliance upon and thus is in complete contravention of the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims.
I am the registered keeper of the vehicle. I am not obliged to identify the driver and I decline to do so. As there is no legal presumption that the keeper of a vehicle was its driver on any particular occasion, your client cannot pursue me as driver as per VCS v Edward (2023) [H0KF6C9C] (https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/yvxek3kfwtb3qent3lj6y/VCS-Limited-v-Ian-Mark-Edward-H0KF6C9C.pdf?rlkey=niecohfdtj1n1ysh5prbsp52p&e=1&dl=0).
Because your letter lacks specificity and breaches the requirements of the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims (paragraphs 3.1(a)-(d), 5.1 and 5.2) as well as the Practice Direction - Pre-Action Conduct (paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c)), you must treat this letter as a formal request for all of the documents/information that the protocol now requires your client to provide. Your client must not issue proceedings without complying with that protocol.
As solicitors you must surely be familiar with the requirements of both the Practice Direction and the Pre-Action Protocol for debt claims and your client, as a serial litigator of debt claims, should likewise be aware of them. As you (and your client) must know, the Practice Direction and Protocol bind all potential litigants, whatever the size or type of the claim. Its express purpose is to assist parties in understanding the claim and their respective positions in relation to it, to enable parties to take stock of their positions and to negotiate a settlement, or at least narrow the issues, without incurring the costs of court proceedings or using up valuable court time. It is embarrassing that a firm of Solicitors are sending a consumer a vague and un-evidenced 'Letter of Claim' in complete ignorance of the pre-existing Practice Direction and the Pre-Action Protocol.
I confirm that, once I am in receipt of a Letter Before Claim that complies with the requirements of para 3.1 (a) of the Pre-Action Protocol, I shall then seek advice and submit a formal response within 30 days, as required by the Protocol. Thus, I require your client to comply with its obligations by sending me the following information/documents:
1. An explanation of the cause of action
2. whether they are pursuing me as driver or keeper
3. whether they are relying on the provisions of Schedule 4 of POFA 2012
4. what the details of the claim are; for how long it is claimed the vehicle was parked, how the monies being claimed arose and have been calculated
5. Is the claim for a contractual breach? If so, what is the date of the agreement? The names of the parties to it and provide to me a copy of that contract.
6. If the claim is for a contractual breach, photographs showing the vehicle was parked in contravention of said contract.
7. Is the claim for trespass? If so, provide details.
8. Provide me a copy of the contract with the landowner under which they assert authority to bring the claim, as required by the BPA/IPC Private Parking Single Code of Practice (PPSCoP).
9. a plan showing where any signs were displayed
10. Photographs of the signs displayed (size of sign, size of font, height at which displayed) at the time of any alleged contravention.
11. Provide details of the original charge, and detail any interest and administrative or other charges added
12. Am I to understand that the additional £70 represents what is dressed up as a 'Debt Recovery' fee, and if so, is this nett or inclusive of VAT? If the latter, would you kindly explain why I am being asked to pay the operator’s VAT?
13. With regard to the principal alleged PCN sum: Is this damages, or will it be pleaded as consideration for parking?
I am clearly entitled to this information under paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c) of the Practice Direction. I also need it in order to comply with my own obligations under paragraph 6(b).
If your client does not provide me with this information then I put you on notice that I will be relying on the cases of Webb Resolutions Ltd v Waller Needham & Green [2012] EWHC 3529 (Ch), Daejan Investments Limited v The Park West Club Limited (Part 20) Buxton Associates [2003] EWHC 2872, Charles Church Developments Ltd v Stent Foundations Limited & Peter Dann Limited [2007] EWHC 855 in asking the court to impose sanctions on your client and to order a stay of the proceedings, pursuant to paragraphs 13, 15(b) and (c) and 16 of the Practice Direction, as referred to in paragraph 7.2 of the Protocol.
Until your client has complied with its obligations and provided this information, I am unable to respond properly to the alleged claim and to consider my position in relation to it, and it is entirely premature (and a waste of costs and court time) for your client to issue proceedings. Should your client do so, then I will seek an immediate stay pursuant to paragraph 15(b) of the Practice Direction and an order that this information is provided.
Yours faithfully,
[Your name]