No, just send it now.
When you attach evidence to your ES, each item of evidence should be on a page that begins with the same header info as the claim. E.g.
IN THE COUNTY COURT
Claim No: [Claim Number]
BETWEEN:
[Claimant]
Claimant
- and -
[Defendant's Full Name]
Defendant
Exhibit XX-01
Change the "XX" to your initials.
In which case you will have to make the application yourself. Here is a link to a partially completed N244 application for your specific case:
N244 application (https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/zcwkj2n7iwvu5igmzdenk/N244_0622_save.pdf?rlkey=fr8eisykkysyh98vgszzhl2ut&st=kcdm0vkq&dl=0)
You will need to complete your personal details and the claim number and you sign by typing your full name for the signature.
Here is the Witness Statement which should be saved as a PDF file.
IN THE COUNTY COURT
Claim No: [Claim Number]
BETWEEN:
National Parking Management Ltd
Claimant
- and -
[Defendant's Full Name]
Defendant
WITNESS STATEMENT
I, [DEFENDANT'S NAME], of [ADDRESS], state as follows:
1. I am the Defendant in this matter. This witness statement is in support of my application to set aside the default judgment entered against me on [DATE] pursuant to CPR 13.3(1).
2. The default judgment was entered due to an honest procedural mistake on my part, and I have a real prospect of successfully defending the claim, which is fundamentally defective and should be struck out.
Background
3. I first became aware of the judgment when I received a letter from HM Courts & Tribunals Service dated [DATE] notifying me of the default judgment.
4. The claim form was correctly delivered, and I submitted an Acknowledgment of Service (AoS) within the prescribed timeframe. However, my defence was not submitted due to:
a) A technical email issue which resulted in the defence not being sent;
b) A misunderstanding regarding the defence form in the claim pack, as I mistakenly believed it was only to be used for counterclaims.
5. Upon learning of the judgment, I acted promptly by contacting the Claimant’s solicitors, Gladstones, requesting a consent order to set aside the judgment. I offered to cover the £119 consent application fee.
6. Despite multiple attempts to engage with the Claimant’s solicitors, they have ignored my requests, forcing me to file this contested application at an increased cost of £303.
The Claim Fails to Comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a) and Should be Struck Out
7. I have a real prospect of successfully defending this claim, but more importantly, the claim fails to comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a) and should be struck out under CPR 3.4(2)(a) because it does not disclose reasonable grounds for bringing a claim.
8. The Particulars of Claim (PoC) contained within the N1SDT claim form are defective and fail to meet the standard required under CPR 16.4(1)(a). A copy of the N1SDT claim form is attached as Exhibit [INITIALS]-01, which clearly demonstrates:
a) No contractual terms are identified or attached, as required under CPR PD 16(7.5).
b) The PoC do not specify which clause(s) of the alleged contract have been breached.
c) The PoC fail to provide a clear factual basis for the alleged breach (e.g., the exact nature of the alleged contravention).
d) The sum claimed is not explained, and no legal basis is provided for additional charges beyond the parking charge itself.
e) The PoC do not clarify whether I am pursued as the driver or as the registered keeper.
9. The PoC within the N1SDT form fail to contain a concise statement of facts, as required by CPR 16.4(1)(a), and as a result, the claim is vague, inadequate and defective. It does not particularise the cause of action, preventing the Defendant from preparing a meaningful response.
10. The courts have previously struck out identical claims for failing to comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a). I rely on the following persuasive appellate authorities:
CEL v Chan 2023 [E7GM9W44] – The court struck out the claim for failing to provide a concise statement of facts as required by CPR 16.4(1)(a).
CPMS v Akande 2024 [K0DP5J30] – The court struck out a similarly vague claim, ruling that a claimant cannot rely on generic, template-style pleadings without properly particularising the alleged breach.
11. Copies of these judgments are attached as Exhibit [INITIALS]-02 and Exhibit [INITIALS]-03.
12. Furthermore, in a similar case, a district judge struck out a claim of their own initiative due to identical defects. The judge ruled that:
• The claim lacked legal and factual specificity.
• It would be disproportionate and contrary to the overriding objective to allow amendments.
13. A copy of the draft order from that case is attached as Exhibit [INITIALS]-04
Claimant’s Unreasonable Conduct & Costs Request
14. I acted promptly in seeking to set aside the judgment and engaged in good faith negotiations with the Claimant’s solicitors, who refused to engage.
15. I attempted to resolve this amicably by:
• Sending an email to Gladstones solicitors on [DATE] requesting a consent order and offering to cover the £119 application fee.
• Following up via first class post with proof of posting on [DATE].
16. Despite these efforts, Gladstones failed to even acknowledge, never mind respond, leaving me no choice but to file a contested application at an increased cost of £303.
17. Under CPR 27.14(2)(g), the Claimant’s failure to engage in settlement discussions is unreasonable conduct that justifies a costs order in my favour.
18. Additionally, under CPR 38.6(1), if the Claimant discontinues the claim post-set-aside, costs should follow the event, meaning I should be compensated for the costs incurred in this unnecessary application.
Request for Relief
19. In light of the above, I respectfully request that the Court:
a) Set aside the default judgment pursuant to CPR 13.3(1).
b) Strike out the claim under CPR 3.4(2)(a) for failing to disclose reasonable grounds for bringing a claim.
c) Order the Claimant to pay my costs, summarily assessed at £303, due to their unreasonable conduct in refusing to engage in settlement discussions.
STATEMENT OF TRUTH
I believe that the facts stated in this Defence 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:
Dated:
Here is the draft order which should be saved in an MS Word (.docx or .doc) format:
IN THE COUNTY COURT[/center]
Claim No: [Claim Number]
BETWEEN:
National Parking Management Ltd
Claimant
- and -
[Defendant's Full Name]
Defendant
DRAFT ORDER
UPON the Court considering the Defendant’s application dated [DATE] to set aside the default judgment entered against them on 10th December 2024;
AND UPON considering the Defendant’s witness statement and supporting evidence;
AND UPON it appearing that:
a) The Defendant acted promptly upon learning of the default judgment and has a real prospect of successfully defending the claim, pursuant to CPR 13.3(1);
b) The Claimant’s Particulars of Claim as set out in the N1SDT claim form are defective and fail to comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a) and CPR PD 16(7.5), in that they do not contain a concise statement of facts, do not specify the exact contractual terms allegedly breached, and do not provide the factual basis for the amount claimed;
c) The Claim is therefore vague, lacking in specificity, and does not disclose reasonable grounds for bringing a claim, pursuant to CPR 3.4(2)(a);
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
1. The default judgment entered on [DATE] is set aside pursuant to CPR 13.3(1).
2. The claim is struck out in its entirety pursuant to CPR 3.4(2)(a) on the basis that it fails to disclose reasonable grounds for bringing a claim due to non-compliance with CPR 16.4(1)(a) and CPR PD 16(7.5).
3. The Claimant shall pay the Defendant’s costs of this application, summarily assessed at £303, due to:
a) The Claimant’s failure to engage in discussions to resolve this matter via consent, which necessitated this contested application; and
b) The Claimant’s issue of defective Particulars of Claim, which resulted in an unmeritorious default judgment being entered.
Dated:
Here is a link to the Chan, Akande transcripts and draft strikeout order exhibits which need to be saved with their own court header information and marked with the relevant reference in the WS to the exhibits with your initials (eg. XX-01, XX-02 etc.).
Draft Order for the defence (https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/zc23txk7poctyyxiv2ytx/Strikeout-order-1-a-v2.1.pdf?rlkey=pancly3z6zwqt2cra5rvvh3ls&st=nq7a58tz&dl=0)
CEL v Chan Transcript (https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/nb9ypbecuurpmln00dily/CELvChan-appeal-transcript.pdf?rlkey=7mpuvpmpe45s2zbhch21om1ez&st=i8dnbod3&dl=0)
CPMS v Akande Transcript (https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/y631olc61z1slr6xfrdsk/CPM-v-AKANDE.pdf?rlkey=kltpojedcxiwarxr0sdfyjo05&st=qi4lv3fv&dl=0)
Make sure you also include a copy of the N1SDT Claim Form with the defective PoC as an exhibit too and reference it accordingly in the WS and on the header.
When you have made the necessary edits and saved everything, the application form, the WS, and the exhibits should all be saved as a single PDF file. The draft order (not the evidential one for the defence) should be saved as a MS Word (.docx or .doc format) file. You then need to attach the PDF film and the Word files to an email which you send to:
applications.cnbc@justice.gov.uk and CC in yourself.
Make sure that the claim number is in the subject field of the covering email and in the body of the email state:
"Please contact me at [phone number] to take payment for the N244 application fee by card" and also include a very short explanation about what is attached, mentioning that it is an N244 application for a set aside.
That should cover it unless anyone else has any observations.
Yes, you can claim for the set-aside application fee from the claimant (Gladstones), but whether the court awards it depends on how the set-aside is granted and the circumstances of the case.
If the court grants the set-aside but the claim isn’t immediately struck out, you can still defend the claim and raise the defective PoC issue in your defence. If the claim is eventually struck out later, you can ask the court to order all costs associated with the set-aside and defence be reimbursed, including the set-aside fee.
You may need to adjust the letter requesting the consensual set aside. Since the default judgment arose due to a misunderstanding on your part about the defence deadline — rather than a procedural defect by the claimant (even though the claim is defective) — it’s important to adjust your approach when requesting reimbursement of the £119 application fee.
You'd need to focus on the fairness argument and the overriding objective, highlighting that both parties benefit from avoiding a contested set-aside and that it would be reasonable for the claimant to cover the fee as part of the Consent Order. You’re not claiming that the default judgment was wrongly obtained, but instead framing it as a pragmatic solution to save both parties further time and costs.
As it currently stands, if Gladstones agrees to a consent set-aside, it’s unlikely you’ll be able to recover the £119 application fee unless you explicitly negotiate this as part of the Consent Order itself. However, courts don’t automatically order costs in a mutual consent set-aside, since the agreement implies both parties are covering their own costs to avoid further disputes.
That said, there are ways you can try to recover the fee, depending on the circumstances and how the claim progresses. You'd have to adjust the letter to ask Gladstones to include the £119 reimbursement in the Consent Order. If they refuse to include a costs clause, reserve your right to request costs later.
It will all depend on whether Gladstones agree to a Consent Order at all. If they do, when reviewing a Consent Order, if it looks like the claim is likely to be struck out for defective PoC, you could propose the following clause:
“The claimant shall reimburse the defendant the sum of £119 for the set-aside application fee should the claim be struck out by the court for non-compliance with the Civil Procedure Rules.”
Even if Gladstones refuses to include that clause, you can still raise the issue with the court if the claim is struck out later.
If they refuse to consent to the set-aside entirely, you would proceed with a contested set-aside and request the court to order costs.
These are the scenarios:
• If Gladstones agrees to a Consent Order for the set-aside and the court grants it, but the claim remains live after the judgment is set aside, you cannot automatically recover the £119 fee. In this case, you’ve agreed to cover the cost of the set-aside to correct your own procedural mistake, and no further costs order would typically be made at that stage.
• If the court grants the set-aside and then strikes out the claim because the Particulars of Claim (PoC) are defective or non-compliant with CPR 16.4, you can request reimbursement of the set-aside application fee.
• If the claim remains live after the set-aside but you successfully defend it at a later hearing (or it is struck out for another reason), you can ask the court to award costs, including the set-aside fee, at that point.
The reasoning is that you incurred the set-aside fee as part of your successful defence, and it would be unjust for you to bear that cost given that the claim lacked merit or was procedurally defective.
Just to add... I have discussed this with a judge and, based on the limited facts I gave him, he said he would set aside the judgement but wouldn’t award the application fee. Financially, you would therefore better off just paying the debt and having done with it.
Because there is a good likelihood that the CCJ would be set aside, there is one other option which is to request a set aside with the claimant's consent. This approach is generally quicker and less expensive than a contested set-aside application, and it reduces the risk of your application being refused by the court.
You would contact the claimant through Gladstones and ask them to agree to set aside the CCJ by mutual consent. If the claimant agrees, you and the claimant would both sign a Consent Order, which confirms that both parties agree to have the judgment set aside.
You would then submit the Consent Order to the court along with Form N244 and pay a £119 fee (this is cheaper than the £303 fee for a full hearing). The advantage of this option is that the court is more likely to accept a set aside with consent, since both parties are agreeing to it. It’s also a much faster process because there’s no need for a lengthy court hearing.
The advantage of this option is that the court is more likely to accept a set aside with consent, as both parties are in agreement. It’s also a much faster process because there would be no need for a court hearing.
Once the CCJ is set aside, you would have the opportunity to defend the original claim. You have a real prospect of successfully defending it based on your argument that the Particulars of Claim (PoC) are defective and non-compliant with CPR 16.4. The claim could even be struck out entirely for failing to meet the basic requirements of the Civil Procedure Rules.
It’s important to note that even if the set aside is granted but the claim is not struck out immediately, you would still have a strong prospect of successfully defending the claim at a future hearing. Given the significant flaws in the PoC, there is every likelihood that the claim would be struck out later during the defence process. In this scenario, you would be able to ask the court to order the claimant to reimburse you for the set-aside application fee, as the claimant’s failure to comply with CPR 16.4 is what caused the default judgment in the first place.
While this option is worth exploring, bear in mind that the claimant is not obligated to agree to a set-aside with consent. If they refuse, you would need to proceed with a contested set-aside application instead.
Key Points to Consider:
• Consent from the claimant is not guaranteed. If the claimant refuses to agree to a set-aside, you would need to proceed with a contested set-aside application instead.
• This process is quicker and cheaper than a contested application, but only if the claimant cooperates.
•You must act quickly. The CCJ was issued on 10th December 2024, and today is 8th January 2025, so time is running out if you want to apply within one month to avoid the CCJ being recorded on your credit file.
In summary, requesting a set aside with consent is worth exploring, as it could save time and money. However, if the claimant is unlikely to willingly agree, it’s important to have a backup plan to submit a contested set-aside application if needed.