Free Traffic Legal Advice

I submitted my defence a few months ago.
I had a letter acknowledging receipt of my defence, and informing me that the claimant needs to contact the court within 28days if they wish to proceed. That was back in march,
i have had no further correspondence from HM courts and tribunals.
I logged in today to see what was happening and I have found this status update.
A claim was issued against you on 17/02/2026

Your acknowledgment of service was submitted on 02/03/2026 at 22:50:30

Your acknowledgment of service was received on 03/03/2026 at 08:07:18

Your defence was submitted on 15/03/2026 at 12:51:04

Your defence was received on 16/03/2026 at 01:06:47

DQ filed by claimant on 16/04/2026

DQ sent to you on 16/04/2026

I have not received a "DQ" if it was sent to me by post.
What should I do now? Can I submit this DQ form online, or do I need to contact the courts to inform them that this has not been received?

thanks

Thanks, I am taking ownership. However, I am relying on the advice of the people that posted before to provide reassurance that this would be dismissed if "defended properly", and I do not know that defended properly means as I have no experience with this issue. You are saying content does not matter, but if that is the case, what does defended properly mean?

Here is a defence I found on another page. I have no idea what this means, which is why I am asking for advice on what to put in my defence. Is this defence adequate then?

"
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 PD 16, para 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 materially 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 PD 7C, para 5.2, but chose not to do so.

AND upon the Court determining, having regard to the overriding objective (CPR 1.1), that it would be disproportionate to direct further pleadings or to allot any further share of the Court’s resources to this claim (for example by ordering further particulars of claim and a further defence, with consequent 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 7 days after service of this order, failing which no such application may be made."

Would be very grateful if someone could help me with advice on what I should put on my defence when submitting this.

I dont have any experience with this, and I am looking for some guidance through the process to try and beat this.

Hello, I am just bumping this thread. Any help is greatly appreciated. Any suggestions on how I should respond with my defence? Should i submit this online on MCOL or via paper?

I have now received a claim form from DCB via HM courts.
It gives me the option to dispute the whole claim or make a counterclaim, and also the option to request 28 days to prepare defence rather than 14 days it gives by default.
Would appreciate advice on best way to proceed? Obviously I will be disputing the claim, but any information on next steps - should i request the 28days, what should i put in the defence, next steps would be appreciated.

I have now received the email response below from DCB legal.

They have included the evidence as attachment

https://ibb.co/Cq3Sz9y (please click on load full resolution to see the file properly)

Any advice on best way to proceed? Should I respond? Or wait it out until the letter of claim? Or settle with them?


-----------------------------------

We write in response to your correspondence received in our office dated 23/11/2025.
We now respond to the same as follows.

Please find evidence requested attached. 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.

The amount owed is a genuine pre-estimate of the losses incurred in managing the parking location to ensure compliance with the clearly displayed terms and conditions. However, in Parking Eye Ltd v Beavis, it was found, both at County Court and Court of Appeal level, that appealing a Parking Charge on the basis that the amount is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss is, in fact, not a successful legal defence.

WITHOUT PREJUDICE SAVE AS TO COSTS
 
To assist the Court in achieving its overriding objective, our Client may be prepared to settle this case. I can confirm our Client would be agreeable to your offer of  £200.00 in full and final settlement of this Claim. The current outstanding balance is £340.00
 
Should you be agreeable to this offer, please confirm the same within 30 days. Failure to make payment may result in the matter progressing to the next stage. 

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,

Litigation Support Team

DCB Legal Ltd

Also interestingly, the letter from dcblegal has a mis-spelling of my surname. Looking at the v5c, it looks like the dvla has mis read my writing when I filled in the ownership form and misread ni for m. So this has transferred to the letter dcblegal have sent to me.

Obviously I will contact dvla to correct the v5c. But the question is, should I correct dcblegal when I sign off the reply letter above?

sorry i couldnt see how to attach the letter initially.
here is a link to the letter.
https://ibb.co/Jwb4qZzG
https://ibb.co/svKdJtZL