Tried just after 8am this morning but then hit the same error as before. I therefore called up and after a lengthy wait, managed to speak to an Advisor who referred me to the MCOL Tech Line. I called them as well, but after waiting nearly an eternity and with high priority work engagements beckoning, I hung up and have since been unable to call them again or revisit the MCOL portal. Will try and jump onto the portal again within the next half hour.

I definitely excluded 5th Dec from the five day Claim Form Issued date count and also believe I excluded the X'mas and New Year public holidays from the overall count................which is perhaps where the discrepancy lies. In any case, I'll be attempting my submission on MCOL again first thing tomorrow morning.

Are we in a position to do that just yet? I've just tried to request it on the MCOL portal and received the same error as before, i.e. The following errors have occurred: You can only request Judgment by default if the required number of days have passed. @Andyorch did point out just over a week ago that as Spring had finally acknowledged service, they'd get the full 33 days to respond and shortly after that, although delayed as a result of the recent postal strike, I received a letter from the court which was dated 23 Dec 2022 and stated the following.......... 'An Acknowledgement of Service to your claim has been filed today, which is attached for your information. The defendant now has a total of 28 days from the date of service of the claim to file a response'. Now, as the claim was issued on Monday 5th December and "is considered served on the fifth day after it was issued" by my reckoning therefore (and I stand to be corrected on this) it should be considered served five working days later, which would be the following Monday, 12th December. Unless of course that "fifth day" stipulated by the court includes weekends/non-working days. Therefore going by the court's letter of December 23rd, Spring have 28 days from Mon, 12th Dec to file their response and I believe that 28 day deadline should be tomorrow 9th Jan. Perhaps someone here can clarify all this.

In hindsight, perhaps I should have even kept mute over this SAR distress claim during the mediation meeting on Dec 21st, as it appears that's what alerted and prompted them to acknowledge service. Otherwise, the judgment request would have probably been well and truly 'in-flight' by now, which would have been the perfect way for me to celebrate the start of 2023.

Well, just tried to kick off the request for judgment and the portal has immediately thrown the below error: The following errors have occurred: You can only request Judgment by default if the required number of days have passed. Looks like I'm probably going to have to sit tight for maybe another day or so.

Apologies. I guess I'm using the wrong terminology (counterclaim) to describe this particular claim. Although perhaps linked to Spring Parking's original parking claim against me, this is an entirely separate claim I submitted, after Spring Parking failed to acknowledge or respond to my Subject Access Request relating to their claim.

All, Wishing everyone a Merry Christmas and what we pray should be a highly productive New Year. So, yesterday I contemplated requesting judgment against Spring Parking for my SAR counterclaim on the basis of the 14 day response deadline expiring. However, having then considered that the Xmas break may have overlapped the odd day or so of that 14 day deadline, I decided to hold fire for another 24 hours, i.e. until today. On the back of that, I've just been on the MCOL portal this morning to set the wheels in motion, but just want to be absolutely certain that I haven't misjudged or got any requirements completely wrong. Kindly therefore find attached two pdf documents which confirm the following details: The Claim issue date. Spring Parking's acknowledgment of service filing date. Spring Parking's change of address notification to the court and date. Guidance and/or instructions on how and when a request for judgment can be made. Upon reviewing the attached and all of the above information, I'd be extremely grateful for any feedback to confirm whether or not I'm perfectly placed to initiate that judgment request today. Thanks. claim_overview.pdf mcol_judgment_guidance.pdf

So I did contact MCOL yet again and another advisor confirmed that DCB Legal did indeed submit an application to amend their original PoC. However, this initial application had been done via email (which isn't the court's required procedure) and as such, the court rejected it outright and advised them via an email reply to submit a new application via post. To date, the court's not received any feedback or response from DCB Legal on this matter.

Well, so after what seemed an eternity on the phone, I finally managed to get through to the MCOL Service Desk and an advisor confirmed the following: On the 10th of November 2022, DCB Legal requested for some forms to enable them amend the original Particulars of Claim. Nothing has since been received by the court from DCB and so the PoC on their system and as far as they're concerned, remains "as-is". As standard procedure, if and when an amended version is even submitted to the court, a court judge is then required to adjudicate and approve or reject the proposed amendment. So I can safely conclude that the PoC with those handwritten amendments that DCB Legal emailed to me, were sent to me under false pretences. I'll be ensuring that this little detail forms part of my armoury for what lies ahead.

I'll make sure I prepare a nice little Xmas pressie for them on Christmas Day, when I apply for that judgement. They want a battle, they'll certainly get a war from me. By the way, if I get confirmation DCB Legal/Spring Parking deliberately presented me with a falsified claim form with those crossed out and handwritten PCN dates, can that be deemed some form of contempt or deception towards the court process? Would be extremely grateful if any legal experts here could advise on this.

Well, that's nearly a grand and a half of my hard-earned cash which they haven't sweated with me to earn, but now want to take it off me. Not a chance !! It's not as if I used a paid car park where I failed to pay and thereby cost them some revenue, or even got them to lose money one way or the other. This car park is free to use, albeit with time restrictions. How does an overstay (if at all) cost the parking company any loss of revenue to justify the obscene monetary claims they demand?

Well, he just called. Apparently, the dossers can't reach their representative or whoever else it is, to seek their advice or opinion on how to proceed on the back of my proposal. The mediator therefore says he'll refer the matter back to the court and then they take it from there.

Morning All. Thanks for the great feedback @FTMDave. Been up early and already on the MCOL website from where I can confirm the SAR Claim issue date to be 05/12/2022. Does that fall outside of the deadline to enable me trigger that Judgment which I can do immediately? The wording on the Claim Form states that: "You must respond to this claim form within 14 days of the day of service (or particulars of claim if served separately) The attached forms may be used for that purpose. The day of service is taken as 5 days after the issue date shown overleaf."

Hello folks, wishing you a Merry Christmas and hope you all have a wonderful festive celebration. Just wanted to drop this brief reminder note that tomorrow’s my botched mediation appointment which I’ll be attending as previously discussed. I gather the appointment will be a 2-way phone conversation with the mediator. Also, as per the previous conversation on this thread, I’ll be putting forward two main points. 1. That I don’t wish to proceed with the mediation as I never agreed to one in the first place, and that the appointment had been arranged erroneously. 2. I’d only be willing to proceed with tomorrow’s mediation on the grounds that if Spring Parking abandoned the claim entirely, I would reciprocate that gesture by also dropping my SAR negligence claim which by the way has now been formally served on Spring Parking by the court. Any final thoughts on the above?

Morning All. So, just to keep everyone in the loop and to clarify the next steps (unless anyone thinks otherwise) I will by 4pm today submit my response to the court, accepting to attend their mediation appointment on Dec 21st.

Nope, absolutely nothing. The MCOL portal has also been dead quiet and had no update for weeks. This is despite the fact DCB Legal emailed me those dodgy-looking N244 forms with the supposedly amended Particulars of Claim which had those duplicate 16/02/2019 dates crossed out and replaced by some barely legible handwritten dates in red pen. If this was a truly amended claim form, surely the court should have sent me a copy of it right...................or is it perfectly normal for a claimant to be the one who distributes critical court documents to a defendant, with no input from the court itself? Is it worth me calling up the court to establish the truth regarding that amended claim form, in other words if any such amendment was submitted at all by DCB Legal?

@FTMDaveand @dx100ukthanks very much for your prompt feedback. I'm all for upsetting their apple cart and causing them as much grief and frustration to give them a taste of their own medicine and this erroneous N180 mediation appointment certainly provides me with the perfect opportunity which I'm eager to grab. My only slight concern is that by agreeing to attend this appointment, would that not also suggest I've personally taken the decision to overlook the court clerical error and get the matter resolved through mediation? Also, what would be my proof to confirm my original N180 questionnaire selection of not requiring mediation? Would the mediator have access to all those court documents on the day, would I have to obtain a copy from the court prior to the appointment, or would my personal copy suffice? Finally, can the mediator and/or claimant argue that I had the opportunity and free will to notify the court of their N180 processing error to get the hearing cancelled/rescheduled, but failed to do so. As such, by agreeing to attend the hearing, I've made a conscious decision to have the matter resolved through mediation and no other alternative form of resolution. Could they throw in this as a plausible line of argument? Just want to ensure there are no loose ends dangling before I submit my appointment response, but all of the above queries/concern really stem from the below bullet list on the court's mediation letter and the implication thereof. I am willing to negotiate on the amount of the claim and I will consider a compromise. I have enough information about the claim to enter into negotiations and do not require any further evidence from the other party before starting mediation.

@FTMDaveso basically, if I've interpreted what you're saying correctly, this would in summary describe your latter proposal: 1. I acknowledge and agree to the mediation appointment and in so doing, I implicitly agree to the court's 3 mediation requirement statements which are that: I am willing to negotiate on the amount of the claim and I will consider a compromise. I have enough information about the claim to enter into negotiations and do not require any further evidence from the other party before starting mediation. I’m available for the entire time slot on the date of my appointment. 2. At the mediation, I point out that I never agreed to a mediation on my N180 directions questionnaire in the first place and that this mediation appointment had been arranged in error by the court. 3. As a result of the court error and therefore under the present circumstances, I'm willing to offer the compromise of dropping my SAR non-compliance claim, if they agree to do likewise with theirs. 4. If the compromise offer is rejected, that essentially becomes a failed mediation and the court then have to arrange a date for a new hearing. 5. If the compromise offer is accepted, then the entire case is closed. Would that be an accurate summary please? Thanks

@FTMDavewell, as I'd be on my X'mas break by the 21st, I have no problem at all sparing an hour of my time to put those pests to bed once and for all. Only question is, by agreeing to honour the appointment, doesn't that compromise my overall position then by suggesting I do not wish to contest against the Claimant's demands, but would be willing to negotiate a plea bargain over the claim amount?

OMG!! Thanks for flagging this up @FTMDave. No, absolutely not. I never opted for any mediation and I've even just verified this again on the submitted N180 Directions Questionnaire, a copy of which I'd have even posted here prior to submission. Question A1: Do you agree to this case being referred to the Small Claims Mediation Service My Response: No Question C1: Do you agree that the small claims track is the appropriate track for the case? My Response: Yes Question D1: Do you consider that this claim is suitable for determination without a hearing, i.e. by a judge reading and considering the case papers, witness statements............ My Response: No Is it possible that DCB could request that the case go for a mediation and the court then chooses to overrule my wish for no mediation, simply because they can't be bothered or find it less of a drain on their human and material resources? Attached, is a copy of the n180 Directions Questionnaire that I submitted. Kindly review and highlight if anything's out of place or not as expected. I've taken out my personal details from page 1, but still retained the key information relating to my response. Page 2-4 though remains 'as-is'. defendants N180.pdf

Folks, So, it's finally here. I received an email (attached) on Friday afternoon notifying me of my court hearing date on December 21st. Time to get to work on preparing a solid defence for the day and with all the expert help and advice I can muster from everyone here, fingers-crossed we should achieve that. In the meantime, any assistance towards providing a response to Friday's email notification would also be greatly appreciated. Part of its subject header states "...... Reply required within 4 working days of receipt". The email also included two attached MS Word documents titled: - Delegating Authority to Mediate - What Happens at Mediation Thank you. 2022-12-21 mediation service appointment.pdf

@FTMDave thanks for that. The claim submission is all done now.

@Andyorchexcellent !! Thanks for that quick feedback. Returning to the claim now to complete my submission.

All, So finally got round to starting that counterclaim on MCOL. Quick question, under the particulars of claim there's a question asking if I wish to send detailed particulars direct to the defendant (please see attached). Do I pick up that task by ticking the box...............or best leave MCOL to deal with that? counterclaim_particulars.pdf

Nope, not filed yet. Will do so later today and all directed to their registered business address...............hopefully once I can grab some break from my work schedule.