IN THE COUNTY COURT AT CROYDONClaim No: [Claim Number]BETWEEN:
Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd
Claimant
- and -
[Defendant's Full Name]
Defendant
SKELETON ARGUMENT FOR SET ASIDE APPLICATION
1. Introduction
This is the Defendant’s application to set aside the default judgment entered in May 2023 pursuant to CPR 13.2 and, in the alternative, CPR 13.3.
The Defendant respectfully submits that the judgment must be set aside because:• The Claimant failed to properly serve the claim form (breach of CPR 6.9).
•More than four months have passed without valid service (CPR 7.5).
• The Particulars of Claim are defective (breach of CPR 16.4).
• The Defendant acted promptly upon discovering the CCJ.
• Justice requires the Defendant be allowed to defend the claim properly.
2. Defective Service (CPR 6.9)
The Defendant did not receive the claim form.
The Claimant served the claim form to an outdated address, despite:• Knowing that the Defendant had appealed the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) in January 2020.
• Failing to undertake reasonable steps to ascertain the Defendant’s current address, as required by CPR 6.9(3).
• Not taking sufficient steps such as a soft trace before issuing proceedings.
The judgment was wrongly entered, and set aside is mandatory under CPR 13.2.
3. Claim Has Expired Unserved (CPR 7.5)
The claim form was not properly served within four months of issue, as required by CPR 7.5.
The Claimant has not applied to extend time or to validate defective service under CPR 6.15 or CPR 6.16.
Therefore, the claim has expired and must be struck out.
4. Particulars of Claim Are Defective (CPR 16.4)
The Particulars of Claim do not disclose a concise statement of facts as required by CPR 16.4(1)(a).
The Defendant relies on persuasive appellate case law:• Civil Enforcement Ltd v Ming Tak Chan (2023) [E7GM9W44]
• Car Park Management Services Ltd v Charles Akande (2024) [K0DP5J30]
The Particulars of Claim fail to set out sufficient detail of the alleged contract, breach, or cause of action.
5. Claimant’s Witness Evidence is Deficient
The Claimant’s witness statement has been made by a solicitor’s paralegal who has no first-hand knowledge of the events giving rise to the claim.
Under CPR 32.4(1), a witness statement must contain evidence which the maker would be permitted to give orally. The paralegal cannot properly give oral evidence about the alleged parking event, the alleged debt, or the service of the claim.
Further, Practice Direction 32, paragraph 18.2 requires a witness to distinguish between matters of their own knowledge and matters of information or belief, identifying the source of any information. The Claimant’s witness statement does not comply with this requirement.
The Defendant has no opportunity to cross-examine any person with direct knowledge of the material facts. Accordingly, it is respectfully submitted that the Court should treat the Claimant’s evidence with caution and little weight.
In any event, this hearing concerns solely the procedural issues surrounding the setting aside of the Default Judgment, not the substantive merits of the underlying claim. It would be procedurally unfair for the Claimant to attempt to plead or litigate their case at this stage before the Defendant has had the opportunity to file a Defence.
6. Claimant Has Not Rebutted the Procedural Failings
The Claimant has failed to properly rebut:• That service was defective (CPR 6.9).
• That the claim expired unserved after four months (CPR 7.5).
• That the Particulars of Claim are fatally defective (CPR 16.4).
The Claimant’s attempt to shift responsibility onto the Defendant regarding V5C details is misconceived, as the vehicle was sold and there was no ongoing obligation.
7. Promptness
The Defendant discovered the CCJ in October 2024 and has acted promptly thereafter in applying to set it aside.
8. Relief Sought
The Defendant respectfully asks the Court to:• Set aside the Default Judgment entered on [date of CCJ].
• Strike out the claim for failure to serve and/or expired service and/or defective Particulars of Claim.
• Alternatively, permit the Defendant to file and serve a Defence within 14 days.
• Order the Claimant to pay the Defendant’s application costs of £303.
Signed:
Date:
Just clarify, the response from Gladstones, was that received before or after you had submitted the N244 application?
Since the N244 application has already been submitted, there’s no need to take further action on the name correction at this stage. The court will review the application as it stands, and you can bring up the name error if the issue arises in court or if you have the opportunity to submit further statements. For now, it’s best to wait for court directions or any instructions for the hearing.
After consulting with the court, I have been advised that Gladstone Solicitors will need to request an amendment to correct this error.When and how did you "consult with the court"?
After consulting with the court, I have been advised that Gladstone Solicitors will need to request an amendment to correct this error.When and how did you "consult with the court"?
Is the difference in name very obvious or is it simply something like "Rams Bottom" instead of "Ramsbottom"?
You keep popping these little nuggets into the thread which is making it difficult to assist effectively.
For now, I suggest you write to Gladstones and inform them of the issue with your name. make sure that you put your correct name on anything to do with the claim.
At what point in these proceedings did you discover that they had misspelt your name? According to your story, you never received a claim form. So, how do you know that the claim form had your name spelt incorrectly?
If your surname is misspelled on the N1SDT claim form, according to the Civil Procedure Rules, when completing the Acknowledgment of Service (AoS), you should have provided your full correct name. If the claim form contains an error in your name, you should have indicated this in the AoS. Specifically, Rule 10.5(1)(d) states:"An acknowledgment of service must... set out the defendant’s name in full. Where the defendant’s name has been incorrectly set out in the claim form, it must be set out correctly in the acknowledgment of service."
So, you should have corrected the spelling of your surname when submitting the AoS. If you didn't, you must inform the court of the correct spelling as soon as possible. You can do this by sending a letter to the CNBC, referencing your claim number, and clearly stating the correct spelling of your name.
Is the name on the claim form very different from your actual name? Does the name on the claim form match the name on your V5C?@b789 It is not very different. My name does not match; my last name is incorrectly split into two words. The problem is only with my last name.
Here is a suggested WS and draft order to go with your N244 application. Double check it and insert any missing dates in the appropriate placeholders:QuoteIN THE COUNTY COURT[/center]Claim No: [Claim Number]BETWEEN:
Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd
Claimant
- and -
[Defendant's Full Name]
Defendant
WITNESS STATEMENT
I, [your full name], of [your address] , will say as follows:
1. I am the Defendant in this matter, and I make this witness statement in support of my application to set aside the County Court Judgment (CCJ) entered against me on 19th May 2023. The judgment was entered in default due to defective service of the claim.
2. I first became aware of the claim against me on 14th October 2024, after a prospective landlord refunded my holding deposit due to a County Court Judgment (CCJ) appearing on my record. This was a tremendous shock, as I had not received any claim form or detailed particulars of the claim in relation to this matter.
3. After making enquiries with the Civil National Business Centre (CNBC), I obtained details of the claimant, their legal representative, and the Particulars of Claim (PoC), which confirmed that the claimant had obtained a default CCJ against me relating to an alleged parking event.
4. Upon further investigation, I established the following:(i) The claim relates to an alleged parking event on 26th December 2019;
(ii) The claim form was sent to an old address at which I no longer reside; and
(iii) Had I been given the opportunity, I would have successfully defended the claim.
5. I did not receive any pre-claim correspondence, including the letter of claim required under the Pre-Action Protocol (PAP), nor did I receive the claim form or any particulars of claim, depriving me of the ability to defend the claim. The Claimant, knows that people move homes from time to time, also should have known that I had not responded to any communications sent to my old address.
6. This situation is directly addressed in the Civil Procedure Rules, specifically CPR 6.9(3), which states:'(3) Where a claimant has reason to believe that the address of the defendant is an address at which the defendant no longer resides or carries on business, the claimant must take reasonable steps to ascertain the address of the defendant’s current residence or place of business (“current address”).'
7. The Claimant used an outdated address ([insert address where claim was served at the time]), at which I no longer reside. I believe this is where they served the claim, constituting a clear breach of both the Civil Procedure Rules (CPRs) and their obligations under the Approved Operator Scheme, specifically the IPC Code of Practice. Further details and relevant issues are outlined below.
8. The Claimant was obligated to take reasonable steps to verify my correct address, as required under section 22.1 of the IPC Code of Practice v7 (November 2019) which states:22.1 Operators must take reasonable steps to ensure that the Motorist’s details are still correct if 12 months have passed from the Parking Event before issuing court proceedings.
9. Given that more than 12 months had passed between the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) issued in December 2019 and the County Court Judgment (CCJ) obtained in May 2023, this duty was especially pertinent.
10. I did not receive any claim form or detailed particulars of the claim related to this matter until I became aware of it, as stated in paragraph 2 above.
11. As more than four months have passed since the CCJ was entered, during which I remained unaware of both the claim and the judgment, the claim should now be dismissed under CPR 7.5.
12. Due to the Claimant’s breach of the Civil Procedure Rules—amounting to an abuse of the Court’s process—the claim form was never properly served. Consequently, the judgment must be set aside at the Claimant’s expense, and the claim dismissed, as it is now too late for the particulars of claim to be re-served.
13. Should the claim not be dismissed, despite the substantial case law outlined below supporting dismissal at the set-aside hearing, I request the opportunity to properly defend it. My application relies upon the 'mandatory set aside' rule in CPR 13.2 (and, in the alternative, CPR 13.3)."
14. In light of the procedural failings and the resultant default judgment, I proactively reached out to the Claimant, offering them the opportunity to consent to a joint application to set aside the judgment and dismiss the claim. I proposed that the Claimant cover the court fee, with no order as to costs. This offer was made in a genuine attempt to rectify the situation without unnecessary court proceedings and to correct the procedural wrongs that had been caused.
15. To facilitate this, I offered to defer filing a unilateral set-aside application, allowing the Claimant reasonable time to consider the proposal and prepare the necessary documents for a joint submission to the Court. I clearly communicated that if no response was received, I would proceed with a unilateral application to set aside the judgment, strike out the particulars of claim, dismiss the claim, and seek full indemnity costs against the Claimant. Despite my reasonable approach, the Claimant refused this offer, leaving me no choice but to proceed with this application.
16. I have set out the grounds for my application in the attached draft order.
THE CLAIMANT FAILED TO SERVE THE CLAIM
17. I understand that the Claimant obtained a Default Judgment against me as the Defendant on 19th May 2023. I am aware that the Claimant is Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd and that the assumed claim is in respect of an unpaid Parking Charge Notice.
18. CPR 6.9 stipulates that an "Individual" should be served at their "Usual or last known residence." As I have not had any correspondence in relation to this matter, other than the brief case details emailed to me on 21st October 2024 from the courts, it is clear that the Claimant, having obtained a previous address from the DVLA and having received no response, did not perform the requisite "reasonable diligence" required to find my correct address to serve the claim form in.
19. Had reasonable diligence been taken, my personal details are found in multiple public sources, including credit reference agencies and the Electoral Roll. The claimant did not have any contact with the defendant for over 12 months since the PCN was issued and thus should have considered they had incorrect details for service.
20. This is a breach of CPR 13.2(a), as the claim form was never served to my current address. Consequently, I was unaware of the Default Judgment until I discovered it, as stated in paragraph 2, on 14th October 2024. The judgment was therefore wrongly entered, as I was unable to submit an acknowledgement of service without notification of the case (CPR 13.3).
PRELIMINARY MATTER: Striking Out the Claim Due to Insufficient Particulars of Claim
21. Should the Court set aside the default judgment, I submit that the claim should be struck out as a preliminary matter due to the inadequacy of the Particulars of Claim (PoC), which fail to meet the requirements of CPR 16.4(1)(a). The PoC do not state a concise cause of action, rendering them deficient and non-compliant with the Civil Procedure Rules.
22. The Court is encouraged to consider persuasive appellate case law, particularly Civil Enforcement Ltd (CEL) v Chan (2023) and CPMS v Akande (2024), where claims with similarly vague and unparticularised PoC were struck out. Both cases support the principle that a claim must state clear grounds to allow a defendant a fair opportunity to understand and respond to the allegations.
23. In the current case, the Claimant’s PoC lack essential details and do not provide a coherent statement of facts, as required under CPR 16.4. Consequently, these deficiencies prevent me from fully understanding the basis of the claim or preparing an informed defence.
24. I respectfully request that the Court consider striking out the claim entirely on these grounds if the CCJ is set aside. This would prevent further proceedings on a fundamentally flawed claim and avoid unnecessary costs and time for both parties.
THE CLAIM HAS EXPIRED UNSERVED
25. I challenge the jurisdiction of the Court to hear this claim now, as it would effectively require dispensing with service. There are no exceptional circumstances to justify the limited discretion of the Court to validate defective service retrospectively by reviving an expired, unserved, and meritless claim.
26. Service of the claim form to an outdated address constitutes defective service, resulting in the claim expiring unserved. The Claimant currently has no claim, as it was not properly served within the required four-month period, and it is now time-barred.
27. Continuing an expired, unserved claim more than four months after it was issued (but never properly served) is impossible under CPR 7.5, which prohibits such action.
28. The Claimant is entirely responsible for failing to serve the claim correctly within the four-month deadline, as stipulated by CPR 7.5, and, as a result, the claim has now expired unserved.
29. The Claimant should not be afforded further opportunities to waste the Court’s time after failing to follow pre-action protocols for debt claims, breaching the IPC Code of Practice, and failing to take “reasonable steps” (CPR 6.9) to verify my current address.
30. If the Claimant believes it still has a claim, the only appropriate course of action would be to file afresh and issue a ‘Letter Before Claim’ to my correct address, this time in compliance with the pre-action protocol for debt claims. I have received no claim form or detailed particulars of the claim at my current address, leaving me unable to build a defence.
31. Accordingly, this claim should be struck out as more than four months have passed since the issue of proceedings and the claim was defectively served (i.e., it was never served).
SET ASIDE APPLICATION WAS MADE PROMPTLY
32. I have responded to this matter promptly. I discovered a CCJ had been obtained against me on 14th October 2024, after a prospective landlord refunded my holding deposit. I promptly contacted the Civil National Business Centre on 24th October 2024 to obtain relevant information about this default judgment.
33. On the 21st October 2024 I wrote to the Claimants legal representative offering to jointly apply to set aside the judgment. Despite allowing them a reasonable amount of time to seek instructions from the claimant, no response was received so on the [insert todays date], I have submitted my case in order to set-aside this judgement and fairly present my case
34. Considering all of the above, I was unable to defend myself against this claim. I believe that the claim against me is without merit and the Default Judgement against me was issued incorrectly. Thus, I respectfully request that the judgment be set aside, the claim struck out, and that the Court consider ordering the Claimant to reimburse my application fee of £303 if this request is successful.
Statement of truth:
I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.
Signed:
Date:
Here is the draft order that should accompany the WS:QuoteIN THE COUNTY COURTClaim No: [Claim Number]BETWEEN:
Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd
Claimant
- and -
[Defendant's Full Name]
Defendant
DRAFT ORDER
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
UPON considering the application of the Defendant to set aside the Judgment by default entered on 19th May 2023;
AND UPON reading the evidence in support of the application;
AND UPON the court taking note that the Claimant was not entitled to default judgment, having failed to serve on the Defendant's usual residential address;
AND UPON more than 4 months having passed (CPR 7.5 refers) since the issue of proceedings on [date of issue];
AND UPON the court finding that the Particulars of Claim fail to comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a) by lacking a concise statement of facts and therefore do not constitute a valid cause of action;
IT IS ORDERED:
1. The Judgment by default entered against the Defendant on 19th May 2023 is hereby set aside.
2. The claim be struck out as more than 4 months has passed since the issue of proceedings on [date of issue] without proper service on the Defendant.
3. The claim is further struck out on the grounds that the Particulars of Claim fail to comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a) and do not provide a concise statement of facts necessary to establish a cause of action.
4. The Claimant shall pay the Defendant’s costs of this application in the sum of £303.
Date: [date]
You will need to attach any evidence and the following two transcripts. Each item of evidence must be numbered and noted within the WS where it is referenced. Use your initials and a number as in "AB-01", AB-02" etc. Number them in the same sequence that they appear in the WS so there is a logical flow.
CEL v Chan Transcript (https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/nb9ypbecuurpmln00dily/CELvChan-appeal-transcript.pdf?rlkey=7mpuvpmpe45s2zbhch21om1ez&st=d5am84ru&dl=0)
CPMS v Akande Transcript (https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/y631olc61z1slr6xfrdsk/CPM-v-AKANDE.pdf?rlkey=kltpojedcxiwarxr0sdfyjo05&st=oq9y484s&dl=0)
Here is a suggested WS and draft order to go with your N244 application. Double check it and insert any missing dates in the appropriate placeholders:QuoteIN THE COUNTY COURT[/center]Claim No: [Claim Number]BETWEEN:
Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd
Claimant
- and -
[Defendant's Full Name]
Defendant
WITNESS STATEMENT
I, [your full name], of [your address] , will say as follows:
1. I am the Defendant in this matter, and I make this witness statement in support of my application to set aside the County Court Judgment (CCJ) entered against me on 19th May 2023. The judgment was entered in default due to defective service of the claim.
2. I first became aware of the claim against me on 14th October 2024, after a prospective landlord refunded my holding deposit due to a County Court Judgment (CCJ) appearing on my record. This was a tremendous shock, as I had not received any claim form or detailed particulars of the claim in relation to this matter.
3. After making enquiries with the Civil National Business Centre (CNBC), I obtained details of the claimant, their legal representative, and the Particulars of Claim (PoC), which confirmed that the claimant had obtained a default CCJ against me relating to an alleged parking event.
4. Upon further investigation, I established the following:(i) The claim relates to an alleged parking event on 26th December 2019;
(ii) The claim form was sent to an old address at which I no longer reside; and
(iii) Had I been given the opportunity, I would have successfully defended the claim.
5. I did not receive any pre-claim correspondence, including the letter of claim required under the Pre-Action Protocol (PAP), nor did I receive the claim form or any particulars of claim, depriving me of the ability to defend the claim. The Claimant, knows that people move homes from time to time, also should have known that I had not responded to any communications sent to my old address.
6. This situation is directly addressed in the Civil Procedure Rules, specifically CPR 6.9(3), which states:'(3) Where a claimant has reason to believe that the address of the defendant is an address at which the defendant no longer resides or carries on business, the claimant must take reasonable steps to ascertain the address of the defendant’s current residence or place of business (“current address”).'
7. The Claimant used an outdated address ([insert address where claim was served at the time]), at which I no longer reside. I believe this is where they served the claim, constituting a clear breach of both the Civil Procedure Rules (CPRs) and their obligations under the Approved Operator Scheme, specifically the IPC Code of Practice. Further details and relevant issues are outlined below.
8. The Claimant was obligated to take reasonable steps to verify my correct address, as required under section 22.1 of the IPC Code of Practice v7 (November 2019) which states:22.1 Operators must take reasonable steps to ensure that the Motorist’s details are still correct if 12 months have passed from the Parking Event before issuing court proceedings.
9. Given that more than 12 months had passed between the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) issued in December 2019 and the County Court Judgment (CCJ) obtained in May 2023, this duty was especially pertinent.
10. I did not receive any claim form or detailed particulars of the claim related to this matter until I became aware of it, as stated in paragraph 2 above.
11. As more than four months have passed since the CCJ was entered, during which I remained unaware of both the claim and the judgment, the claim should now be dismissed under CPR 7.5.
12. Due to the Claimant’s breach of the Civil Procedure Rules—amounting to an abuse of the Court’s process—the claim form was never properly served. Consequently, the judgment must be set aside at the Claimant’s expense, and the claim dismissed, as it is now too late for the particulars of claim to be re-served.
13. Should the claim not be dismissed, despite the substantial case law outlined below supporting dismissal at the set-aside hearing, I request the opportunity to properly defend it. My application relies upon the 'mandatory set aside' rule in CPR 13.2 (and, in the alternative, CPR 13.3)."
14. In light of the procedural failings and the resultant default judgment, I proactively reached out to the Claimant, offering them the opportunity to consent to a joint application to set aside the judgment and dismiss the claim. I proposed that the Claimant cover the court fee, with no order as to costs. This offer was made in a genuine attempt to rectify the situation without unnecessary court proceedings and to correct the procedural wrongs that had been caused.
15. To facilitate this, I offered to defer filing a unilateral set-aside application, allowing the Claimant reasonable time to consider the proposal and prepare the necessary documents for a joint submission to the Court. I clearly communicated that if no response was received, I would proceed with a unilateral application to set aside the judgment, strike out the particulars of claim, dismiss the claim, and seek full indemnity costs against the Claimant. Despite my reasonable approach, the Claimant refused this offer, leaving me no choice but to proceed with this application.
16. I have set out the grounds for my application in the attached draft order.
THE CLAIMANT FAILED TO SERVE THE CLAIM
17. I understand that the Claimant obtained a Default Judgment against me as the Defendant on 19th May 2023. I am aware that the Claimant is Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd and that the assumed claim is in respect of an unpaid Parking Charge Notice.
18. CPR 6.9 stipulates that an "Individual" should be served at their "Usual or last known residence." As I have not had any correspondence in relation to this matter, other than the brief case details emailed to me on 21st October 2024 from the courts, it is clear that the Claimant, having obtained a previous address from the DVLA and having received no response, did not perform the requisite "reasonable diligence" required to find my correct address to serve the claim form in.
19. Had reasonable diligence been taken, my personal details are found in multiple public sources, including credit reference agencies and the Electoral Roll. The claimant did not have any contact with the defendant for over 12 months since the PCN was issued and thus should have considered they had incorrect details for service.
20. This is a breach of CPR 13.2(a), as the claim form was never served to my current address. Consequently, I was unaware of the Default Judgment until I discovered it, as stated in paragraph 2, on [date you found out about the CCJ]. The judgment was therefore wrongly entered, as I was unable to submit an acknowledgement of service without notification of the case (CPR 13.3).
PRELIMINARY MATTER: Striking Out the Claim Due to Insufficient Particulars of Claim
21. Should the Court set aside the default judgment, I submit that the claim should be struck out as a preliminary matter due to the inadequacy of the Particulars of Claim (PoC), which fail to meet the requirements of CPR 16.4(1)(a). The PoC do not state a concise cause of action, rendering them deficient and non-compliant with the Civil Procedure Rules.
22. The Court is encouraged to consider persuasive appellate case law, particularly Civil Enforcement Ltd (CEL) v Chan (2023) and CPMS v Akande (2024), where claims with similarly vague and unparticularised PoC were struck out. Both cases support the principle that a claim must state clear grounds to allow a defendant a fair opportunity to understand and respond to the allegations.
23. In the current case, the Claimant’s PoC lack essential details and do not provide a coherent statement of facts, as required under CPR 16.4. Consequently, these deficiencies prevent me from fully understanding the basis of the claim or preparing an informed defence.
24. I respectfully request that the Court consider striking out the claim entirely on these grounds if the CCJ is set aside. This would prevent further proceedings on a fundamentally flawed claim and avoid unnecessary costs and time for both parties.
THE CLAIM HAS EXPIRED UNSERVED
25. I challenge the jurisdiction of the Court to hear this claim now, as it would effectively require dispensing with service. There are no exceptional circumstances to justify the limited discretion of the Court to validate defective service retrospectively by reviving an expired, unserved, and meritless claim.
26. Service of the claim form to an outdated address constitutes defective service, resulting in the claim expiring unserved. The Claimant currently has no claim, as it was not properly served within the required four-month period, and it is now time-barred.
27. Continuing an expired, unserved claim more than four months after it was issued (but never properly served) is impossible under CPR 7.5, which prohibits such action.
28. The Claimant is entirely responsible for failing to serve the claim correctly within the four-month deadline, as stipulated by CPR 7.5, and, as a result, the claim has now expired unserved.
29. The Claimant should not be afforded further opportunities to waste the Court’s time after failing to follow pre-action protocols for debt claims, breaching the IPC Code of Practice, and failing to take “reasonable steps” (CPR 6.9) to verify my current address.
30. If the Claimant believes it still has a claim, the only appropriate course of action would be to file afresh and issue a ‘Letter Before Claim’ to my correct address, this time in compliance with the pre-action protocol for debt claims. I have received no claim form or detailed particulars of the claim at my current address, leaving me unable to build a defence.
31. Accordingly, this claim should be struck out as more than four months have passed since the issue of proceedings and the claim was defectively served (i.e., it was never served).
SET ASIDE APPLICATION WAS MADE PROMPTLY
32. I have responded to this matter promptly. I discovered a CCJ had been obtained against me on 14th October 2024, after a prospective landlord refunded my holding deposit. I promptly contacted the Civil National Business Centre on 24th October 2024 to obtain relevant information about this default judgment.
33. On the 21st October 2024 I wrote to the Claimants legal representative offering to jointly apply to set aside the judgment. Despite allowing them a reasonable amount of time to seek instructions from the claimant, no response was received so on the [insert todays date], I have submitted my case in order to set-aside this judgement and fairly present my case
34. Considering all of the above, I was unable to defend myself against this claim. I believe that the claim against me is without merit and the Default Judgement against me was issued incorrectly. Thus, I respectfully request that the judgment be set aside, the claim struck out, and that the Court consider ordering the Claimant to reimburse my application fee of £303 if this request is successful.
Statement of truth:
I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.
Signed:
Date:
Here is the draft order that should accompany the WS:QuoteIN THE COUNTY COURTClaim No: [Claim Number]BETWEEN:
Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd
Claimant
- and -
[Defendant's Full Name]
Defendant
DRAFT ORDER
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
UPON considering the application of the Defendant to set aside the Judgment by default entered on [date];
AND UPON reading the evidence in support of the application;
AND UPON the court taking note that the Claimant was not entitled to default judgment, having failed to serve on the Defendant's usual residential address;
AND UPON more than 4 months having passed (CPR 7.5 refers) since the issue of proceedings on [date of issue];
AND UPON the court finding that the Particulars of Claim fail to comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a) by lacking a concise statement of facts and therefore do not constitute a valid cause of action;
IT IS ORDERED:
1. The Judgment by default entered against the Defendant on 19th May 2023 is hereby set aside.
2. The claim be struck out as more than 4 months has passed since the issue of proceedings on [date of issue] without proper service on the Defendant.
3. The claim is further struck out on the grounds that the Particulars of Claim fail to comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a) and do not provide a concise statement of facts necessary to establish a cause of action.
4. The Claimant shall pay the Defendant’s costs of this application in the sum of £303.
Date: [date]
You will need to attach any evidence and the following two transcripts. Each item of evidence must be numbered and noted within the WS where it is referenced. Use your initials and a number as in "AB-01", AB-02" etc. Number them in the same sequence that they appear in the WS so there is a logical flow.
CEL v Chan Transcript (https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/nb9ypbecuurpmln00dily/CELvChan-appeal-transcript.pdf?rlkey=7mpuvpmpe45s2zbhch21om1ez&st=d5am84ru&dl=0)
CPMS v Akande Transcript (https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/y631olc61z1slr6xfrdsk/CPM-v-AKANDE.pdf?rlkey=kltpojedcxiwarxr0sdfyjo05&st=oq9y484s&dl=0)
Here is a suggested WS and draft order to go with your N244 application. Double check it and insert any missing dates in the appropriate placeholders:QuoteIN THE COUNTY COURT[/center]Claim No: [Claim Number]BETWEEN:
Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd
Claimant
- and -
[Defendant's Full Name]
Defendant
WITNESS STATEMENT
I, [your full name], of [your address] , will say as follows:
1. I am the Defendant in this matter, and I make this witness statement in support of my application to set aside the County Court Judgment (CCJ) entered against me on 19th May 2023. The judgment was entered in default due to defective service of the claim.
2. I first became aware of the claim against me on 14th October 2024, after a prospective landlord refunded my holding deposit due to a County Court Judgment (CCJ) appearing on my record. This was a tremendous shock, as I had not received any claim form or detailed particulars of the claim in relation to this matter.
3. After making enquiries with the Civil National Business Centre (CNBC), I obtained details of the claimant, their legal representative, and the Particulars of Claim (PoC), which confirmed that the claimant had obtained a default CCJ against me relating to an alleged parking event.
4. Upon further investigation, I established the following:(i) The claim relates to an alleged parking event on 26th December 2019;
(ii) The claim form was sent to an old address at which I no longer reside; and
(iii) Had I been given the opportunity, I would have successfully defended the claim.
5. I did not receive any pre-claim correspondence, including the letter of claim required under the Pre-Action Protocol (PAP), nor did I receive the claim form or any particulars of claim, depriving me of the ability to defend the claim. The Claimant, knows that people move homes from time to time, also should have known that I had not responded to any communications sent to my old address.
6. This situation is directly addressed in the Civil Procedure Rules, specifically CPR 6.9(3), which states:'(3) Where a claimant has reason to believe that the address of the defendant is an address at which the defendant no longer resides or carries on business, the claimant must take reasonable steps to ascertain the address of the defendant’s current residence or place of business (“current address”).'
7. The Claimant used an outdated address ([insert address where claim was served at the time]), at which I no longer reside. I believe this is where they served the claim, constituting a clear breach of both the Civil Procedure Rules (CPRs) and their obligations under the Approved Operator Scheme, specifically the IPC Code of Practice. Further details and relevant issues are outlined below.
8. The Claimant was obligated to take reasonable steps to verify my correct address, as required under section 22.1 of the IPC Code of Practice v7 (November 2019) which states:22.1 Operators must take reasonable steps to ensure that the Motorist’s details are still correct if 12 months have passed from the Parking Event before issuing court proceedings.
9. Given that more than 12 months had passed between the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) issued in December 2019 and the County Court Judgment (CCJ) obtained in May 2023, this duty was especially pertinent.
10. I did not receive any claim form or detailed particulars of the claim related to this matter until I became aware of it, as stated in paragraph 2 above.
11. As more than four months have passed since the CCJ was entered, during which I remained unaware of both the claim and the judgment, the claim should now be dismissed under CPR 7.5.
12. Due to the Claimant’s breach of the Civil Procedure Rules—amounting to an abuse of the Court’s process—the claim form was never properly served. Consequently, the judgment must be set aside at the Claimant’s expense, and the claim dismissed, as it is now too late for the particulars of claim to be re-served.
13. Should the claim not be dismissed, despite the substantial case law outlined below supporting dismissal at the set-aside hearing, I request the opportunity to properly defend it. My application relies upon the 'mandatory set aside' rule in CPR 13.2 (and, in the alternative, CPR 13.3)."
14. In light of the procedural failings and the resultant default judgment, I proactively reached out to the Claimant, offering them the opportunity to consent to a joint application to set aside the judgment and dismiss the claim. I proposed that the Claimant cover the court fee, with no order as to costs. This offer was made in a genuine attempt to rectify the situation without unnecessary court proceedings and to correct the procedural wrongs that had been caused.
15. To facilitate this, I offered to defer filing a unilateral set-aside application, allowing the Claimant reasonable time to consider the proposal and prepare the necessary documents for a joint submission to the Court. I clearly communicated that if no response was received, I would proceed with a unilateral application to set aside the judgment, strike out the particulars of claim, dismiss the claim, and seek full indemnity costs against the Claimant. Despite my reasonable approach, the Claimant refused this offer, leaving me no choice but to proceed with this application.
16. I have set out the grounds for my application in the attached draft order.
THE CLAIMANT FAILED TO SERVE THE CLAIM
17. I understand that the Claimant obtained a Default Judgment against me as the Defendant on 19th May 2023. I am aware that the Claimant is Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd and that the assumed claim is in respect of an unpaid Parking Charge Notice.
18. CPR 6.9 stipulates that an "Individual" should be served at their "Usual or last known residence." As I have not had any correspondence in relation to this matter, other than the brief case details emailed to me on 21st October 2024 from the courts, it is clear that the Claimant, having obtained a previous address from the DVLA and having received no response, did not perform the requisite "reasonable diligence" required to find my correct address to serve the claim form in.
19. Had reasonable diligence been taken, my personal details are found in multiple public sources, including credit reference agencies and the Electoral Roll. The claimant did not have any contact with the defendant for over 12 months since the PCN was issued and thus should have considered they had incorrect details for service.
20. This is a breach of CPR 13.2(a), as the claim form was never served to my current address. Consequently, I was unaware of the Default Judgment until I discovered it, as stated in paragraph 2, on [date you found out about the CCJ]. The judgment was therefore wrongly entered, as I was unable to submit an acknowledgement of service without notification of the case (CPR 13.3).
PRELIMINARY MATTER: Striking Out the Claim Due to Insufficient Particulars of Claim
21. Should the Court set aside the default judgment, I submit that the claim should be struck out as a preliminary matter due to the inadequacy of the Particulars of Claim (PoC), which fail to meet the requirements of CPR 16.4(1)(a). The PoC do not state a concise cause of action, rendering them deficient and non-compliant with the Civil Procedure Rules.
22. The Court is encouraged to consider persuasive appellate case law, particularly Civil Enforcement Ltd (CEL) v Chan (2023) and CPMS v Akande (2024), where claims with similarly vague and unparticularised PoC were struck out. Both cases support the principle that a claim must state clear grounds to allow a defendant a fair opportunity to understand and respond to the allegations.
23. In the current case, the Claimant’s PoC lack essential details and do not provide a coherent statement of facts, as required under CPR 16.4. Consequently, these deficiencies prevent me from fully understanding the basis of the claim or preparing an informed defence.
24. I respectfully request that the Court consider striking out the claim entirely on these grounds if the CCJ is set aside. This would prevent further proceedings on a fundamentally flawed claim and avoid unnecessary costs and time for both parties.
THE CLAIM HAS EXPIRED UNSERVED
25. I challenge the jurisdiction of the Court to hear this claim now, as it would effectively require dispensing with service. There are no exceptional circumstances to justify the limited discretion of the Court to validate defective service retrospectively by reviving an expired, unserved, and meritless claim.
26. Service of the claim form to an outdated address constitutes defective service, resulting in the claim expiring unserved. The Claimant currently has no claim, as it was not properly served within the required four-month period, and it is now time-barred.
27. Continuing an expired, unserved claim more than four months after it was issued (but never properly served) is impossible under CPR 7.5, which prohibits such action.
28. The Claimant is entirely responsible for failing to serve the claim correctly within the four-month deadline, as stipulated by CPR 7.5, and, as a result, the claim has now expired unserved.
29. The Claimant should not be afforded further opportunities to waste the Court’s time after failing to follow pre-action protocols for debt claims, breaching the IPC Code of Practice, and failing to take “reasonable steps” (CPR 6.9) to verify my current address.
30. If the Claimant believes it still has a claim, the only appropriate course of action would be to file afresh and issue a ‘Letter Before Claim’ to my correct address, this time in compliance with the pre-action protocol for debt claims. I have received no claim form or detailed particulars of the claim at my current address, leaving me unable to build a defence.
31. Accordingly, this claim should be struck out as more than four months have passed since the issue of proceedings and the claim was defectively served (i.e., it was never served).
SET ASIDE APPLICATION WAS MADE PROMPTLY
32. I have responded to this matter promptly. I discovered a CCJ had been obtained against me on 14th October 2024, after a prospective landlord refunded my holding deposit. I promptly contacted the Civil National Business Centre on 24th October 2024 to obtain relevant information about this default judgment.
33. On the 21st October 2024 I wrote to the Claimants legal representative offering to jointly apply to set aside the judgment. Despite allowing them a reasonable amount of time to seek instructions from the claimant, no response was received so on the [insert todays date], I have submitted my case in order to set-aside this judgement and fairly present my case
34. Considering all of the above, I was unable to defend myself against this claim. I believe that the claim against me is without merit and the Default Judgement against me was issued incorrectly. Thus, I respectfully request that the judgment be set aside, the claim struck out, and that the Court consider ordering the Claimant to reimburse my application fee of £303 if this request is successful.
Statement of truth:
I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.
Signed:
Date:
Here is the draft order that should accompany the WS:QuoteIN THE COUNTY COURTClaim No: [Claim Number]BETWEEN:
Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd
Claimant
- and -
[Defendant's Full Name]
Defendant
DRAFT ORDER
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
UPON considering the application of the Defendant to set aside the Judgment by default entered on [date];
AND UPON reading the evidence in support of the application;
AND UPON the court taking note that the Claimant was not entitled to default judgment, having failed to serve on the Defendant's usual residential address;
AND UPON more than 4 months having passed (CPR 7.5 refers) since the issue of proceedings on [date of issue];
AND UPON the court finding that the Particulars of Claim fail to comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a) by lacking a concise statement of facts and therefore do not constitute a valid cause of action;
IT IS ORDERED:
1. The Judgment by default entered against the Defendant on 19th May 2023 is hereby set aside.
2. The claim be struck out as more than 4 months has passed since the issue of proceedings on [date of issue] without proper service on the Defendant.
3. The claim is further struck out on the grounds that the Particulars of Claim fail to comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a) and do not provide a concise statement of facts necessary to establish a cause of action.
4. The Claimant shall pay the Defendant’s costs of this application in the sum of £303.
Date: [date]
You will need to attach any evidence and the following two transcripts. Each item of evidence must be numbered and noted within the WS where it is referenced. Use your initials and a number as in "AB-01", AB-02" etc. Number them in the same sequence that they appear in the WS so there is a logical flow.
CEL v Chan Transcript (https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/nb9ypbecuurpmln00dily/CELvChan-appeal-transcript.pdf?rlkey=7mpuvpmpe45s2zbhch21om1ez&st=d5am84ru&dl=0)
CPMS v Akande Transcript (https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/y631olc61z1slr6xfrdsk/CPM-v-AKANDE.pdf?rlkey=kltpojedcxiwarxr0sdfyjo05&st=oq9y484s&dl=0)
What was the date of issue of the claim?
IN THE COUNTY COURT[/center]Claim No: [Claim Number]BETWEEN:
Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd
Claimant
- and -
[Defendant's Full Name]
Defendant
WITNESS STATEMENT
I, [your full name], of [your address] , will say as follows:
1. I am the Defendant in this matter, and I make this witness statement in support of my application to set aside the County Court Judgment (CCJ) entered against me on 19th May 2023. The judgment was entered in default due to defective service of the claim.
2. I first became aware of the claim against me on 14th October 2024, after a prospective landlord refunded my holding deposit due to a County Court Judgment (CCJ) appearing on my record. This was a tremendous shock, as I had not received any claim form or detailed particulars of the claim in relation to this matter.
3. After making enquiries with the Civil National Business Centre (CNBC), I obtained details of the claimant, their legal representative, and the Particulars of Claim (PoC), which confirmed that the claimant had obtained a default CCJ against me relating to an alleged parking event.
4. Upon further investigation, I established the following:(i) The claim relates to an alleged parking event on 26th December 2019;
(ii) The claim form was sent to an old address at which I no longer reside; and
(iii) Had I been given the opportunity, I would have successfully defended the claim.
5. I did not receive any pre-claim correspondence, including the letter of claim required under the Pre-Action Protocol (PAP), nor did I receive the claim form or any particulars of claim, depriving me of the ability to defend the claim. The Claimant, knows that people move homes from time to time, also should have known that I had not responded to any communications sent to my old address.
6. This situation is directly addressed in the Civil Procedure Rules, specifically CPR 6.9(3), which states:'(3) Where a claimant has reason to believe that the address of the defendant is an address at which the defendant no longer resides or carries on business, the claimant must take reasonable steps to ascertain the address of the defendant’s current residence or place of business (“current address”).'
7. The Claimant used an outdated address ([insert address where claim was served at the time]), at which I no longer reside. I believe this is where they served the claim, constituting a clear breach of both the Civil Procedure Rules (CPRs) and their obligations under the Approved Operator Scheme, specifically the IPC Code of Practice. Further details and relevant issues are outlined below.
8. The Claimant was obligated to take reasonable steps to verify my correct address, as required under section 22.1 of the IPC Code of Practice v7 (November 2019) which states:22.1 Operators must take reasonable steps to ensure that the Motorist’s details are still correct if 12 months have passed from the Parking Event before issuing court proceedings.
9. Given that more than 12 months had passed between the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) issued in December 2019 and the County Court Judgment (CCJ) obtained in May 2023, this duty was especially pertinent.
10. I did not receive any claim form or detailed particulars of the claim related to this matter until I became aware of it, as stated in paragraph 2 above.
11. As more than four months have passed since the CCJ was entered, during which I remained unaware of both the claim and the judgment, the claim should now be dismissed under CPR 7.5.
12. Due to the Claimant’s breach of the Civil Procedure Rules—amounting to an abuse of the Court’s process—the claim form was never properly served. Consequently, the judgment must be set aside at the Claimant’s expense, and the claim dismissed, as it is now too late for the particulars of claim to be re-served.
13. Should the claim not be dismissed, despite the substantial case law outlined below supporting dismissal at the set-aside hearing, I request the opportunity to properly defend it. My application relies upon the 'mandatory set aside' rule in CPR 13.2 (and, in the alternative, CPR 13.3)."
14. In light of the procedural failings and the resultant default judgment, I proactively reached out to the Claimant, offering them the opportunity to consent to a joint application to set aside the judgment and dismiss the claim. I proposed that the Claimant cover the court fee, with no order as to costs. This offer was made in a genuine attempt to rectify the situation without unnecessary court proceedings and to correct the procedural wrongs that had been caused.
15. To facilitate this, I offered to defer filing a unilateral set-aside application, allowing the Claimant reasonable time to consider the proposal and prepare the necessary documents for a joint submission to the Court. I clearly communicated that if no response was received, I would proceed with a unilateral application to set aside the judgment, strike out the particulars of claim, dismiss the claim, and seek full indemnity costs against the Claimant. Despite my reasonable approach, the Claimant refused this offer, leaving me no choice but to proceed with this application.
16. I have set out the grounds for my application in the attached draft order.
THE CLAIMANT FAILED TO SERVE THE CLAIM
17. I understand that the Claimant obtained a Default Judgment against me as the Defendant on 19th May 2023. I am aware that the Claimant is Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd and that the assumed claim is in respect of an unpaid Parking Charge Notice.
18. CPR 6.9 stipulates that an "Individual" should be served at their "Usual or last known residence." As I have not had any correspondence in relation to this matter, other than the brief case details emailed to me on 21st October 2024 from the courts, it is clear that the Claimant, having obtained a previous address from the DVLA and having received no response, did not perform the requisite "reasonable diligence" required to find my correct address to serve the claim form in.
19. Had reasonable diligence been taken, my personal details are found in multiple public sources, including credit reference agencies and the Electoral Roll. The claimant did not have any contact with the defendant for over 12 months since the PCN was issued and thus should have considered they had incorrect details for service.
20. This is a breach of CPR 13.2(a), as the claim form was never served to my current address. Consequently, I was unaware of the Default Judgment until I discovered it, as stated in paragraph 2, on 14th October 2024. The judgment was therefore wrongly entered, as I was unable to submit an acknowledgement of service without notification of the case (CPR 13.3).
PRELIMINARY MATTER: Striking Out the Claim Due to Insufficient Particulars of Claim
21. Should the Court set aside the default judgment, I submit that the claim should be struck out as a preliminary matter due to the inadequacy of the Particulars of Claim (PoC), which fail to meet the requirements of CPR 16.4(1)(a). The PoC do not state a concise cause of action, rendering them deficient and non-compliant with the Civil Procedure Rules.
22. The Court is encouraged to consider persuasive appellate case law, particularly Civil Enforcement Ltd (CEL) v Chan (2023) and CPMS v Akande (2024), where claims with similarly vague and unparticularised PoC were struck out. Both cases support the principle that a claim must state clear grounds to allow a defendant a fair opportunity to understand and respond to the allegations.
23. In the current case, the Claimant’s PoC lack essential details and do not provide a coherent statement of facts, as required under CPR 16.4. Consequently, these deficiencies prevent me from fully understanding the basis of the claim or preparing an informed defence.
24. I respectfully request that the Court consider striking out the claim entirely on these grounds if the CCJ is set aside. This would prevent further proceedings on a fundamentally flawed claim and avoid unnecessary costs and time for both parties.
THE CLAIM HAS EXPIRED UNSERVED
25. I challenge the jurisdiction of the Court to hear this claim now, as it would effectively require dispensing with service. There are no exceptional circumstances to justify the limited discretion of the Court to validate defective service retrospectively by reviving an expired, unserved, and meritless claim.
26. Service of the claim form to an outdated address constitutes defective service, resulting in the claim expiring unserved. The Claimant currently has no claim, as it was not properly served within the required four-month period, and it is now time-barred.
27. Continuing an expired, unserved claim more than four months after it was issued (but never properly served) is impossible under CPR 7.5, which prohibits such action.
28. The Claimant is entirely responsible for failing to serve the claim correctly within the four-month deadline, as stipulated by CPR 7.5, and, as a result, the claim has now expired unserved.
29. The Claimant should not be afforded further opportunities to waste the Court’s time after failing to follow pre-action protocols for debt claims, breaching the IPC Code of Practice, and failing to take “reasonable steps” (CPR 6.9) to verify my current address.
30. If the Claimant believes it still has a claim, the only appropriate course of action would be to file afresh and issue a ‘Letter Before Claim’ to my correct address, this time in compliance with the pre-action protocol for debt claims. I have received no claim form or detailed particulars of the claim at my current address, leaving me unable to build a defence.
31. Accordingly, this claim should be struck out as more than four months have passed since the issue of proceedings and the claim was defectively served (i.e., it was never served).
SET ASIDE APPLICATION WAS MADE PROMPTLY
32. I have responded to this matter promptly. I discovered a CCJ had been obtained against me on 14th October 2024, after a prospective landlord refunded my holding deposit. I promptly contacted the Civil National Business Centre on 24th October 2024 to obtain relevant information about this default judgment.
33. On the 21st October 2024 I wrote to the Claimants legal representative offering to jointly apply to set aside the judgment. Despite allowing them a reasonable amount of time to seek instructions from the claimant, no response was received so on the [insert todays date], I have submitted my case in order to set-aside this judgement and fairly present my case
34. Considering all of the above, I was unable to defend myself against this claim. I believe that the claim against me is without merit and the Default Judgement against me was issued incorrectly. Thus, I respectfully request that the judgment be set aside, the claim struck out, and that the Court consider ordering the Claimant to reimburse my application fee of £303 if this request is successful.
Statement of truth:
I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.
Signed:
Date:
IN THE COUNTY COURTClaim No: [Claim Number]BETWEEN:
Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd
Claimant
- and -
[Defendant's Full Name]
Defendant
DRAFT ORDER
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
UPON considering the application of the Defendant to set aside the Judgment by default entered on 19th May 2023;
AND UPON reading the evidence in support of the application;
AND UPON the court taking note that the Claimant was not entitled to default judgment, having failed to serve on the Defendant's usual residential address;
AND UPON more than 4 months having passed (CPR 7.5 refers) since the issue of proceedings on [date of issue];
AND UPON the court finding that the Particulars of Claim fail to comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a) by lacking a concise statement of facts and therefore do not constitute a valid cause of action;
IT IS ORDERED:
1. The Judgment by default entered against the Defendant on 19th May 2023 is hereby set aside.
2. The claim be struck out as more than 4 months has passed since the issue of proceedings on [date of issue] without proper service on the Defendant.
3. The claim is further struck out on the grounds that the Particulars of Claim fail to comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a) and do not provide a concise statement of facts necessary to establish a cause of action.
4. The Claimant shall pay the Defendant’s costs of this application in the sum of £303.
Date: [date]
Please edit your reply to show the full dates. They are not secret and will not affect anything.Done @b789
So, show us what you wrote to the claimant when you tried to get a set aside with consent. Also show us the email from the solicitor and also show us the wording of your rejection of their offer.
You also state that you appealed the PCN in January 2020. What response to the appeal did you receive? You say that the amount went from £100 to over £300, so you must have had an appeal rejection and some debt collector letters. However, for it to have gone to more than £170, you must have received a Letter of Claim (LoC). When did you receive the LoC?
Can you confirm please.
So, show us what you wrote to the claimant when you tried to get a set aside with consent. Also show us the email from the solicitor and also show us the wording of your rejection of their offer.
You also state that you appealed the PCN in January 2020. What response to the appeal did you receive? You say that the amount went from £100 to over £300, so you must have had an appeal rejection and some debt collector letters. However, for it to have gone to more than £170, you must have received a Letter of Claim (LoC). When did you receive the LoC?
Can you confirm please.
So, show us what you wrote to the claimant when you tried to get a set aside with consent. Also show us the email from the solicitor and also show us the wording of your rejection of their offer.
You also state that you appealed the PCN in January 2020. What response to the appeal did you receive? You say that the amount went from £100 to over £300, so you must have had an appeal rejection and some debt collector letters. However, for it to have gone to more than £170, you must have received a Letter of Claim (LoC). When did you receive the LoC?
Can you confirm please.
You need to get all the facts together a timeline rather than providing us with bits of information. All dates are important. Start with the date of the alleged parking event and progress from there, including the dates of address changes.
Once we have a timeline of events and sight of any correspondence, in both directions, and by who to who, we can put together your application. You only need to redact your personal details, VRM, PCN number, Claim number. The location and dates are important.
Obviously a Gladstones issued claim. Fails completely to comply with CPR 16.4 and incudes their particularly unlawful interest at 10.25%.
You are not putting in a full defence at set aside stage. You are applying for the set aside and it must be under CPR 13.2 as the claim was not properly served. Also, in the alternative, you are applying under CPR 13.3 as you have a very good prospect of successfully defending the claim.
In your application you will also argue that the claim should be struck out for failing to comply with CPR 16.4 and you will provide applicable, persuasive appeals case law in CEL v Chan (2023) and CPMS v Akande (2024) to show that other similarly poorly pleaded claims that do not even comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a) have been thrown out for failing to even show what the facts are that the claimant is relying on.
Also, you will argue that when the claim is set aside, it cannot be re-served as it has been more than 4 months since claim was issued. This requirement is stipulated in CPR 7.5(1). If the claim form is not served within this four-month period, it becomes invalid, and the claimant cannot serve it thereafter. To extend the time for service, the claimant must apply to the court under CPR 7.6. However, such an application must be made within the original four-month period. If the application is made after this period, the court will only grant an extension if the court has failed to serve the claim form or the claimant has taken all reasonable steps to serve the claim form but has been unable to do so and the claimant has acted promptly in making the application. This is outlined in CPR 7.6(3).
So, if more than four months have elapsed since the claim form was issued and it has not been served, the claimant cannot re-serve it.
All this needs to be detailed in your application, Witness Statement and Draft Order.
So, before you do anything else, show us what has been requested and we can provide the necessary help in putting together a proper application that will blow them out of the water.
Thank you for your prompt reply @DWMB2.QuoteI received a letter from the solicitors last year but ignored it.What was this letter?
I received a letter from the solicitors last year but ignored it.What was this letter?