Free Traffic Legal Advice

IN THE COUNTY COURT

Claim No: [Claim Number]

BETWEEN:

New Generation Parking Management Ltd
Claimant

- and -

[Defendant's Full Name]

Defendant

---

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 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 (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 attaches to this defence a copy of a draft order approved by a district judge at another court. The court struck out the claim of its own initiative after determining that the Particulars of Claim failed to comply with CPR 16.4. The judge noted that the claimant had failed to:

(i) Set out the exact wording of the clause (or clauses) of the terms and conditions relied upon;

(ii) Adequately explain the reasons why the defendant was allegedly in breach of contract;

(iii) Provide separate, detailed Particulars of Claim as permitted under CPR PD 7C.5.2(2).

(iv) The court further observed that, given the modest sum claimed, requiring further case management steps would be disproportionate and contrary to the overriding objective. Accordingly, the judge struck out the claim outright rather than permitting an amendment.

5. 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 for the Claimant’s failure to comply with CPR 16.4.

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:

We write in response to correspondence received in our office dated 9th June 2025.           

We have made a record of the contents of your correspondence and noted this on your file accordingly. 

For the avoidance of doubt, a claim was issued against you on 10th June 2025 in the sum of £291.60. As such the opportunity to raise substantive disputes has now passed and so we will not be responding to the same.

If you fail to pay the Judgment balance within one calendar month of the date of the Judgment, the same will remain on your credit file for a period of 6 years. If payment is made outside of the one calendar month, the Judgment will simply be marked as 'satisfied' on your credit file.

Please find enclosed the evidence we hold on file.

You now have 30 days from the date of Judgment to make payment of £291.60. Failure to make payment will result in the CCJ currently recorded on your credit file, remaining for a period of 6 years.

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 ([redacted]) 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/.

• PDF of two NtK letters from NGPM dated 31st May and 1st July
• Photographs of the site, car park and signs
• CCTV of the vehicle in the disabled bay

Thank you for your request. We confirm that we have updated our records to reflect your new address for service:

[New address]

All future correspondence regarding this matter will be directed to this address.

However, at the time of the parking event, our records indicate that your V5C (vehicle logbook) had not been updated with the DVLA. Therefore, when we obtained registered keeper details in accordance with our legitimate interest under Regulation 27 of the Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) Regulations 2002, the DVLA provided us with the address listed at that time:

[Old address]

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.... etc etc

1. Breach of Pre-Action Protocol

Your Letter of Claim was dated 9 May 2025. I responded in full on 26 May 2025, within the 30-day period required under the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims. My response included a request for further information and documentation, as permitted under Paragraph 5.1 of the Protocol.

On 29 May 2025, you replied stating that you were “unable to locate [my] file with the information provided” and requested the following details:

• Full name
• First line of address and postcode
• DCB Legal reference number

I provided all of the requested information. Despite this, you failed to respond to my Letter of Claim response, failed to provide any of the requested documents, and instead proceeded to issue a claim on 10 June 2025.

This is a clear and deliberate breach of the Pre-Action Protocol. You had a duty to engage meaningfully with my response and provide the requested documents before issuing proceedings. Your failure to do so will be brought to the court’s attention.