Civil Enforcement Limited & DCB Legal LTD - From LBA to County Court Claim

Gr1pr

We beg people to not post their complete defence,  just paragraphs 2 & 3

You have not completed paragraph 2 with an ending 

Use the recent simple numbered points paragraph for 3, as seen in dozens of recent threads,  like coupon mad mentioned back on page 1

No stories,  save them for your WS next summer 

So please start over with paragraphs 2 & 3 , only post your 2 & 3 below,  when complete,  should take you less than 10 minutes 

Coupon-mad

Here you go:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6576011/cel-dcb-legal-pcn-cnbc-claim-defence-assistance-required-please

That's a new standard para 3 especially for DCB Legal cases. Easy, innit?

Please delete the post with the Template Defence, which we really don't want to check!

Mekky24

Many thanks for your comments. You guys are geniuses. You have just made me realise the PoC are all wrong. I just checked the Notice to Keeper and the PCN issue date on the PoC is clearly wrong. Thumbs up guys!

Here's my updated para 2 & 3.

2. 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, but NOT the driver at the time.

3. Referring to the POC: paragraph 1 is denied. The Defendant is not indebted to the Claimant. Paragraph 2 is denied. No PCN was "issued on 23/11/2022" (the date of the alleged visit).  Whilst the Defendant is the registered keeper, paragraphs 3 and 4 are denied. The Defendant is not liable and has seen no evidence of a breach of prominent terms.  The quantum is hugely exaggerated (no PCN can be £170 on private land) and there were no damages incurred whatsoever. The Claimant is put to strict proof of all of their allegations.

Coupon-mad

Great. Easy, innit?! Must drive them mad...

Mekky24

Coupon-mad said:

Great. Easy, innit?! Must drive them mad...

Sure! Do you recommend I file the defence now or wait closer to 30/12/2024? I just don't want to be thinking about it over Christmas.

Gr1pr

Mekky24 said:

Coupon-mad said:

Great. Easy, innit?! Must drive them mad...

Sure! Do you recommend I file the defence now or wait closer to 30/12/2024? I just don't want to be thinking about it over Christmas.

Do it on Tuesday afternoon then , because you can then rest easy until next year 

Mekky24

Defence was filed on 24/12/2024.

Mekky24

Update: I received my Directions Questionnaire from CNBC few days ago. I am now trying to complete the form as instructed in the defence template but struggling with reason for ticking 'No' to D1 question about suitability for determination without a hearing. I have searched the forum for answers but couldn't find any. Please is anyone able to help or direct me to the appropriate page? Thanks

1505grandad

As per the NEWBIES announcement:-

"Yes, there are some new Qs in the N180 form; please DON'T post asking about how to answer them (and don't ask how to answer the Welsh question):

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/79250068#Comment_79250068

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/80121512/#Comment_80121512

The second link (and subsequent posts on the linked thread) as always will answer your question.

Mekky24

1505grandad said:

As per the NEWBIES announcement:-

"Yes, there are some new Qs in the N180 form; please DON'T post asking about how to answer them (and don't ask how to answer the Welsh question):

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/79250068#Comment_79250068

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/80121512/#Comment_80121512

The second link (and subsequent posts on the linked thread) as always will answer your question.

Many thanks 🙏  This is how I’ve rewarded my reason.
Determination without hearing puts me, the Defendant, at a disadvantage. I’ll be denied opportunity to question the Claimant about their evidence, omissions and misleading assertions. I wish to expose the Claimant’s dubious business practices which is based on aggressive and misleading tactics of extorting inflated charges from law abiding citizens.