Free Traffic Legal Advice

Hello again and hoping all is well with you.

I have just received a copy of the Claimants Application Response, sent to the court with their written submissions and asks the court to note that the application is opposed. (The hearing date is 16th March 2026).

So I am now re-visiting my notes/paperwork and your very helpful comments here.

They have, as expected relied on DVLA and my online appeal in April 2024 to provide evidence that they served at the correct address. (The UK address).

Reasonable Steps (DPR 6.9(3))

They show a copy of my online POPLA appeal in April 2024. Stating I confirmed this was my address. (My UK address is entered in the Personal Details, although everything was being dealt with online and by email). Also that I responded to the “Letter Before Claim” sent by post, dated July 2024. (I don’t remember doing this, but if I did respond, I would have likely used the online service for this. They have not provided evidence of my response. Nearly all of their evidence showing correspondence to me from April 2024 is clearly showing it was sent to me by email!

They have not offered comments relating to any steps taken to check the address was correct for service, despite there being no response from me when the Claim Form was sent to my UK address in March 2025.

They are opposing  the “Promptness”. Stating it was delayed by four months… Of course I have submitted firm evidence to show the reason for this delay - I was not in the country when the papers were served, and my residential address is overseas.

Obviously a lot of other mentions opposing my application. Nothing really very valid in my humble opinion! I will be ready to respond to it.

They have included images of the signage to show the fees payable for parking. It is not the same sign that was on site when I parked, and now includes the wording “tariffs payable up until midnight of day of arrival”. Clearly resolving the issue of there being no network coverage on site and even nearby in this City. (Well known for having no network coverage in the centre). This was the very reason for my delay in making the payment and then relying on the parking app to send notifications of the time left. Now it is clear you have plenty of time to pay so long as you make note of your hours manually.

The hearing is being held via a video platform.

Thank you

Thank you for your speedy reply. I am currently doing as advised. The case was transferred on 24th September to another local County Court to deal with the application. It is this court I assume has sent the Court Order. I am sending the email to them and copying the others as advised. The email I received today was due to being a CC recipient on Parkingeye's email response to the local court with the copy document attached. I have now just spoken on the phone at CNBC and was told that the letter sent to the Claimant was only for their response, and nothing was sent to me, and no response from me is required currently. A note of my call was made on my file. I have also sent the emails, with slight amendments. Strange that it is being referred to as a Court Order, when perhaps it is simply a letter/email sent!

Just another big thank you 'b789' for your input and explanations regarding my CCJ case. And others on this thread who made helpful comments. I couldn't have done it without you. I submitted my N244 application yesterday and will update you again when I have more news.

I think I am ready now to summit my N244 and would very much appreciate it if you could please check that all is ok. 

I will upload my paperwork without personal details
* Draft Order
* N244 main sections - should I put my overseas address in the last section? - 'Address for documents to be sent' I will obviously be adding my email address.
* Witness Statement

Thank you

What exceptional circumstances? The lack of phone signal and mobility issues? Not really mitigating circumstances, the signage clearly says you can pay up to midnight on the day of parking so there was no time pressure to pay, there was plenty of opportunity to pay after leaving at your leisure when you had a phone signal. If it had been a pay on exit car park then there may have been a valid defence using the disability act to show the car park setup disadvantaged people with reduced  mobility.

Thank you for pointing that out Ixxy. That's an interesting point about the paying until midnight. I have uploaded the wrong photo!

That photo was taken a month ago, but on checking my details from the time I was sent the PCN the signs were different, so have been renewed. Which could indicate they have been made aware that payment cannot be made from inside the carpark due to phone signal issues! See correct photo which doesn't mention anything about paying until midnight.

Here is my Draft Order.... I have used a few other examples on here that appear similar to my situation...

-----------------
CLAIM No: xxx

BETWEEN:
xxx (Claimant)

-- and --
xxx
(Defendant)

______________________________________________

DRAFT ORDER

______________________________________________

 

UPON reading the Defendant's application dated xx xxx 2025 and the annexed witness statement;

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 10 March 2025;

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 THAT:

1.   The default judgment dated 8 April 2025 be set aside pursuant to CPR 13.2 or CPR 13.3.

2.   The claim be struck out as more than 4 months has passed since the issue of proceedings on 10 March 2025 without proper service on the Defendant.

3.    That claim is further struck out pursuant to the landmark cases of VCS vs Carr, Civil Enforcement v Chan.

4.   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.

5.    That the Defendant's costs be paid by the Claimant on an indemnity basis. This is summarily assessed at £313 plus the costs for attending the hearing.   

6.   That all enforcement be put on hold pending the outcome of the application.

I"m wondering how you got on with this parking charge! I am discovering there are many others like yourself who are being sent Parking Charges from ParkingEye when parking at this carpark. Myself included, which I appealed and lost! But I am now taking to court! There is an App shown on the signage that is supposed to be used but there is no phone signal inside (it's underground), and nothing until quite a distance away from the carpark. It takes longer than the 10 minute grace period they give before payment can be made. They are making a fortune out this situaton. It's criminal in my opinion. They put the hourly rates on the signage, but nothing understandable to say your time limit starts on entry and exit via the ANPR cameras. Only a steep stairway to exit on site, so takes even longer to get out if you have mobility issues. I would really like to find more people who have been sent Parking Charge notices while parking at Woolstaplers simply because they had no phone coverage to make the payment in time. This needs to be officially reported. Would be great to hear back from you.

Thank you b786.

I have taken note of all your key points and in particular your mention of CPR 12.3. And I will certainly make use of the example letter to send to Parkingeye. Much appreciated.

Just to clarify... On the basis I may be able to apply for set aside - judgement being wrongly served. Am I understanding correctly, from section CPR 12.3. 2(a) that conditions were not met by the fact I was not able, (due to being at my overseas address), and therefore did not acknowledge service? Which of course I can prove.

Conditions to be satisfied by the claimant… CPR 12.3
“(2) Judgment in default of defence (or any document intended to be a defence) may be obtained only—
(a) where an acknowledgement of service has been filed but, at the date on which judgment is entered, a defence has not been filed;”

Many thanks