DCB Legal - court letter

[b789]

Unfortunately, I can’t access the case on FTLA. Can you please show me the Particulars of Claim (PoC) for both claims. I only need to see the N1SDT claim form itself, not all the other forms that came with it. Just the page with the details and the amount they are claiming.

When you send your N180 for this claim #2, attach a pdf letter as advised below. The point is that ParkingEye, through its bulk litigators, DCB Legal, has issued a second separate claim against the same defendant concerning the same vehicle and the same location whilst the first claim is already live. That is an abuse of process.

The purpose of the letter is to put the court on notice of that duplication now, without inviting consolidation and without incurring the cost or inconvenience of seeking to amend the defence at this stage.

Claim No: [second claim number]
Related Claim No: [first claim number]
Parties: [Claimant] v [Defendant]

Dear Sir or Madam,

Please find enclosed the Defendant’s completed Directions Questionnaire in respect of the above claim.

The Defendant also respectfully draws the Court’s attention to the fact that this is a second claim issued by the same Claimant against the same Defendant concerning the same vehicle and the same location, namely Aspire Leisure Centre, Stanmore, whilst a previous claim is already live under claim number [first claim number].

The Defendant’s position is that this later claim is duplicative and abusive. It appears that the Claimant, a serial bulk litigant acting by solicitors who issue parking claims in bulk, has chosen to split matters across multiple separate claims rather than bring them together, if at all. That approach places the Defendant under unnecessary additional burden and is contrary to the proper and efficient conduct of litigation.

The Defendant respectfully asks that this letter be placed on the court file and that the Court note the existence of the earlier live claim when considering directions and allocation in this second matter.

Yours faithfully,

[Defendant’s name]
[Defendant’s address]
[Defendant’s email]

[adegaw]

apologies i didn’t get a notification on your message. 

please see below:

claim #1: https://ibb.co/Q3mmz6c5
claim #2: https://ibb.co/ycMmPWFZ 

also noticed the letter says we had until 10th april to
respond but we only got the letter on the 11th april!

[b789]

Thanks for that. Don't worry about the N180 being a few days late. As long as you send it ASAP and include the attached letter with it and CC in the claimant.

[adegaw]

thank you!

[adegaw]

hello - hope you’re well

I just got an update that the fee was paid on the 3rd Aug. i’ve also received an offer email from parkingeye for £240 instead of the £857.96 for claim #1. 

Please can you advise on what best to do?

[b789]

@adegaw, how did you receive the notification that the trial fee had been paid? Was it by post or email? Can you please show me the notification.

You have not mentioned any correspondence regarding the courts direction on any hearing! You must have received a Notice of Allocation with a judges directions to both parties with deadlines for hearing dates and submission of Witness Statements. You appear to have gone from receipt of the claim, mediation and DQ to informing me that a "fee" was paid on 3rd August. What is the date of the hearing? What is the deadline for their payment of the hearing fee (usually 4 weeks before the hearing date) and very importantly, what is the deadline for submitting Witness Statements (bundle).

It is important that you show me the notices you receive so I can advise in a timely manner. If the trial fee has been paid, it means that they are going to go ahead with the hearing and unlikely to discontinue. 

The defence submitted relied on the fact that the PoC were insufficient to establish a cause of action and that they failed to comply with CPR 16.4 PD16. In most cases the procedural judge would have made some comment or made a requirement for the claimant to do something about it or struck the claim out.

So, before we continue, please show me the Notices you received about the claim being transferred to your local county court and the judges orders. You should have received an N271 Notice of Transfer of Proceedings and an N157 Notice of Allocation to the Small Claims Track,

[adegaw]

yes i posted this a while back (links are below) and you advised me to ring the court to check if they make it the payment which is how I knew they had made the payment. we haven’t received any further letters since:


https://ibb.co/d4zcFtTg
https://ibb.co/SwWG6bQC
https://ibb.co/1GVczsM1
https://ibb.co/7NnSbdYz
https://ibb.co/n8Vtvsxj

do these help or am I missing another letter?

[b789]

Sorry, my bad. I had't read back fully through the thread and my notes. Yes, you did provide those and I am now going through them again. I will get back to you soon.

[b789]

@adegaw, having now re-read the full Notice of Allocation, I think this needs to be put back before the court urgently before we proceed with the witness statement.

Paragraph 8 of the order is plainly directed at a road traffic accident case. It requires repair estimates, car-hire invoices, a police accident report, plans of an accident scene and photographs of vehicle damage. None of those directions has anything whatsoever to do with this ParkingEye contractual parking claim.

That appears to be an obvious error in the order itself and raises a legitimate concern that the case was processed using the wrong standard directions without the issues raised in your mum's Defence being properly considered.

That is particularly important because her Defence expressly raised the fundamental inadequacy of ParkingEye's Particulars and asked the court to strike the claim out. ParkingEye still has not identified what contractual term was allegedly breached or properly pleaded the factual cause of action. Your mum is nevertheless now being ordered to prepare a witness statement responding to a case which has never actually been particularised.

So I would not initially approach this as your mum making an ordinary application to change directions. She should draw the apparent court error to the court's attention and ask that the order and file be referred urgently to a District Judge for correction/clarification. Once the judge looks at the file, she can also ask the judge to consider the unresolved CPR 16.4(1)(a) issue and whether it is appropriate to require her to serve a WS before ParkingEye has properly pleaded its case.

Importantly, unless the court says otherwise, the existing deadline still stands, so we cannot simply stop preparing the WS while waiting for an answer.

And I would now draft the email as follows:

Subject: URGENT – Claim No. [NUMBER] – ParkingEye Ltd v [DEFENDANT] – Apparent Error in Notice of Allocation/Request for Urgent Judicial Review of Directions

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am the Defendant in the above proceedings, listed for hearing at Dartford County Court on 4 September 2026.

I write to draw the Court's urgent attention to what appears to be an obvious error in the Notice of Allocation dated 12 March 2026.

Paragraph 8 of the Order directs the parties to provide documents including:

• repair estimates and invoices;
  
• car-hire invoices;
  
• a police accident report;
  
• plans of the accident scene; and
  
• photographs of accident damage.
  

This is not a road traffic accident claim. It is a contractual private parking claim brought by ParkingEye Ltd.

I therefore respectfully request that the Notice of Allocation and the court file be placed urgently before a District Judge so that the apparent error may be considered and the appropriate directions clarified or corrected.

This is particularly important because there is an unresolved preliminary issue expressly raised in my Defence.

The Claimant's Particulars merely allege that the vehicle:

   "Remained On Private Property In Breach Of The Prominently Displayed Terms And Conditions."

They do not identify the contractual term allegedly breached or adequately plead what conduct constituted the alleged breach. My Defence expressly pleaded that the Particulars fail to comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a) and invited the Court to strike out the claim. No further or more detailed Particulars have subsequently been served.

I am now required by the same Order to prepare and serve a witness statement and evidence despite still not knowing with sufficient particularity the contractual and factual case which the Claimant says I must answer.

Given the apparently erroneous directions contained in the Order, I respectfully ask that, when reviewing the Order, the Judge also consider the preliminary pleading issue already raised in my Defence and whether it is appropriate for the Defendant to be required to serve her witness evidence before that issue has been resolved.

I respectfully invite the Court, if appropriate, to exercise its own-initiative case-management powers either:

1. to strike out the claim for the pleading failures already identified in the Defence; or alternatively
   
2. to require the Claimant first to serve compliant Particulars identifying the contractual term relied upon and the factual basis of the alleged breach, with consequential directions allowing the Defendant a proper opportunity thereafter to respond.
   

I am not seeking to disregard or unilaterally vary the existing Order and understand that its present deadlines remain effective unless the Court directs otherwise.

I would be grateful if this correspondence could be referred urgently to a District Judge given the imminent witness statement deadline and hearing date.

This correspondence is copied to DCB Legal Ltd on behalf of the Claimant.

Yours faithfully,

[DEFENDANT]
Defendant

CC: DCB Legal Ltd

[adegaw]

ok thank you very much. i’ll send now