Since there is no hearing within 10 working days, and the email did not include a new issue, application, or appeal, and the message was general correspondence seeking clarification, it is likely the court will not action the email unless an individual court officer chooses to respond as a courtesy. According to the rules in the auto-response, the email technically falls outside what the court has agreed to process by email.
In which case, in order to ensure the court formally processes your query and places it on the file (especially in case the claim isn’t yet administratively marked as struck out), you should send a postal letter to the court including:
• A brief covering letter referencing the unless order;
• A polite request for confirmation that the claim is struck out;
• A copy of the claimant's late-served PoC if you wish to evidence the non-compliance.
You can use the following draft which you will then print and send to the court by First Class post and make sure you get a free "Proof of Posting" certificate from any post office or simply drop it off by depositing it into the Court Post/Drop box:
[Your Full Name]
[Your Address]
[Postcode]
[Email Address – optional]
[Phone Number – optional]
Date: [Insert today's date]
To: The Court Manager
Romford County Court
2a Oaklands Avenue
Romford
RM1 4DP
Re: Claim No. [insert claim number]
Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd v [Your Full Name]
Unless Order dated 30 April 2025 – Request for Confirmation of Automatic Strike-Out
Dear Sir/Madam,
I write in respect of the above claim and the unless order issued by the court on 30 April 2025, which required the Claimant to file and serve a compliant Particulars of Claim by 4:00pm within 7 days of service of the order.
According to CPR 6.26, the order is deemed served on 2 May 2025, meaning the deadline for compliance expired at 4:00pm on Friday 9th May 2025. The Claimant’s further Particulars of Claim are dated 13 May 2025 and were served after this deadline. No application for relief from sanctions has been received or notified.
The order clearly stated that if the Claimant failed to comply, the claim would be struck out automatically and without further order.
Accordingly, I respectfully request that the court confirm that the claim stands as struck out in accordance with paragraph 2 of the order and that the court record will be updated accordingly.
Please confirm in writing whether the court has recorded this strike-out, or whether any further action is required.
Yours faithfully,
[Signature]
[Your Name]
What date were the further PoC sent? What date did you receive them.
key dates:
• Order dated: 30 April 2025
• Deemed served (by post): 2 May 2025
• Deadline to comply: 4pm on 9 May 2025
• Automatic strike-out: If nothing is filed by 4pm on 9 May, the claim is struck out without further order
Based on the court's order dated 30 April 2025, which required the Claimant to:
“…within 7 days of service of this order file and serve a Particulars of Claim…”
and considering that:
• The PoC is dated 13 May 2025, and
• Service of the court's order is deemed to have occurred on 2 May 2025 (if sent by post the same day),
then:
• The 7-day deadline expired at 4pm on 9 May 2025.
• The PoC was signed and presumably filed/served on 13 May 2025, which is 4 days late.
As per paragraph 2 of the court's order:
“If the Claimant fails to comply with the above direction, the claim shall be struck out automatically and without further order.”
This means the claim ceased to exist as of 4pm on 9 May 2025.
Send the following, today, to the court by email marked "URGENT" with the claim number to civil.romford.countycourt@justice.gov.uk and CC help@moorsidelegal.co.uk and also yourself:
[Date]
The Court Manager
Romford County Court
Re: Claim No. [Insert claim number]
Claimant: Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd
Defendant: [Insert your name]
Dear Sir/Madam,
Re: Claimant’s failure to comply with unless order dated 30 April 2025
I write with reference to the above claim and the court's order dated 30 April 2025, which stated:
"The Claimant must by 4pm within 7 days of service of this order file and serve a Particulars of Claim setting out their case in respect of the alleged parking contravention."
The order further provided that:
"If the Claimant fails to comply with the above direction, the claim shall be struck out automatically and without further order."
According to CPR 6.26, the order is deemed to have been served on 2 May 2025. Therefore, the deadline for compliance was 4pm on 9 May 2025. The Claimant’s further Particulars of Claim are dated 13 May 2025, which is four days after the expiry of the deadline imposed by the court.
To date, the Claimant has not applied for or obtained relief from sanctions under CPR 3.9.
Accordingly, pursuant to the terms of the unless order, the claim is automatically struck out. I respectfully request that the court updates the record to reflect this and confirms that the claim stands as struck out.
If the court requires any further information from me in this regard, I will be happy to assist.
Yours faithfully,
[Your Full Name]
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/673341e779e9143625613543/N180_1124.pdf
Here are the answers to some of the less obvious questions:
• The name of the court is "Civil National Business Centre".
• To be completed by "Your full name" and you are the "Defendant".
• C1: "YES"
• D1: "NO". Reason: "I wish to question the Claimant about their evidence at a hearing in person and to expose omissions and any misleading or incorrect evidence or assertions.
Given the Claimant is a firm who complete cut & paste parking case paperwork for a living, having this case heard solely on papers would appear to put the Claimant at an unfair advantage, especially as they would no doubt prefer the Defendant not to have the opportunity to expose the issues in the Claimants template submissions or speak as the only true witness to events in question.."
• F1: Whichever is your nearest county court. Use this to find it: https://www.find-court-tribunal.service.gov.uk/search-option
• F3: "1".
• Sign the form by simply typing your full name for the signature.
When you have completed the form, attach it to a single email addressed to both dq.cnbc@justice.gov.uk and info@dcblegal.co.uk and CC in yourself. Make sure that the claim number is in the subject field of the email.
This is the defence I advise you to submit. Because the PoC are so woefully inadequate, no valid defence can be formed. It requests that the claim be struck out because of failure to comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a), listing the Chan and Akande appeal transcripts as persuasive argument. In the alternative, should the judge not be persuaded, it asks the court to order the claimant to submit fully detailed Particulars of Claim, which we know from experience that the claimant is unable to fully comply with.
All you need to do is edit your name, the claim number and then sign the defence by typing your full name for the signature. There is nothing to edit in the draft order or the two transcripts. When done, save all the documents in PDF format and attach them to an email addressed to claimresponses.cnbc@justice.gov.uk and CC in yourself. Make sure that the clim number in in the email subject field and in the body, just put: "Please find attached the defence, transcripts and draft order in the matter of Parking Control Management UK Ltd v [your name] Claim No.: [claim number]"
IN THE COUNTY COURT
Claim No: [Claim Number]
BETWEEN:
Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd
Claimant
- and -
[Defendant's Full Name]
Defendant
DEFENCE
1. The Defendant denies the claim in its entirety. The Defendant asserts that there is no liability to the Claimant and that no debt is owed. The claim is without merit and does not disclose any valid cause of action.
Preliminary Matter
2. The Defendant respectfully submits that the Particulars of Claim (PoC) fail to comply with the mandatory requirements of CPR 16.4(1)(a), which states that the PoC must include a concise statement of the facts on which the claimant relies. The PoC are so deficient in particulars that they fail to disclose a cause of action, making it impossible for the Defendant to plead properly.
3. Specifically, the PoC lack:
(a) The specific terms of the alleged contract that were purportedly breached;
(b) The precise signage locations, alleged terms and conditions displayed thereon, or details of how the alleged breach occurred;
(c) Attachment or details of the contract relied upon, contrary to CPR PD 16.7.5;
(d) Particularity as to the alleged breach, including its nature, time, and location;
(e) An explanation of how the sum claimed is calculated, including the basis for any statutory interest, damages, or other charges;
(f) Clarity on whether the Defendant is sued as the driver or the keeper of the vehicle, as the claimant cannot plead alternative causes of action without specificity.
4. In light of the above, the Defendant respectfully requests that the court strikes out the claim pursuant to CPR 3.4(2) on the basis that:
• The statement of case discloses no reasonable grounds for bringing the claim; and
• The statement of case is an abuse of process.
5. The Defendant cites the cases of CEL v Chan 2023 [E7GM9W44] and CPMS v Akande 2024 [K0DP5J30], which are persuasive appellate decisions. In these cases, claims were struck out due to identical failures to comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a). Transcripts of these decisions are attached to this Defence.
Alternative Submission
6. The Defendant submits that the correct course of action is for the court to strike out the claim due to the Claimant's clear and material failure to comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a). The rules exist to ensure fairness, and the Claimant's non-compliance cannot be excused. The Defendant asserts that "rules are rules," and the Claimant has failed to follow them.
7. However, in the unlikely event that the court does not agree with the persuasive nature of the cited appellate decisions, the Defendant submits the following alternative:
• The court should make an order requiring the Claimant to provide the following further and better particulars:
(a) Set out the specific terms of the alleged contract that were purportedly breached;
(b) Specify the precise signage locations, alleged terms and conditions displayed thereon, or details of how the alleged breach occurred;
(c) Provide attachment or details of the contract relied upon, as required by CPR PD 16.7.5;
(d) Provide particularity as to the alleged breach, including its nature, time, and location;
(e) Explain how the sum claimed is calculated, including the basis for any statutory interest, damages, or other charges;
(f) Clarify whether the Defendant is sued as the driver or the keeper of the vehicle, as the claimant cannot plead alternative causes of action without specificity.
8. Without such particulars, the Defendant is unable to properly respond to the claim, resulting in unfairness and prejudice.
Draft Order
9. A draft order is appended to this defence, which the Defendant requests the court to consider adopting should the claim not be struck out at this stage.
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:
Date:
CEL v Chan transcript (https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/nb9ypbecuurpmln00dily/CELvChan-appeal-transcript.pdf?rlkey=7mpuvpmpe45s2zbhch21om1ez&st=5735s458&dl=0)
CPMS v Akande transcript (https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/y631olc61z1slr6xfrdsk/CPM-v-AKANDE.pdf?rlkey=kltpojedcxiwarxr0sdfyjo05&st=4z757gg9&dl=0)
Draft Order for the defence (https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/z8zcqfdncdoajgj4ag6a4/short-defence-order.pdf?rlkey=at98xmfwj0ehi3w9d0ia15ogp&st=saqthunn&dl=0)