Free Traffic Legal Advice

No its a different claimant at a different location but the solicitors are the same DCB Legal.
What I meant to ask was that if its still the same process to proceed for me with the new case just as I followed your guide in the current case then I can simply copy and paste that from my current case, like the 122 line defence and following questionnaire without adding that extra workload for you guys to spend time and effort.

Do I have to wait for their response of this before submitting my own N180 ? The date on my N180 form says you must submit by 30th October 2025.

Hello again..I received a copy of their N180 in the email on 29SEP 25 and after reading a few previous cases I wanted to ask if there is anything we should object to.
In response to E1 they just put TBC and under the signature at the last page they just wrote DCB LEGAL LTD.

I also received my own N180 in post on 13th Oct 25 and will follow the advice on previous cases.

As I mentioned above that I responded to their letter of claim asking for proof of their claim.I have today received this below email from DCB LEGAL.I am assuming it doesn't require a response.


We write in response to your correspondence received in our office dated 11/08/2025.

We now respond to the same as follows.

Our Client will ensure that there are signs clearly displayed on the land, outlining the terms of the parking. These will generally be displayed at the entrance and exit of the land/ car park, as well as being positioned at various points throughout the land (Please refer to the attached Site Plan) Our Client does not need to prove that you read and understood the terms of those signs and will rely on the fact that the signs were situated on the land and that a reasonable person would have seen them. You should always be vigilant when entering any land that you are not familiar with or that you know is privately owned and there are parking terms in place.

If there are any documents that you have requested, but that are not attached, it is because we have deemed the request to be disproportionate and/or not relevant to the substantive issues in dispute. We respectfully draw your attention to paragraph 2.1(c) of the Protocol and remind you that both parties are expected to act reasonably and proportionately.

Please note, a claim was accepted against you on 28/08/2025. Please either address the Cout documentation or make payment of the claim amount of £264.72 within the relevant time frame. Failure to do so will result in Judgment being requested against you in default. If accepted a County Court Judgment will be placed on your credit file.

Payment can be made via bank transfer to our designated client account: -

Account Name: DCB Legal Ltd Client Account
Sort Code: 20-24-09
Account Number: 60964441
You must quote the correct case reference (711200245122GBP) when making payment. If you do not, we may be unable to correctly allocate the payment. If further action is taken by us as a result of an incorrect reference being quoted, you will be liable for any further fees or costs incurred.

We would ask that you kindly furnish us with your most up to date telephone number and email address, this can be emailed to us at info@dcblegal.co.uk.

Alternatively, you can contact DCB Legal Ltd on 0203 838 7038 to make payment over the telephone or online at https://dcblegal.co.uk/response/pay-online/.

Kind Regards,

 

Sofia Marth

Administration Associate

DCB Legal Ltd

Thank you so much for such detailed clarification and please excuse my legal ignorance!
I will submit the defence in a couple of days at the latest and will post here once I hear anything back from them.
This is such great help and I cannot thank you enough for this!

Thank you for such a detailed response, I appreciate your help!
Could you please clarify a few points.
In your defence draft

(c) The PoC do not adequately set out the reason (or reasons) why the claimant asserts the defendant has breached the contract (or contracts).
The No.3 point of POC does state the breach reason NO VALID PERMIT DISPLAYED.

(d) The PoC do not state with sufficient particularity exactly where the breach occurred,
The No.1 point of POC does state the exact place as Arnold street leicester.

(e) The PoC do not state precisely how the sum claimed is calculated, including the basis for any statutory interest, damages, or other charges;
In the last para of POC it does mention about interest charges at a rate of 8% per annum along with an additional column at the bottom right of the page with
Amount claimed £179.72
court fee £35
Legal representatives cost £50.

(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.
The No.3 point of POC does state the defendant is pursued as the driver and point No 4 says In the alternative the defendant is pursued as the keeper pursuant to POFA 2012 schedule 4.
I Don't understand these two points to be honest.

Do you think I should omit these points ?

I have checked the google street view of this road but thats from 2018 and the street is very different now.
I am posting the photos I have of the parking spots but I will get more later with a wider view of the street.

https://i.imgur.com/6OJ2dcR.jpeg[/img]

https://i.imgur.com/kVlIghy.jpeg[/img]

https://i.imgur.com/MupWUIB.jpeg[/img]