Search the forum for N180 and you’ll find advice on its completion, such as:QuoteHaving 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.
For form N180 when filling it - I should tick
Page 1 - Defendant
Page 2 - B - Contact Details
Page 3 - Contact Details
C - C1 - Yes as claim is under 10k
D - D1 - NO???
Page 4 - E1 - Mediation appointment? should i put my details in?
E2 - Is mediation done over the phone and is this a quick phone call?
E3- No
Page 5 - E4 - No
Page 6 - F1 - Respondents home court - should I specify which one?
F2 - No
F3 - 1
Page 7 - F4 - I list the dates when I`m not available to attend the hearing.
F5 - No
F6 - No
Page 8 - G1 - Yes
G2 - English
G3 - English
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.
DEFENCE
1. The Defendant denies any liability for this claim.
2. The Claimant has failed to comply with the strict requirements
of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (POFA 2012),
specifically:
(a) The Creditor failed to provide the Hirer with a 'Notice to
Hirer' within the relevant statutory period in accordance with
Paragraph 14(2)(a);
(b) The 'Notice to Hirer' was not accompanied by the mandatory
documents required under Paragraph 14(2)(b), namely:
(i) A statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm
confirming that the vehicle was hired to a named person under a
hire agreement;
(ii) A copy of the relevant hire agreement; and
(iii) A copy of the statement of liability signed by the hirer
under that hire agreement.
Consequently, the Claimant has failed to satisfy the strict
statutory conditions required to transfer liability from the
registered keeper to the hirer.
In the absence of POFA 2012 compliance, the Claimant has no lawful
right to pursue the Defendant in their capacity as the hirer.
Therefore, the Defendant, as hirer, cannot be held liable for this
charge when the identity of the driver at the material time has
not been established, and the Defendant is under no legal
obligation to identify the driver.
3. There is a lack of precise detail in the Particulars of Claim
(PoC) in respect of the factual and legal allegations made against
the Defendant such that the PoC do not comply with CPR 16.4.
4. The Defendant is unable to plead properly to the PoC because:
(a) The contract referred to is not detailed or attached to the
PoC in accordance with CPR PD 16(7.3)
(b) The PoC do not state the exact wording of the clause (or
clauses) of the terms and conditions of the contract (or
contracts) which is/are relied on;
(c) The PoC do not state with sufficient particularity the
exact
time when the breaches occurred and how long it is alleged that
the vehicle was parked before the parking charges were allegedly
incurred;
(d) The PoC do not state exactly how the claim for statutory
interest is calculated;
(e) The PoC do not state what proportion of the claim are the
parking charges and what proportion is damages;
(f) The PoC states that the Claimant is suing the defendant as
the
driver or the keeper. The claimant obviously knows whether the
defendant is being sued as the driver or the keeper and should not
be permitted to plead alternative causes of action
Statement of truth
I believe that the facts stated in this Defence are true. I
understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought
against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement
in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest
belief in its truth.
That seems along the lines of what I was thinking about, yes.
I don’t understand your second question. Other than that you should use MCOL to enter your defence.
Yes, I’d add something to (2) to the effect ofQuoteand therefore the defendant, as hirer, can not be held liable when the driver has not been identified
just to make the point.
2. The Claimant has failed to comply with the strict requirements of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 ("POFA 2012"), specifically:
(a) The Creditor failed to provide the Hirer with a 'Notice to Hirer' within the relevant statutory period in accordance with Paragraph 14(2)(a);
(b) The 'Notice to Hirer' was not accompanied by the mandatory documents required under Paragraph 14(2)(b), namely:
(i) A statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm confirming that the vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement;
(ii) A copy of the relevant hire agreement; and
(iii) A copy of the statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement.
Consequently, the Claimant has failed to satisfy the strict statutory conditions required to transfer liability from the registered keeper to the hirer.
In the absence of POFA 2012 compliance, the Claimant has no lawful right to pursue the Defendant in their capacity as the hirer. Therefore, the Defendant, as hirer, cannot be held liable for this charge when the identity of the driver at the material time has not been established, and the Defendant is under no legal obligation to identify the driver.
and therefore the defendant, as hirer, can not be held liable when the driver has not been identified
IN THE COUNTY COURT
Claim No: [Claim Number]
BETWEEN:
Parking EYE LTD
Claimant
- and -
[Defendant's Full Name]
Defendant
DEFENCE
1. The Defendant denies any liability for this claim.
2. The Claimant has failed to comply with POFA 2012 specifically :-
(a) the creditor has within the relevant period given the hirer a notice in accordance with sub-paragraph (5) (a “notice to hirer”), together with a copy of the documents mentioned in paragraph 13(2) and the notice to keeper;
(b) a statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement;
a. a copy of the hire agreement; and
b. a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement.
3. There is a lack of precise detail in the Particulars of Claim (PoC) in respect of the factual and legal allegations made against the Defendant such that the PoC do not comply with CPR 16.4.
4. The Defendant is unable to plead properly to the PoC because:
(a) The contract referred to is not detailed or attached to the PoC in accordance with CPR PD 16(7.3)
(b) The PoC do not state the exact wording of the clause (or
clauses) of the terms and conditions of the contract (or
contracts) which is/are relied on;
(c) The PoC do not state with sufficient particularity the exact
time when the breaches occurred and how long it is alleged that
the vehicle was parked before the parking charges were allegedly
incurred;
(d) The PoC do not state exactly how the claim for statutory
interest is calculated;
(e) The PoC do not state what proportion of the claim are the
parking charges and what proportion is damages;
(f) The PoC states that the Claimant is suing the defendant as the
driver or the keeper. The claimant obviously knows whether the
defendant is being sued as the driver or the keeper and should not
be permitted to plead alternative causes of action
Statement of truth
I believe that the facts stated in this Defence are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.
Signed:
Date:
QuoteBut you will need to file a defence in due course.By 1 June, or you file an Acknowledgment of Service by this date which gives you until 15 June to file a defence.
You were promised a template defence earlier in this thread by someone who no longer posts here, but increasingly we have seen the likely template defence struck out by the courts because it’s generic and addresses the failings of the claimant’s process rather than being a defence specific to the case.
You have the information you need in this thread to construct a defence around Parking Eye’s failure to comply with PoFA 2012 to transfer liability from the unknown driver to the hirer, so I suggest you work on that, structure it into paragraphs for clarity and post it here for comment.
The basic point that DCB Legal will almost certainly discontinue in the face of a properly defended claim stands.
N THE COUNTY COURT
Claim No: [Claim Number]
BETWEEN:
UK Parking Control Ltd
Claimant
- and -
[Defendant's Full Name]
Defendant
DEFENCE
1. The Defendant denies any liability for this claim.
2. There is a lack of precise detail in the Particulars of Claim (PoC) in respect of the factual and legal allegations made against the Defendant such that the PoC do not comply with CPR 16.4.
3. The Defendant is unable to plead properly to the PoC because:
(a) The contract referred to is not detailed or attached to the PoC in accordance with CPR PD 16(7.5);
(b) The PoC do not state the exact wording of the clause (or clauses) of the terms and conditions of the contract which is relied on;
(c) The PoC do not state with sufficient particularity exactly where the breach occurred, the exact time when the breach occurred and how long it is alleged that the vehicle was parked before the parking charge was allegedly incurred;
(d) The PoC do not state exactly how the claim for statutory interest is calculated;
(e) The PoC do not state what proportion of the claim is the parking charge and what proportion is damages;
(f) The PoC states that the Claimant is suing the defendant as the driver or the keeper. The claimant obviously knows whether the defendant is being sued as the driver or the keeper and should not be permitted to plead alternative causes of action.
4. The Defendant has attached to this defence a copy of an order made at another court which the allocating judge ought to make at this stage so that the Defendant can then know and understand the case which he/she/it faces and can then respond properly to the claim.
Statement of truth
I believe that the facts stated in this Defence are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.
Signed:
Date:
But you will need to file a defence in due course.By 1 June, or you file an Acknowledgment of Service by this date which gives you until 15 June to file a defence.
What do you mean by “claim was succesful”? Claim by whom? Success by whom?
DCB Legal initiates court proceedings because it knows that many people ignore them, and then it applies for and gets a judgement in default against them.
People who follow the process and file a defence, on the other hand, they eventually give up with. We can’t promise anything, but something like >99% of defended cases get discontinued. It’s not worth their while actually taking it to court, sending people, paying expenses, for a couple of hundred pounds.
But you will need to file a defence in due course.
I agree, the response to the Letter of Claim isn’t too vital, you respond as above and that’s fine.
But you will need to file a defence to a court claim, so you should research this now so that you have it ready in due course. A defended case with a proper defence will very likely end up with a discontinuation, but you need to follow the paperwork path first.
You could reply with the following;
To whom it may concern,
Thank you for your Letter of Claim which arrived today.
I write as the individual named on your letter.
Liability for the debt is categorically denied.
As I understand it, the driver is not known to your client and, given the specific circumstances, there is no other route to liability in this matter.
I am sorry that I am unable to help you further.
Best wishes,
xxxxx xxxxxxxx
Reply along the lines of denying any responsibility for the alleged debt, thanks to the incompetence of Parking Eye in not following the requirements of PoFA 2012, and you will defend any court claim on that basis, if not on others.
Expect to receive a court claim, to which you will need to respond and provide a defence. And attend a “mediation” session at which you will offer £0 to settle.
DCB Legal will almost certainly discontinue the case before having to pay the court fee.
Search the forum for many, many similar cases.
As long as the driver has not been identified, they cannot hold the Hirer liable. They have no idea who the driver is unless the Hirer blabs it to them, inadvertently or otherwise.
Did you appeal? If you did, did you identify the driver by saying things like "I did this or that" instead of "the driver did this or that"?
Besides the fact they the Notice to Hirer (NtH) is not PoFA compliant with paras 13/14, the location is not relevant land as it is covered buy statutory byelaws. As long as the driver has not been identified, this will go nowhere.
As already mentioned above, because ParkingEye are using DSCB Legal, they know they don't have a chance if this ever went in front of a judge. If DCB Legal do issue the claim, you will defend using the template defence we provide and I can guarantee that it will eventually be discontinued. They only go this far because they hope you are low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree and can be intimidated into paying out of ignorance and fear.
Can`t i contact DCBL to ask them to send the letter of claim?You could, but they won't. Any letter of claim will be issued by the associated but different DCB Legal, or if they're feeling lucky, ParkingEye themselves.
The usual: what other documents came with the Notice to Hirer?
None, I’m sure, so Parking Eye has not complied with PoFA 2012 to be able to hold you, the hirer, liable in place of the unknown driver. So if the identity of the driver has not been revealed, they can’t come after you instead.
It sounds like no formal appeal to Parking Eye was made.
Who is the notice of intended legal action from? If it’s just a debt collector, ignore and wait for a Letter of Claim.
The incorrect name is irrelevant. You can correct it when you reply to the Letter of Claim in due course.
PoFA requiresQuote(2)The conditions are that—and the required extra documents are
(a)the creditor has within the relevant period given the hirer a notice in accordance with sub-paragraph (5) (a “notice to hirer”), together with a copy of the documents mentioned in paragraph 13(2) and the notice to keeper;Quote(a)a statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement;
(b)a copy of the hire agreement; and
(c)a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement.
(2)The conditions are that—and the required extra documents are
(a)the creditor has within the relevant period given the hirer a notice in accordance with sub-paragraph (5) (a “notice to hirer”), together with a copy of the documents mentioned in paragraph 13(2) and the notice to keeper;
(a)a statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement;
(b)a copy of the hire agreement; and
(c)a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement.