We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
MET Parking taking me to court N1 received Help!


I had genuinely not known i would be fined for parking in the bay which is located at a nearby Asda superstore (Ruislip) which offers free parking for a number of hours when you shop with Asda. I had been shopping with the family and parked there as my child needed the bathroom urgently, I have not been able to find the original PCN from nearly 5 years ago but i have set Subject Access Request (SAR) to Met Parking. I have also contacted DCB Legal who are acting on behalf of MET Parking with a request to put my case on hold for 30 days while i seek debt advice, i have used the standard templates which were found on the forum.
I have also acknowledged the N1 Claim form using www.moneyclaim.gov.uk website, I will also be returning to the Asda car park to check the signage again and take pictures that could help my defence.
I understand it is now a race to form a defence before the court submission deadline, is there anything else i could use in my defence?
Does anyone have any experience dealing with MET Parking and fighting this alleged Electric bay abuse PCN from 2018?
Should i try to defend the case in court or seek to settle this with Met Parking before it is decided by the court?
Thank you all in advance for you help
Comments
-
What is the Issue Date on your County Court Claim Form?
Upon what date did you file an Acknowledgment of Service?
Your MCOL Claim History will have the definitive answer to that.1 -
I have also contacted DCB Legal who are acting on behalf of MET Parking with a request to put my case on hold for 30 days while i seek debt adviceOnce a court claim has been served there is no scope for a 30-day delay, that only applied to the Letter Of/Before Claim stage. Your focus must be on getting your Defence done by its due date (which @KeithP will give you once you've answered his questions above).Please note, we are not a legal advice forum. I personally don't get involved in critiquing court case Defences/Witness Statements, so unable to help on that front. Please don't ask. .
I provide only my personal opinion, it is not a legal opinion, it is simply a personal one. I am not a lawyer.
Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.Private Parking Firms - Killing the High Street2 -
Show us the PoC as it is highly likely that this will get thrown out at allocation stage. To date, all DCB Legal PoC fail to comply with Civil Procedure Rule 16.4 and the Practice Direction to Part 16.1
-
Here are the details logged on moneyclaim.gov.uk
A claim was issued against you on 18/09/2023
Your acknowledgment of service was submitted on 23/09/2023 at 13:40:14
Your acknowledgment of service was received on 25/09/2023 at 01:05:23
@B789 from what I have gathered PoC means particulars of claim, where is this information found? On Claim form N1?
I know I've kept some of the letters that were sent including the PCN but so far have been unable to find them all I have are a few Balif letters and a letter from DCB Legal.0 -
If you look on your claim form you will find the POC left hand side just below centre, unless they (CNBC/CCBC) have changed the form.2
-
hharry100 said:A claim was issued against you on 18/09/2023
Your acknowledgment of service was submitted on 23/09/2023 at 13:40:14
Your acknowledgment of service was received on 25/09/2023 at 01:05:23With a Claim Issue Date of 18th September, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Monday 23rd October 2023 to file your Defence.
That's four weeks away. Plenty of time to produce a Defence, but please don't leave it to the last minute.To create a Defence, and then file a Defence by email, look at the second post in the NEWBIES thread.Don't miss the deadline for filing a Defence.
Do not try and file a Defence via the MoneyClaimOnline website. Once an Acknowledgment of Service has been filed, the MCOL website should be treated as 'read only'.1 -
Here is a copy of the claim form N1SDTParticulars of Claim1. The Defendant(D) is indebted to the Claimant (C) for a Parking Charge(s) issued to vehicle XXXXXX at (840) Arla Old Dairy, South Ruislip, HA4 OFY 2. The PCN details are 12/11/2018,AB0000000 3.The PCN(s) was issued on private land owned or managed by C. The vehicle was parked in breach of the Terms on Cs signs (the Contract), thus incurring the PCN(s).4. The driver agreed to pay within 28 days but did not. D is liable as the driver or keeper. Despite requests, the PCN(s) is outstanding. The Contract entitles C to damages.AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS 1.£170 being the total of the PCN(s) and damages. 2. Interest at a rate of 8% per annum pursuant to s.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 from the date hereof at a daily rate of £0.01 until judgment or sooner payment. 3. Costs and court fees0
-
Same old stuff seen in every DCBLegal claim.Does anyone have any experience dealing with MET Parking and fighting this alleged Electric bay abuse PCN from 2018?Err, you don't need any of that. Just read any DCBLegal claim thread this month. Job done.PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
CLICK at the top or bottom of any page where it says:
Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD2 -
Just use the standard template defence and add just after your own paragraph (renumbering everything if necessary):
Failure to comply with Civil Procedure Rules
1. Recent persuasive Appeal judgment in Civil Enforcement Limited v Chan (Ref. E7GM9W44, attached) would indicate the PoC fails to comply with Civil Procedure Rule 16.4 and the Practice direction to Part 16. In the cited case HHJ Murch held that 'the particulars of the claim as filed and served did not set out the conduct which amounted to the breach in reliance upon which the claimant would be able to bring a claim for breach of contract'. The Defendant asserts that this Claim is based upon an agreement by conduct. The Defendant asserts that the Claimant has failed to specify how Contract terms have been breached by the conduct of the Defendant in the PoC.
2. The Defendant believes the Claim should be struck out at Allocation stage and should not have been accepted by the CNBC due to a represented parking firm Claimant knowingly breaching basic CPRs.
2
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 351.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.7K Spending & Discounts
- 244.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177K Life & Family
- 257.5K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards