Free Traffic Legal Advice

I've received an appointment for a mediation phone call.

Just wanted to confirm this is the recommended reponse(Thank you to B789):

• 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.

[/i]

Just to confirm that Section E. About the mediation appointment  - should be left blank.

Here is a brief update: email received from DCB Legal:

Plain Text Defence:

---

Defence and Counterclaim

Claim number
************
Claimant
Smart Parking Limited
Defendant
************
 
How much of the claim do you dispute?
I dispute the full amount claimed as shown on the claim form.
 
Do you dispute this claim because you have already paid it?
No, for other reasons.
 
Defence
1. The Defendant denies the claim in its entirety. The Defendant
asserts that there is no liability to the Claimant and that no
debt is owed. The claim is without merit and does not adequately
disclose any comprehensible cause of action.

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 adequately 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 16.7.3(1);

(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 adequately set out the reason (or reasons)
why the claimant asserts the defendant has breached the contract
(or contracts);

(d) 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;

(e) The PoC do not state precisely how the sum claimed is
calculated, including the basis for any statutory interest,
damages, or other charges;

(f) The PoC do not state what proportion of the claim is the
parking charge and what proportion is damages;

(g) The PoC do not provide clarity on whether the Defendant is
sued as the driver or the keeper of the vehicle, as the claimant
cannot plead alternative causes of action without specificity.

4. The Defendant submits that courts have previously struck out
similar claims of their own initiative for failure to adequately
comply with CPR 16.4, particularly where the Particulars of
Claim failed to specify the contractual terms relied upon or
explain the alleged breach with sufficient clarity.

5. In comparable cases involving modest sums, judges have found
that requiring further case management steps would be
disproportionate and contrary to the overriding objective.
Accordingly, strike-out was deemed appropriate. The Defendant
submits that the same reasoning applies in this case and invites
the court to adopt a similar approach by striking out the claim
due to the Claimant’s failure to adequately comply with
CPR 16.4, rather than permitting an amendment. The Defendant
proposes that the following Order be made:

Draft Order:

Of the Court's own initiative and upon reading the particulars
of claim and the defence.

AND the court being of the view that the particulars of claim
do not adequately comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a) because:
(a) they do not set out the exact wording of the clause
(or clauses) of the terms and conditions of the contract which
is (or are) relied on; and
(b) they do not adequately set out the reason (or reasons) why
the claimant asserts that the defendant was in breach of
contract.

AND the claimant could have complied with CPR 16.4(1)(a) had it
served separate detailed particulars of claim, as it could have
done pursuant to CPR PD 7C.5.2(2), but chose not to do so.

AND upon the claim being for a very modest sum such that the
court considers it disproportionate and not in accordance with
the overriding objective to allot to this case any further share
of the court's resources by ordering further particulars of
claim and a further defence, each followed by further referrals
to the judge for case management.

ORDER:
1. The claim is struck out.
2. Permission to either party to apply to set aside, vary or
stay this order by application on notice, which must be filed at
this Court not more than 5 days after service of this order,
failing which no such application may be made.
 
Signed
I am the Defendant - I believe that the facts stated in this form are true
************
10/08/2025
 
Defendant's date of birth
**************
 
Address to which notices about this claim can be sent to you
************
 
Telephone number
************
E-mail
***********

Thank you to everyone for your replies and your time looking at this.

The second PCN 2/7 - 13/7 is in time. Again presumed delivered 15/7.

However they have conflated the claims into one, and therefore can’t use “In the alternative the Defendant is pursued as the keeper pusuant to POFA 2012, Schedule 4” as they claim.

Thank you for looking at this carefully @jfollows, this is very helpful.

Do we presume that you have ignored all correspondence so far and not replied to any.

If so, unfortunately this is a example of not to ignore and gives more work to do.

However, help will be here.

Thank you @Dave65

I haven't replied to any of the correspondence - a lesson now learnt.