Help please writing my defence. Thanks

richierich1983

Hello Everyone,
I have read the newbies post and I believe this is the latest Defence template. Can someone confirm this please? Any tips on what to write within the gaps in bold  below would be much appreciated as it’s information overload. I’m basically being accused of overstaying in a car park on private land. Please see particulars of claim. 

1. The Claimant’s sparse case lacks specificity and does not comply with CPR 16.4, 16PD3 or 16PD7, failing to 'state all facts necessary for the purpose of formulating a complete cause of action'. The added costs/damages are an attempt at double recovery of capped legal fees (already listed in the claim) and are not monies genuinely owed to, or incurred by, this Claimant. The claim also exceeds the Code of Practice (CoP) £100 parking charge ('PC') maximum. Exaggerated claims for impermissible sums are good reason for the court to intervene. Whilst the Defendant reserves the right to amend the defence if details of the contract are provided, the court is invited to strike out the claim using its powers under CPR 3.4.

2. The allegation(s) and heads of cost are vague and liability is denied for the sum claimed, or at all. At the very least, interest should be disallowed; the delay in bringing proceedings lies with the Claimant. This also makes retrieving material documents/evidence difficult, which is highly prejudicial. The Defendant seeks fixed costs (CPR 27.14) and a finding of unreasonable conduct and further costs (CPR 46.5). The Defendant has little recollection of events, save as set out below and to admit that they were the registered keeper.

^^ADD 'and driver' if admitting that.

if you were not driving and believe the NTK was non-POFA, add that fact.

Change 'registered keeper' to hirer or lessee if it's a company or lease/fleet car (you are not the rk in that case).

Paragraph 3 is yours to write!

Please DO NOT say "I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO PUT" (you do, see below) but by all means post your draft para 3 for feedback on your own thread:

3.  EITHER:

IF THE POC FAIL TO STATE THE BREACH (e.g. Civil Enforcement Ltd, Gladstones & Moorside cases currently all fail to specify an allegation) BRIEFLY REFER TO CEL v CHAN & CPMS v AKANDE. SEE LINK BELOW. This is all you need unless you have something very important to add, such as being a blue badge holder when shopping at a retail park, or were charging an EV (no contractual signs at those bays) or that you were a tenant/owner with rights or an expectation to park at a residential site:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81571257/#Comment_81571257

OR

If they DO state the breach in the POC (in-house ParkingEye claims, also BW Legal and most DCB Legal cases) then respond to the allegation made. Add BRIEF details as para 3, e.g.

- if you didn't get any letters or it was years ago & you can't recall if you were driving, say that.ONLY IF TRUE

- you appealed and they refused it?

- the machines or app weren't working?

- was it a double dip ANPR error?

- or a keying error, were you staff/lived there with a right to park?

- saw no signs because they were sparsely placed or it was dark?

- was the driver disabled, elderly or pregnant and needed more time?

BE VERY CONCISE, OR YOUR DEFENCE WON'T FIT IN THE MCOL DEFENCE BOX - SO TEST IT, CHECK AND REDUCE YOUR LINE-COUNT! IF YOU NEED TO, YOU CAN REMOVE PARA 10 COMPLETELY. NOT A PROBLEM.

4. It is neither admitted nor denied that a term was breached but to form a contract, there must be an offer, acceptance, and valuable consideration (absent in this case). The Consumer Rights Act 2015 (s71) mandates a 'test of fairness' duty on Courts and sets a high bar for prominence of terms and 'consumer notices'. Paying regard to Sch2 (examples 6, 10, 14 & 18), also s62 and the duties of fair, open dealing/good faith, the Defendant notes that this Claimant reportedly uses unclear (unfair) terms/notices. On the limited information given, this case looks no different. The Claimant is put to strict proof with contemporaneous photographs.

5. DVLA keeper data is only supplied on the basis of prior written landowner authority. The Claimant (an agent) is put to strict proof of their standing to sue and the terms, scope and dates of the landowner agreement, including the contract, updates, schedules and a map of the site boundary set by the landowner (not an unverified Google Maps aerial view).

6. To impose a PC, as well as a breach, there must be: (i) a strong 'legitimate interest' extending beyond compensation for loss, and (ii) 'adequate notice' (prominence) of the PC and any relevant obligation(s). None of which have been demonstrated. This PC is a penalty arising as a result of a 'concealed pitfall or trap', poor signs and covert surveillance, thus it is fully distinguished from ParkingEye v Beavis [2015] UKSC67.

7. Attention is drawn to (i) paras 98, 100, 193, 198 of  Beavis (an £85 PC comfortably covered all letter chain costs and generated a profit shared with the landowner) and also to (ii) the binding judgment in ParkingEye v Somerfield Stores ChD [2011] EWHC 4023(QB) which remains unaffected by Beavis and stands as the only parking case law that deals with costs abuse. HHJ Hegarty held in paras 419-428 (High Court, later ratified by the CoA) that 'admin costs' inflating a £75 PC (already increased from £37.50) to £135 were disproportionate to the minor cost of an automated letter-chain and 'would appear to be penal'.

8. The Parking (Code of Practice) Act will curb rogue conduct by operators and their debt recovery agents (DRAs). The Government recently launched a Public Consultation considered likely to bring in a ban on DRA fees, which a 2022 Minister called ‘extorting money from motorists’. They have identified in July 2025: 'profit being made by DRAs is significantly higher than ... by parking operators' and 'the high profits may be indicative of these firms having too much control over the market, thereby indicating that there is a market failure'.

9. Pursuant to Sch4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 ('POFA') the claim exceeds the maximum sum and is unrecoverable: see Explanatory Note 221: 'The creditor may not make a claim against the keeper ... for more than the amount of the unpaid parking related charges as they stood when the notice to the driver was issued (para 4(5))'. Late fees (unknown to drivers, not specified on signs) are not 'unpaid parking related charges'. They are the invention of 'no win no fee' DRAs. Even in the (unlikely) event that the Claimant complied with the POFA and CoP, there is no keeper liability law for DRA fees.

10. This claim is an utter waste of court resources and it is an indication of systemic abuse that parking cases now make up a third of all small claims. False fees fuel bulk litigation that has overburdened HMCTS. The most common outcome of defended cases is late discontinuance, making Claimants liable for costs (r.38.6(1)). Whilst this does not 'normally' apply to the small claims track (r.38.6(3)) the White Book has this annotation: 'Note that the normal rule as to costs does not apply if a claimant in a case allocated to the small claims track serves a notice of discontinuance although it might be contended that costs should be awarded if a party has behaved unreasonably (r.27.14(2)(dg))'.

Gr1pr

So ECP via DCB Legal dated 8th October 2025, for an alleged overstay 

I hope that you have already logged into MCOL via your government gateway account and completed the AOS online   ?

If not you are in danger of timing out 

Who signed it on the back   ?  S.E or D,C  ?

Study similar recent ECP overstay cases over the last few weeks and adapt your paragraph 3 to be like theirs 

Most of that template remains unchanged,  so 90% is already done for you ( yes that is the correct template   )

richierich1983

Ok thanks. Are they easy to find within the threads? I’ll take a look 👀

Yes and I asked for an extra 28 days to prepare my defence.

Signed on the back by DJC including his middle initial. 

What do you think my chances are of winning? 50/50… nothing to lose now!

Gr1pr

These rarely go to court so your question is largely irrelevant,  or incorrect 

Your question should have been 

Will DCB Legal discontinue just before the hearing fee is due next year  ?

  Answer,  YES, that is very common and very very likely 

OK, so a solicitor signed it,  so standard defence with your bespoke paragraph 3

You dont get an extra 28 days,  it's an extra 14 days 

Your defence submission deadline is 4pm on Monday 10th November 

Le_Kirk

With an issue date of 08/10/25 and providing you complete(d) the AoS after 13/10/25 and before 27/10/25 your defence deadline date is 4.00 p.m. on 10/11/25