Author Topic: ParkMaven - DCB Legal - Parking in a private car park with Blue Badge - Court Claim Received  (Read 387 times)

0 Members and 149 Guests are viewing this topic.

Hi all,

I've submitted a AOS via MCOL but just wanted to get some advice on the defence of my claim.

I parked in a car park in a disabled bay and it wasn't at all stated on the signs that I need to pay for parking there as far as I recall. This happened a few months back but now I'ved received a MCOL claim for which I've submitted a AOS as stated in some of the threads.

I was just wondering whether someone can guide me on next steps. I was a member of another forum but that seems to have closed down so hoping someone here can help.

Advanced notice ---- Really appreciate any guidance as not very good with computers or email so please be a little patient with me. I've attached the claim form as received thanks



Thanks

Choc

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook


What the signs say might be key, there is no reason for private land to give free parking to people who park in disabled bays, whether or not they hold and display blue badges.

You say that the signs didn’t state that you had to pay, but the counter-argument is that if they didn’t state that you don’t have to pay, then you do have to pay.

However, please read https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/read-this-first-private-parking-charges-forum-guide/ and post what you can, especially the orignal notice you received. There may be other reasons why you don’t need to pay, but without this we’re guessing and can’t advise you properly.
« Last Edit: May 09, 2025, 06:12:08 pm by jfollows »

Thanks for reply.

I don't have the other documents anymore. I am very far from location but I can try to ask someone to send picture of the sign
Can I appeal against DCB still using template or it's not possible? The hotel was aware I was parking there and I asked one of the workers and he said it was fine to park there if I display my badge

If it was a hotel car park, then you should ask the hotel to get this cancelled for you on the basis that you were told to park and display your badge.

If they won’t do so, then it is part of your defence which you will file.

DCB Legal tends to withdraw from defended court claims before having to pay the fee. So follow the process and submit a defence, which you should post here for comment first.


I contacted the hotel and they said to email them which I have.

Will they contact Parkmaven now and will I need to inform the court of this?

Thanks


If a claim has been issued, it is no good trying to get the hotel to get it cancelled. The only thing you need to concern yourself with now, is defending the claim.

With an issue date of 23rd April, you had until 4pm on Monday 12th May to submit your defence. Having submitted an Acknowledgement of Service (AoS) before then, you now have until 4pm on Tuesday 27th May to submit your defence.

Here is the defence and link to the draft order that goes with it. You only need to edit your name and the claim number. You sign the defence by typing your full name for the signature and date it. There is nothing to edit in the draft order.

When you're ready you combine both documents as a single PDF attachment and send as an attachment in an email to claimresponses.cnbc@justice.gov.uk and CC in yourself. The claim number must be in the email subject field and in the body of the email just put: "Please find attached the defence and draft order in the matter of ParkMaven Ltd v [your full name] Claim no.: [claim number]."

Quote
IN THE COUNTY COURT
Claim No: [Claim Number]

BETWEEN:

ParkMaven 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:

Draft Order for the defence
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain