Free Traffic Legal Advice

Subject: Elite Car Parking Management Ltd v [My Full Name] – Claim M8KF60F5 – Default Judgment and Proposed Consent Order

Dear Sirs,

Re: Elite Car Parking Management Ltd v [My Full Name]
Claim No: M8KF60F5
Your Ref: 117098.4059D

I write as the Defendant in the above claim.

I recently discovered, via my credit file, that a default County Court Judgment was entered against me in April 2025. Prior to that, I had received no Letter of Claim, Claim Form or judgment at my current address and had no knowledge of the proceedings.

Background and mis-service

In brief:

• The alleged parking event is dated 27 September 2024 at “Eddington 4hr Zone, Cambridge, CB3 1AD”, relating to vehicle YD19 VPA.
• On that date, the driver paid for parking via the JustPark app for that vehicle and location. The booking remains visible in my JustPark account and is supported by the corresponding card/bank transaction. Your Particulars of Claim, which allege “vehicle not registered on Just Park app or displaying P&D ticket”, are therefore factually wrong.
• The only correspondence I actually saw was a DCBL debt recovery letter around 18 November 2024, sent to 194a Highamhill Road, E17 5RQ.
• I moved out of 194a Highamhill Road in January 2025 to my current address at [current address] and promptly updated my address with the DVLA (V5C) and on my driving licence.
• I have since been informed by the Civil National Business Centre that the claim was treated as served on 7 April 2025 and default judgment entered shortly thereafter, all to the old Highamhill Road address.

I did not receive any Letter of Claim, Claim Form or judgment at my current address and therefore had no opportunity to respond or defend the claim.

CPR 6.9(3), PPSCoP section 10.1 and Carr v VCS

You and your client are experienced bulk litigators. No initial NtK was ever received yet you sent multiple items of correspondence (debt recovery letters, Letter of Claim and Claim Form) to the Highamhill Road address and received no response at all. In those circumstances you plainly had reason to doubt that I was still resident there.

Under CPR 6.9(3), once there is reason to believe that the last known address is no longer current, a claimant must take reasonable steps to ascertain the defendant’s current address before serving the claim form. In practice, that means carrying out a simple tracing / credit reference search, which would have identified my current address. You did not do so.

Your client is also bound by the Private Parking Single Code of Practice v1.1 (17 February 2025). Section 10.1 requires operators, before debt recovery or legal action, to take reasonable steps to ensure that correspondence is being sent to the correct and current address of the keeper/debtor and not to continue enforcement where there is reason to believe that an address is no longer current. Persisting in issuing and serving proceedings to an obviously stale address, without a basic trace, is contrary to that obligation.

I will rely, among other authorities, on Carr v Vehicle Control Services Ltd [2025] EWCA Civ 713, where the Court of Appeal upheld the setting aside of a default judgment and the striking out of a private parking claim because the operator failed to take reasonable steps under CPR 6.9(3) to ascertain the defendant’s current address before service.

Intended application and strike-out

In light of the above, I am preparing a contested N244 application seeking:

1. An order setting aside the default judgment under CPR 13.2, on the basis that it was wrongly entered due to the claim form not being validly served on me;
2. In the alternative, an order under CPR 13.3, on the basis that I have a clear and real prospect of successfully defending the claim and have acted promptly upon discovering the judgment;
3. An order that, once the judgment is set aside, the claim be struck out pursuant to CPR 7.5(1) and/or CPR 3.4(2)(c), on the basis that the claim form was never validly served within four months of issue and has therefore expired; and
4. An order that the Claimant pay my costs of and occasioned by the application, including the £313 court fee and my reasonable litigant-in-person costs, in view of the unreasonable conduct in issuing and serving to a stale address contrary to CPR 6.9(3) and PPSCoP section 10.1.

Proposal for resolution by consent

To avoid unnecessary court time and further costs for all parties, I am prepared to resolve this by consent.

I enclose below a draft consent order for your consideration. In summary, it provides that:

• The default judgment is set aside under CPR 13.2, with an alternative under CPR 13.3;
• The claim is struck out once the judgment is set aside, due to non-service within four months under CPR 7.5(1); and
• The Claimant bears the costs of the application, including the court fee.

If your client is willing to accept responsibility for the position created by mis-service and to bear the cost of correcting it, then I invite you to:

1. Confirm, within 10 days of the date of this email, that you agree the enclosed draft order without amendment; and
2. Lodge an application with the court in those agreed terms at your client’s cost, copying me into both the application and the draft order filed, so that I can be sure no unilateral changes are made to my detriment.

For the avoidance of doubt, I do not consent to any amendments to the enclosed draft order. If you consider that any wording requires alteration, you must propose those changes to me in writing and obtain my express written agreement before filing anything with the court.

If I have not received written confirmation that you agree the draft order and have submitted an application in those agreed terms within 10 days, I will proceed without further notice to issue my own contested N244 application, seeking the orders described above and inviting the court to make an adverse costs order against the Claimant for unreasonable conduct.

I look forward to your prompt confirmation.

Yours faithfully,

[Full Name]
[Current Address]
[Email]

IN THE COUNTY COURT
Claim No: M8KF60F5

BETWEEN:
ELITE CAR PARKING MANAGEMENT LTD
Claimant
-and-
[FULL NAME]
Defendant

DRAFT CONSENT ORDER

UPON the parties having agreed the terms of this order

BY CONSENT IT IS ORDERED THAT:

1. The default judgment entered on [date in April 2025] in Claim No. M8KF60F5 be set aside pursuant to CPR 13.2, on the basis that the judgment was wrongly entered because the claim form was not validly served on the Defendant.

2. In the alternative, if the Court finds that the judgment was regularly entered, the default judgment is set aside pursuant to CPR 13.3, on the basis that the Defendant has a real prospect of successfully defending the claim and has acted promptly upon becoming aware of the proceedings and the judgment.

3. Upon the judgment being set aside, the Claimant’s claim is struck out pursuant to CPR 7.5(1) and/or CPR 3.4(2)(c) on the ground that the claim form was not validly served within four months of the date of issue and has therefore expired.

4. The Claimant shall pay the Defendant’s costs of and occasioned by the application to set aside the default judgment, such costs to be summarily assessed in the total sum of £[insert – at least the £313 court fee, plus any agreed LiP sum], payable within 14 days of the date of this order.

5. There be liberty to apply.

Signed: ___________________________
For and on behalf of the Claimant
Elite Car Parking Management Ltd
(by its solicitors DCB Legal Ltd)

Dated: ___________________________

Signed: ___________________________
[Defendant’s full name]

Dated: ___________________________