Free Traffic Legal Advice

Thank you for that. So would the defendant need to pay the £313 fee to set aside and counter claim if the case is reopened? or not be required to pay the fee?

What are your thoughts on the claimants process handling.
They contacted the defendant with in 14 days but provided a blank N180 as a claimants completed DQ. They stated that this had also been filed with the court.
DQ Questionnaire wasn't actually file with the court until 3 weeks later and upon the defendant 4 weeks later (so a week later than the court).
I am of opinion that if the defendant had not emailed them querying the blank N180 they would not have been aware of the failure in the process.
The MCOL history states the Case stay lifted, is this because the claimant requested it, or is this just common case terminology?

Sorry for all the questions, they may not be relevant at this stage if indeed relevant.

Does anyone else have any additional advice?

Thanks

Hi all,

I was hoping someone could assist me
As it stands Judgement has been passed, defence was struck out because defendant has not replied to the claim for.
Defendant acknowledges the DQ N180 was filed late but as soon as the became aware of the Judgement Order. Defendant is adamant that they never received a Notice of Proposal Allocation to Track.
From my own uneducated point of view the claimants case handling has been poor to the point where I question if it was intentionally.
I have bullet pointed the Case History in an attempt to make it easier to understand. Further details will be present on the correspondence. This will follow tomorrow as I have had to redact and also blank out defendants comments.
In summary, I guess what we would like to know is…

Is it worth trying to get the case set aside? Can the fee required to forward an N244 and to try and have the case set aside be claimed back if successful, and would this have to be filed as a counter claim.
If the Court allow for the Judgement to be set aside, what are the chances of contesting the claim successfully?

MCOL Status
Claim  was issued 03/12/25
Defence submitted 27/12/25
Defence received 29/12/25
Correspondence
• 03/12/25 Claim Form from CNBC.
• 29/12/25 Letter from CNBC to Defendant acknowledging receipt of Defence. A copy is being served on the Claimants Sol. The court will then inform the defendant on what will happen next.
Where he wishes to proceed the claimant must contact the court within 28 days after receipt of defence.
• 13/02/26 from Gladstones the Claimants Solicitor.
State they have notified the Court of the claimants intention to proceed.
Please find enclosed a copy of the claimant’s completed Directions Questionnaire, which has also been filed with the Court.
The DQ N180 was blank and it obviously wasn’t filed with the Court as MCOL states it was filed on the 03/02/26. Three weeks after Filing a blank N180 and 30+ days after defence being served.
• 01/02/26 Acting in good faith the Defendant contacted the Claimants Solicitors via email (exhibit)  Advising that the DQ N180 they had provided was blank and that they were open to mediation.
• 09/02/26 Claimant provides a copy of their completed DQ N180. With no instruction or response to any of the concerns the defendant raised.
MCOL status
03/02/26 Case Stay lifted
03/02/26 DQ sent to you
03/02/26 DQ filed by claimant

Correspondence
• 18/03/26 General Form of Judgement/Order letter. Which states “the Defendant, you have been sent Notice of Proposal Allocation to Track which specified the date by which you were required to return the Directions Questionnaire. You have failed to file the Directions Questionnaire with the CNBC by the date specified in the Notice.” been sent a Notice of Proposal Allocation to Track which specified a date for them (Defendant) to return.
It is ordered that the Defendant must file the DQ with the CNBC on or before 7 days of this service.
Defendant is adamant that they never received the Notice of Proposal. As the Defendant works away, they only became aware of the General Form of Judgement upon returning home on the 27/03/26.
Defendant still does not know the actual date they were required to file the DQ N180 originally.
• 27/03/26 Defendant emailed the DQ N180 to both parties on the 27/03/26. Receiving automatic responses from both parties informing them that the Email had been received.
The Defendant regularly checked MCOL for an update and concerned that MCOL had not been updated called the CNBC number. The automated system stated that it could take upto 10/11 weeks for them to respond to emails. Although not ideal, this allayed the defendants concerns about the lack of update on MCOL.
• 20/04/26 Defendant received Judgement for Claimant (in default) dated 20/04/26. The judgement stated that the defendant had failed to reply to the claim form.
Defendant has since called the CNBC number and they still could not find the Filed DQ N180 but that it was irrelevant as it had not been filed in time.
Defendant was told they had to pay the Fee stated in the Judgement or pay £313 and complete an N244 asking for the judgement to be set aside.

Photos to follow

Thanks in advance.

D

Anyhow, moving on from the Signage. I have a few questions about the evidence on the Constabulary's website.

Can I challenge on any of the following?
Images of Vehicle Reg. are not very clear.
Calibration certificate of Device, just not state that it has been Distance checked at the distance of the actual devices recording. It has been tested upto 150m the evidence states 300m.
There are no training certificates for the Operating Officer.

Thanks

I just question why the Constabularies bother with the signage in the first place if it is not required. The whole 165 miles of my journey has Speed camera warnings/in operation signs apart from the said section of the M50.
[/quote]
Presumably because it's a cheaper way of encouraging people to slow down than having the cameras everywhere.
[/quote]

I appreciate your point is probably a good assessment. But why stop encouraging people to slow down on this particular stretch of road? Surely, the signage should still be there?

Anyhow not trying to justify my speeding, I am just surprised that they are not a legal obligation.

Quote from: Lynch004 on February 01, 2026, 02:30:12 am

...was just seeing if there was a quick resolution.

Absent any actual defence (nothing you've said so far hints at one) then the quickest resolution will be a course to avoid the points or a fixed penalty (3 points £100).

Thank you for your time in responding.
I genuinely don't dispute that I was speeding, it is just annoying because I genuinely try to abide by the speed limit. Whilst not an excuse, I was over taking another motor vehicle, my bad.
Cheers

Morning,

Basically, I have received a NIP for Speeding - exceed 70mph Motorway limit - Manned equipment. Vehicle speed 80mph.

The stretch of the M50 in question has no Speed Camera/warning signage. Haven driven this stretch of road a few times since, the manned camera appears to be a Male operating out of a Grey people carrier, on the opposite side of the road, with no Hi-Viz signage, both personally or on vehicle.

Happy to scan and post correspondence, was just seeing if there was a quick resolution.
Many thanks
Lynch