Recent Court Document Attached..(DCB Legal)

1505grandad

Just checking you have definitely copied the template Defence because "Judgment" is not spelled like you have  -  for instance:-

Para 3  -  "The same is true in this case and in view of the Chan judgement (transcript below) the Court should strike out the claim, using its powers pursuant to CPR 3.4. 

another_victim_newbie

Thank you for your quick response 1505grandad. Yes, I have, however I changed the spelling as I thought it was spelled incorrectly - oops! 

Can I also ask, does the font size and text style matter in the defence? 


Now updated below:

1.  The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.  It is denied that any conduct by the driver was in breach of any term.  Further, it is denied that this Claimant (understood to have a bare licence as agents) has standing to sue or form contracts in their own name. Liability is denied, whether or not the Claimant is claiming 'keeper liability', which is unclear from the boilerplate text in the Particulars of Claim ('the POC').

Preliminary matter: The claim should be struck out

2. The Defendant draws to the attention of the allocating Judge that there is now a persuasive Appeal judgement to support striking out the claim (in these exact circumstances of typically poorly pleaded private parking claims, and the extant PoC seen here are far worse than the one seen on Appeal).  The Defendant believes that dismissing this meritless claim is the correct course, with the Overriding Objective in mind.  Bulk litigators (legal firms) should know better than to make little or no attempt to comply with the Practice Direction.  By continuing to plead cases with generic auto-fill unspecific wording, private parking firms should not be surprised when courts strike out their claims based in the following persuasive authority.

3. A recent persuasive appeal judgment in Civil Enforcement Limited v Chan (Ref. E7GM9W44) would indicate the POC fails to comply with Civil Procedure Rule 16.4(1)(e) and Practice Direction Part 16.7.5. On the 15th August 2023, 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 same is true in this case and in view of the Chan judgment (transcript below) the Court should strike out the claim, using its powers pursuant to CPR 3.4. 

The facts known to the Defendant:

4. The facts in this defence come from the Defendant's own knowledge and honest belief.  Conversely, the Claimant sets out a cut-and-paste incoherent and sparse statement of case. The POC appear to be in breach of CPR 16.4, 16PD3 and 16PD7, and fail to "state all facts necessary for the purpose of formulating a complete cause of action". The Defendant is unable, on the basis of the POC, to understand with certainty what case, allegation(s) and what heads of cost are being pursued, making it difficult to respond. However, the vehicle is recognised and it is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver.

5. The Defendant had not noticed any signage close to the where the Defendant parked, showing the terms and conditions for use, the Defendant was not aware of any restrictions that applied in the area leading up to the car park due to obscure signage which was impossible to read from where the defendant had parked. The signage was also discoloured and faded which made this even more difficult. The small signage was not suitable to alert a motorist. Due to the age of the alleged offence which is over 5 years old, the Defendant is unable to recall the exact reason for the PCN. However, any purported contract was neither seen nor agreed; thus any breach is denied.

1505grandad

Check it in para 2 also  -  we don't usually have to check the actual template wording so when an obvious error is noticed wonder what else is wrong.

another_victim_newbie

Yes, you are correct. Thank you. These were the only para's I edited.

Can I also ask, does the font size and text style matter in the defence? 

KeithP

There is a font size and style recommended in Bargepole's 'what happens when' thread linked from the second post of the NEWBIES thread.

Forgive me for not giving an answer here... I would have to go there to find out too.

Coupon-mad

Change 'offence' to event

32 paragraphs is fine.

another_victim_newbie

Brill - thank you - now changed to 'event' in para 4. Think I am now ready to file the defence.

Thank you for all your help everybody, I really do appreciate it.

I will be back no doubt once I need further support with the next stage. Thanks again!

another_victim_newbie

Hi all,

This is the automatic acknowledgement I have received from CCBCAQ after filing my defence. It states I am unhappy with their service but made no such complaint. I only filed my defence. Is this an appropriate acknowledgement from them?

CCBC AQ	3:18 PM (3 minutes ago)
to me

 

Thank you for your email which may be in relation to delays you have experienced with our service. I am sorry to hear you are unhappy with the service provided by us. We understand the delays that you are currently experiencing can be frustrating and fall short of the standards you rightly expect of us. As a public service, we record all complaints and regularly review points that are raised to improve our service.

 

This service is currently undergoing a significant transition as we take on new work and expand to meet the growing needs of our customers. This means we have a large backlog of work to clear.

 

The service is focusing on reducing the volume of work in priority order and to do this we are currently prioritising resources to tackle case progression work as opposed to dealing with chase up correspondence, so we ask for your continued patience and trust that your case will be dealt with in due course.  We are aiming to recover our position by the end of the September.

 

The service has also recently introduced new procedures to make sure work is being processed as soon as possible. Please be assured that this is a result of feedback received from our customers, as we are actively looking to improve the service being offered. These procedures have seen a reduction in processing time already and further improvements are expected in the coming weeks. If you would like to track our performance please click on the link below which will take you to our latest available information.

 

The Business Centre Performance update is published weekly

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

 

Thank you for emailing the County Court Business Centre, please accept this as a receipt of your email.  Where a response is required we will endeavour to respond to your email within 10 working days (please do not re-send duplicate messages)

 If you’ve submitted a complaint, please note that the Court will aim to reply within 10 working days. (please do not duplicate complaints)

You should not come to any of our court and tribunal buildings if:

• you have coronavirus symptoms
• you have tested positive for COVID-19 or are waiting for a test result
• you have been instructed by the NHS to self-isolate

If we’re expecting you, let us know as soon as possible if you’re not coming to the court or tribunal.

 

If you should have any queries please forward to CCBC@JUSTICE.GOV.UK

 

The County Court Business Centre is a separate entity to Northampton Combined Court and therefore only deal with CCBC and Traffic Enforcement queries.   We do not deal with Family, Probate or Bankruptcy matters.

 

Guidance is accessible online 24 hours a day at

http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/onlineservices2/important_info/claim_criteria.htm

 

Court staff are not legally trained.  If your query is in relation to whether you have a valid claim, we will be unable to comment on this matter.  You may wish to seek professional legal advice from a Solicitor, Legal Executive or Citizens Advice Bureau. 

 

Please note that attachments must be sent in a format supported by the software used by the specified court to which it is sent.  These formats are listed on Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service website.  Attachments sent to a specified court in a format not listed will be treated as not having been received by the court.

The time of receipt of a transmission will be recorded electronically on the transmission as it is received.

If a transmission is received after 4pm any document attached to the transmission will be treated as filed on the next day the court office is open.

If you are having problems completing an electronic form please visit the below link, it contains useful information about using Adobe which may be of assistance:https://acrobat.adobe.com/uk/en/products/about-adobe-pdf.html

 

To view an up-to-date list of our current processing and response times please visit www.gov.uk/guidance/hmcts-civil-business-centres-performance-information.

 

 

The office is closed on all bank holidays.

 

 

This message is automatically generated; please do not reply to this message.

Thank you.

 

KeithP

You can ignore what it says, but do keep it as a receipt confirming that you have filed a defence.

another_victim_newbie

Hi all,

I have completed the DQ N180 as this has been sent to me from the CNBC. I have signed and completed the form and will now email this to CNBC and the Claimants representative which is DCB Legal LTD.

Does anybody have the email address of DCB Legal LTD? As I have found a range of different ones and not sure which address to use to send over my DQ?

Thanks all.