New DCB Legal claim

Le_Kirk

You need to make sure that the parking company and their solicitors (and CNBC) have your correct address for service - you don't want any(more) letters going astray. What is the date of issue of the N1SDT claim form?

bluewine

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81938529#Comment_81938529

6th March - I calculated that after my AOS I have until Easter Monday-ish to submit the defence, but it will be gone tonight or tomorrow!

I've emailed to update my address but I may just take the hit and extend my redirection for another 3 months - I don't trust these companies to do anything properly!

@Gr1pr thanks for the tip, I'll get it gone!

patient_dream

A standard rubbish claim from DCBL

They claim DAMAGES ? what a load of crap. DCBL are attempting to line their own pockets and mislead you and the court. It is a FEEBLE attempt of double recovery which is not allowed

That is why Mr Croot of DCBL issues DISCONTINUATIONS BEFORE COURT.

REMEBER ….. THE FAKE ADD-ON IS DOUBLE RECOVERY

bluewine

Ok, so to confirm before I submit my defence, paragraphs 1-9 copied and pasted exactly as they are, with the following from Minimonsta's thread inserted as paragraph 3:

"3. With regards to the POC in question, two recent persuasive appeal judgments in Civil Enforcement Limited v Chan (Ref. E7GM9W44) and Car Park Management Service Ltd v Akande (Ref. K0DP5J30) 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 Chan case, HHJ Murch held: '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 the Defendant trusts that the Court should strike out the extant claim, using its powers pursuant to CPR 3.4. The second recent persuasive appeal judgment also held that typical private parking case POC (like this) fail to comply with Part 16. On the 10 May 2024, in CPMS v Akande, HHJ Evans held: 'Particulars of Claim have to set out the basic facts upon which a party relies in order to prove his or her claim'."

Should I include paragraph 10 if I have the space? I don't intend to counterclaim but will it bolster my claim if I keep it in?

Coupon-mad

But paragraph 10 isn't about counterclaiming. Yes it stays in!

Le_Kirk

With an issue date of 06/03/26 and providing you complete(d) the AoS after 11/03/26 and before or on 25/03/26 your defence deadline date is 4.00 p.m. on 08/04/26

The deadline will never be a weekend or bank holiday.

bluewine

Defence submitted. Thanks everyone for the help so far, I'll update again when the DQ comes through and as needed!

bluewine

Quick update... received this via email today, so now to await the DQ from the court and then complete:

"Good Afternoon

Having reviewed the content of your defence, we write to inform you that our client intends to proceed with the claim.

In due course, the Court will direct both parties to each file a directions questionnaire. In preparation for that, please find attached a copy of the Claimant's, which we confirm has been filed with the Court.

Without Prejudice to the above, in order to assist the Court in achieving its overriding objective, our client may be prepared to settle this case - in the event you wish to discuss settlement, please call us on 0203 434 0433 within 7 days and make immediate reference to this correspondence.

If you have provided an email address within your Defence, we intend to use it for service of documents (usually in PDF format) hereon in pursuant to PD 6A (4.1)(2)(c). Please advise whether there are any limitations to this (for example, the format in which documents are to be sent and the maximum size of attachments that may be received). Unless you advise otherwise, we will assume not.

Kind Regards,

Litigation Support".

bluewine

Hi all, to update on this I attended the mandatory mediation in July and followed the advice given here, and was done within 5 minutes. Had a letter saying that it was allocated to a court (but no date yet) and then I've received this through the post today. I understand it's not aimed at me, but unsure what it means for the case. I've tried searching the forum but can't see any others that look exactly like this:

Is this an expected part of the process or have they failed to do something as it suggests? Good, bad or neutral news?

Thanks as always

Gr1pr

Certainly not expected, but they are required to comply with this new order