Free Traffic Legal Advice

Ignore Trace and all other variants of debt collectors.
They are powerless, and they don’t “threaten” a CCJ, they just put it prominently in big letters to frighten you.
If you want specific advice, please read https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/read-this-first-private-parking-charges-forum-guide/ and post things like your original PCN here for us to see.

Come back when you receive a Letter of Claim (LoC). As advised, you can safely ignore Trace or any other debt recovery firm. We dob[t need to know about a powerless debt collector. All they can do is try and persuade the low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree to pay up out of ignorance and fear. They certainly cannot give you a CCJ and here is why:

What CCJ? Do you have any understanding of how someone gets a CCJ? Nothing we advise on here will make anyone get a CCJ.

Quote

A County Court Judgment (CCJ) does not just happen—it follows a clear legal process. If someone gets a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) from a private parking company, here's what happens step by step:

1. Parking Charge Notice (PCN) Issued

• The parking company sends a letter (Notice to Keeper) demanding money.

• This is not a fine—it’s an invoice for an alleged breach of contract.

2. Opportunity to Appeal

• The recipient can appeal to the parking company.

•If rejected, they may be able to appeal to POPLA (if BPA member) or IAS (if IPC member).

• If an appeal is lost or ignored, the parking company demands payment.

3. Debt Collection Letters

• The parking company might send scary letters or pass the case to a debt collector.

• Debt collectors have no power—they just send letters and can be ignored.

• No CCJ happens at this stage.

4. Letter Before Claim (LBC)

• If ignored for long enough, the parking company (or their solicitor) sends a Letter Before Claim (LBC).

• This is a warning that they may start a court case.

• The recipient has 30 days to reply before a claim is filed.

• No CCJ happens at this stage.

5. County Court Claim Issued

• If ignored or unpaid, the parking company may file a claim with the County Court.

• The court sends a Claim Form with details of the claim and how to respond.

• The recipient has 14 days to respond (or 28 days if they acknowledge it).

• No CCJ happens at this stage.

6. Court Process

• If the recipient defends the claim, a judge decides if they owe money.

• If the recipient ignores the claim, the parking company wins by default.

• No CCJ happens yet unless the recipient loses and ignores the court.

7. Judgment & Payment

• If the court rules that money is owed, the recipient has 30 days to pay in full.

• If they pay within 30 days, no CCJ goes on their credit file.

• If they don’t pay within 30 days, the CCJ stays on their credit file for 6 years.

Conclusion

CCJs do not appear out of thin air. They only happen if:

• A parking company takes the case to court.

• The person loses or ignores the case.

• The person fails to pay within 30 days.

If you engage with the process (appeal, defend, or pay on time), no CCJ happens.

Thank you so much . That provides a lot of clarity. 

respond with the following by email to help@moorsidelegal.co.uk and CC yourself:

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.

As a firm of supposed solicitors, one would expect you to be capable of crafting a letter that aligns with paragraphs 3.1(a)–(d), 5.1 and 5.2 of the Protocol, and paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c) of the Practice Direction. These provisions do not exist for decoration—they exist to facilitate informed discussion and proportionate resolution. You might wish to reacquaint yourselves with them.

The Civil Procedure Rules 1998, Pre-Action Conduct and Protocols (Part 3), stipulate that prior to proceedings, parties should have exchanged sufficient information to understand each other’s position. Part 6 helpfully clarifies that this includes disclosure of key documents relevant to the issues in dispute.

Your template letter mentions a “contract”, yet fails to provide one. This would appear to undermine the only foundation upon which your client’s claim allegedly rests. It’s difficult to engage in meaningful pre-litigation dialogue when your side declines to furnish the very document it purports to enforce.

I confirm that, once I am in receipt of a Letter Before Claim that complies with the requirements of para 3.1 (a) of the Pre-Action Protocol, I shall then seek advice and submit a formal response within 30 days, as required by the Protocol. Thus, I require your client to comply with its obligations by sending me the following information/documents:

1. A copy of the original Notice to Keeper (NtK) that confirms any PoFA 2012 liability
2. A copy of the contract (or contracts) you allege exists between your client and the driver, in the form of an actual photograph of the sign you contend was at the location on the material date, not a generic stock image
3. The exact wording of the clause (or clauses) of the terms and conditions of the contract(s) which is (are) relied upon that you allege to have been breached
4. The written agreement between your client and the landowner, establishing authority to enforce
5. A breakdown of the charges claimed, identifying whether the principal sum is claimed as consideration or damages, and whether the £70 “debt recovery” fee includes VAT

I am clearly entitled to this information under paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c) of the Practice Direction. I also need it in order to comply with my own obligations under paragraph 6(b).

If your client does not provide me with this information then I put you on notice that I will be relying on the cases of Webb Resolutions Ltd v Waller Needham & Green [2012] EWHC 3529 (Ch), Daejan Investments Limited v The Park West Club Limited (Part 20) Buxton Associates [2003] EWHC 2872, Charles Church Developments Ltd v Stent Foundations Limited & Peter Dann Limited [2007] EWHC 855 in asking the court to impose sanctions on your client and to order a stay of the proceedings, pursuant to paragraphs 13, 15(b) and (c) and 16 of the Practice Direction, as referred to in paragraph 7.2 of the Protocol.

Until your client has complied with its obligations and provided this information, I am unable to respond properly to the alleged claim and to consider my position in relation to it, and it is entirely premature (and a waste of costs and court time) for your client to issue proceedings. Should your client do so, then I will seek an immediate stay pursuant to paragraph 15(b) of the Practice Direction and an order that this information is provided.

Yours faithfully,

[Your name]

Hi,
Please see the reply below from Moorside legal. I recieved the email on the 18th and they state I have 7 days to respond. Any advice much appreciated.

noreply@moorsidelegal.co.uk
   
AttachmentsAug 18, 2025, 3:58 PM (3 days ago)
   
to me

We write in relation to the above matter.

Please see attached as requested.
Our client has instructed us to collect the outstanding balance of £170.00 in relation to an unpaid Parking Charge Notice (PCN).
 
The Terms and Conditions on which UKCPS Ltd's services are provided are clearly displayed throughout the private land. Please be advised that there are several signs within this location displaying the terms and conditions,  As you breached the terms and conditions of the car park, this PCN was correctly issued. Considering the evidence, we are satisfied that the PCN has been issued in line with industry standards and is compliant with the International Parking Community’s (IPC) code of practice. The signage of the car park also complies with the International Parking Community’s Code of Practice.
 
By entering and parking the vehicle on our client's private land, you agreed to enter into a contract with our client and to be bound by the terms and conditions of that contract. The terms and conditions were clearly displayed at the entrance and in prominent places within the car park. Due to your failure to comply with the terms and conditions, our client has issued the PCN.
 
It is unclear why you would need to inspect any agreement between our client and the landowner as you are not party to that agreement, not could it aid your dispute or any potential defence.
 
The additional charge which has been levied on your Parking Charge of £70 is the amount set out in both the British Parking Association and International Parking Community Codes of Practice as the amount which may be added to a Parking Charge when a Parking Charge remains unpaid and when further recovery is required. Our Client is a member of the International Parking Community which is a government approved Accredited Trade Association (ATA) for Private Parking. Our Client adheres to the ATA’s Code of Practice. The £70 does not represent the cost of recovery but is a reasonable amount in relation to the Parking Charge amount, in order to encourage early payment of the Parking Charge without the need for debt recovery. It is a fair amount set by our Client’s government-approved Accredited Trade Association Code of Practice. There are however also costs incurred by our client in relation to debt recovery services.
 

 
Please note that we will not be addressing any further correspondence related to disputes of the same nature, as we have already provided you with a response. However, should you wish to raise a new dispute, we will investigate the matter further and respond accordingly.

 

We ask that you make the full payment of £170.00 within 7 days of receipt of this email.

 

 

You can make payment in the following ways: 

    Contact us on 0330 822 9950 (our opening times are Monday- Friday 9:00- 17:00);
    portal.moorsidelegal.co.uk - Login to our portal
    https://pay.moorside.legal - Quick Pay

 

 

If you fail to respond or make payment, we may be instructed by our client to issue legal proceedings against you. This will incur further costs and fees that will be added to the outstanding balance. You may wish to seek independent legal advice. 

 

Don't be intimidated by the utter incompetents at Moorside Legal. Respond to them with the following:

Dear Sirs,

Re: Your response dated 18 August 2025 – Non-Compliance with Pre-Action Protocol

I refer to your email of 18 August 2025 and attachments, claiming a £170 balance on a Parking Charge Notice (PCN). Your reply remains deficient and in breach of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998, Part 3 Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims and the accompanying Practice Direction.

Despite your assertions, you have not provided:

1. The original Notice to Keeper under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. 
2. Photographic evidence of the actual signage displayed on the date in question, in situ. 
3. The precise wording of the clause(s) within the Terms and Conditions you allege were breached. 
4. The written contract between your client and the landowner, establishing enforcement authority. 
5. A full breakdown of the £100 principal sum (clarifying whether sought as consideration or damages) and the £70 “recovery” fee, including VAT status and actual recovery costs.

These documents are mandatory under:

- Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims, ¶3.1(a)–(d), 5.1–5.2 
- Practice Direction, ¶6(a), 6(c)

Please provide the above documents within 7 days of this letter. Should you fail to do so, I will:

- Apply for a stay of any proceedings under Practice Direction ¶15(b). 
- Seek sanctions and an adverse costs order against your client and yourselves personally for non-compliance under Practice Direction ¶13, ¶16 and Protocol ¶7.2.

Once compliant disclosure is received, I will seek advice and deliver my substantive response within 30 days, as required. Until then, any attempt to issue proceedings will be premature and opposed on grounds of procedural unfairness, with immediate applications for case-management relief and costs.

Yours faithfully,

[Your Name]

Nah... just send it as is. I'm sure there are more than one type of sign at the location.

Hi All,

Here it is the Court claim form (attached)
Although the date on the letter states 19th Nov, I only recieved it yesterday(22nd) , I don't know if that makes any difference.
I would appreciate any advice on the next steps . What are my options and chances going forward & how such cases have panned out lately.
Many thanks.