MET Stansted Southgate Park - Claim Form received!

CreamyPies

Hi folks,

Well, it's happened. I have received a Claim Form courtesy of DCB Legal on behalf of MET parking services for an alleged overstay at (346) Southgate Park, Stansted, CM24 1PY. I have learned this is a notorious site for parking PCNs… Please find a snip of the particulars below, issue date 03 JULY 2026

Firstly, I have taken the liberty of reading the Newbie thread and the Template defence suggestion thread. I thank the community here for providing these as I would have been lost without them. I am going to share my experience here in case it can help others.

Where I am now - I have already submitted an Acknowledgement of Service through the MCOL portal, however something strange is going on with it and I am now unable to log back in. No drama though - having spoken with a court assistant on the telephone, I have discovered that we are able to submit our N9B defence form via email to the court. I am in the process of doing this now.

Having looked over the Template defence thread, I have adapted the Defence statement template to my personal situation. Changes have been only been made to sections 2 & 3 per the below, with all other sections remaining unchanged;

2. The allegation(s) are vague and liability is denied for the sum claimed, or at all. The claim has been issued more than a year after the alleged parking event, making retrieval of contemporaneous evidence difficult, which is prejudicial to the Defendant. The Defendant admits being the registered keeper of the vehicle on the material date. Liability is denied. Save as set out below, the Defendant has little recollection of events due to the passage of time and the delay in bringing proceedings.

3. During the relevant period, the Defendant's vehicle registration was cloned, resulting in several parking and traffic enforcement notices being wrongly issued before being cancelled. Against that background, the Defendant mistakenly believed that the Parking Charge Notice forming the subject of this claim had also been resolved. Due to the passage of time, the Defendant has little independent recollection of the events. Accordingly, liability is denied and the Claimant is put to strict proof of every element of its claim.

One thing that might make this case a bit more interesting is that I was unfortunately the victim of vehicle cloning around this time. Has this happened to anyone else? In any case, I believe I am on the right track with my defence statement and will be emailing it over to the court this evening. Feedback/criticism of the more experienced among us is welcomed!

Kind regards

Gr1pr

I am not convinced with paragraph 3, wait for replies

Post the Issue date from the top right of the claim form below

Deal with whats in front of you, not cloning to anyone else, its irrelevant to your defence case

You phoned the CNBC in Northampton, because currently no court is involved yet

Do not use any paperwork , no scans or pictures, only an email with a pdf attachment etc

Your final 10 paragraph defence will need readers and footers adding, plus an e signature and date, saved as a pdf before emailing the pdf to claim responses

CreamyPies

Hi Gr1pr,

OK, waiting for replies before I proceed any further.

The issue date found on the top right of the claim form is: 03 JUL 2026

Regarding the cloning question, yes fair enough, Just thought it might be worth mentioning only to build the background.

Thank you for the pointers on headers/footers, e-signature & PDF format. I'll make sure that is sorted for submission. Thanks for chiming in!

Regard

CreamyPies

I've been mulling paragraph 3 over this evening and what to do with it - I think I'll remove the reference to the cloning entirely. On further consideration, I don't think this point belongs in the defence, which as I understand it should answer the claim that has been brought and demonstrate why I am not liable? Which leaves us with the much more concise;

3. The Defendant has little recollection of the events due to the passage of time. Liability is denied and the Claimant is put to strict proof of the contractual terms relied upon, the alleged breach, and the sum claimed

Coupon-mad

No that's not enough.

Instead, adapt the defence by @Meltof that they posted on 12th April.

patient_dream

Also, bear in mind thaat DCBL has added a fake amount of £70 which they call DAMAGES. This is a poort attempt of DOUBLE RECOVERY which the courts do not allow

DCBL are as usual misleading you and the court ?

Play the game with DCBL just like over 900 people have as seen in the famous DCBL discontinuation thread

CreamyPies

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82092414#Comment_82092414

Excellent - thanks @Coupon-mad for pointing me in the right direction. I have adapted my entire defence statement based on Meltof's recent defence. Para 3 of my defence now reads:

3. The Defendant is unable to recall who may have been driving on an unremarkable date and unspecified time and no evidence has been produced. There can be no 'keeper liability' in this case. Research has proved that this Claimant has never used the provisions of Schedule 4 of the POFA 2012 and they know, or should know, that they cannot hold registered keepers liable.

CreamyPies

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82092577#Comment_82092577

Thanks @patient_dream

Indeed, I note that DCBL have added these so called 'damages' to the tune of £70… SpoiIer alert, I won't be paying those.

I also note that the defence template I have adapted from Meltof addresses the damages claim in four specific places;

• Paragraph 1 – False fee / double recovery / Beavis.
• Paragraph 4 – Abuse of process and inflated interest.
• Paragraph 9 – Government criticism of additional fees.
• Paragraph 10 – POFA limits the recoverable amount.

So I feel overall that this is covered nicely - let the games continue! Cheers!

CreamyPies

Thanks all for your help - the defence incorporating all of the above pointers has now been submitted. My understanding is that things go a bit quiet for a while now - I will post the latest in this thread as we progress.

Thanks again!

Le_Kirk

With an issue date of 03/07/26 and providing you complete(d) the AoS before or on 22/07/26 your defence deadline date is 4.00 p.m. on 05/08/26

What date did you complete the AoS?

ETA - I see you have submitted a defence now, phew that was close!

CreamyPies

@Le_Kirk Yes, I cut this one very close to the bone! What I would say to others is maybe don't cut it quite as fine as I did since it doesn't leave much margin for error should one need to make any late changes… however, my reason for doing so was intentional. I want to bog down and the frustrate the process for DCBL as much as possible. I don't know how effective this approach is toward that goal, but honestly I find their practices contemptable so anything I can do to make life more difficult brings me joy.