Free Traffic Legal Advice

It says,
    "1. This is now a defended claim.
        The defendant has filed a defence, a copy of which is enclosed"

 but someone has drawn a pen line though(a copy of which is enclosed).

I see now what you mean. This because the same document is sent to the claimant. However, your copy does not need the copy of the defence attached.

This is all standard and expected. No judge has sen the defence yet. All this administrative procedure has to be completed.

You should download your own N180DQ and complete it. There is no need to print anything out.

You do not want a determination without a hearing. That would be throwing away any chance of success if it ever got that far. So, it is not suitable for determination without a hearing.

Just put the following as the reason:

I am not content for the case to be heard 'on the papers' because that seems to disproportionately give an advantage to a legally represented party. 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.

You only need the actual N180. None of the other forms are necessary. However, you will also attach two transcripts, a draft order and a covering letter to go with your DQ.

Yes, attach the Draft Order and the transcripts with this as a covering letter to go with your DQ:

CEL v Chan transcript
CPMS v Akande transcript
Draft Order

[Your Name]
[Your Address]
[Date]

The Court Manager
Civil National Business Centre
4th Floor, St Katharine’s House
21-27 St Katharine’s Street
Northampton
NN1 2LH

Claim Number: [Insert Claim Number]
Claimant: [Insert Claimants name]
Defendant: [Your Name]

Dear Sir/Madam,

Re: Request for Strike Out or Alternatively Compliance with Draft Order in Response to N180 Directions Questionnaire

I write concerning the above-referenced claim, for which I have received a Notice of Directions Questionnaire (N180). Due to the vague and deficient nature of the Particulars of Claim (PoC), I have been unable to plead a full defence. Therefore, I respectfully request that the court considers striking out the claim pursuant to CPR 3.4(2)(a) on the grounds that the PoC fail to fully comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a), as they do not provide a concise statement of fact.

Alternatively, should the court decide not to strike out the claim, I request that the Claimant be ordered to comply with the attached draft order, which seeks further and better particulars of claim.

To support my application, I enclose transcripts of two persuasive appeal cases:

• Civil Enforcement Ltd v Chan (2023) [E7GM9W44]

• CPMS v Akande (2024) [K0DP5J30]

Both cases involved claims that were struck out due to similarly insufficient particulars.

I trust that the attached documents will assist the court in its assessment and in issuing appropriate case management directions.

Yours faithfully,

[Your Name]

Attach all the PDF documents to an email and address the email to both DQ.cnbc@justice.gov.uk and to info@dcblegal.co.uk and CC in yourself.