DCB Legal - court letter

[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