Free Traffic Legal Advice

As usual, a typical claim by the incompetents at Gladstones. There is no cause of action in those Particulars of Claim (PoC).

With an issue date of 11th June, you had until 4pm on Monday 30th March to June your defence. Having submitted an Acknowledgement of Service (AoS) before then, you now have until 4pm on Monday 14th July to submit your defence.

Here is the defence and link to the draft order and relevant transcripts that go with it. You only need to edit your name and the claim number. You sign the defence by typing your full name for the signature and date it. There is nothing to edit in the draft order.

When you're ready you send all the documents as a single PDF attachment (in the order of 'defence', 'draft order' and then the 2 'transcripts') in an email to claimresponses.cnbc@justice.gov.uk and CC in yourself. The claim number must be in the email subject field and in the body of the email just put: "Please find attached the defence and draft order in the matter of Horizon Parking Ltd v [your full name] Claim no.: [claim number]."

IN THE COUNTY COURT

Claim No: [Claim Number]

BETWEEN:

Horizon Parking 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 adequately disclose any comprehensible cause of action.

2. There is a lack of precise detail in the Particulars of Claim (PoC) in respect of the factual and legal allegations made against the Defendant such that the PoC do not comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a).

3. The Defendant is unable to plead properly to the PoC because:

(a) The contract referred to is not detailed or attached to the PoC in accordance with CPR PD 16(7.5);

(b) The PoC do not state the exact wording of the clause (or clauses) of the terms and conditions of the contract (or contracts) which is/are relied on;

(c) The PoC do not adequately set out the reason (or reasons) why the claimant asserts the defendant has breached the contract (or contracts)

(d) The PoC do not state with sufficient particularity exactly where the breach occurred, the exact time when the breach occurred and how long it is alleged that the vehicle was parked before the parking charge was allegedly incurred;

(e) The PoC do not state precisely how the sum claimed is calculated, including the basis for any statutory interest, damages, or other charges;

(f) The PoC do not state what proportion of the claim is the parking charge and what proportion is damages;

(g) The PoC do not provide 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. 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.

5. The Defendant attaches to this defence a copy of a draft order approved by a district judge at another court. The court struck out the claim of its own initiative after determining that the Particulars of Claim failed to comply with CPR 16.4.(1)(a). The judge noted that the claimant had failed to:

(i) Set out the exact wording of the clause (or clauses) of the terms and conditions relied upon;

(ii) Failed to explain the reasons why the defendant was allegedly in breach of contract;

(iii) Provide separate, detailed Particulars of Claim as permitted under CPR PD 7C.5.2(2).

(iv) The court further observed that, given the modest sum claimed, requiring further case management steps would be disproportionate and contrary to the overriding objective. Accordingly, the judge struck out the claim outright rather than permitting an amendment.

6. The Defendant submits that the same reasoning applies in this case and invites the court to adopt a similar approach by striking out the claim for the Claimant’s failure to comply with CPR 16.4(1)(a).

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:

Draft Order for the defence

CEL v Chan Transcript

CPMS v Akande Transcript

If you want an editable MS Word file with everything in a single document which you can then save/export as a single PDF file when ready to send, use this:

MS Word .docx file for defence [CPR 16.4(1)(a)]

I have emailed my defence exactly as advised to but I haven't received an automated response, sent 4 hours ago, can anyone advise if this usually happens quickly or after a delay, thank you.

Keep sending it until you receive an auto response email. If nothing being received, check your spam folder and if nothing, the try with a different email agent. Did you CC it to yourself? Check that you have the email correct:

ClaimResponses.cnbc@justice.gov.uk. (the case is not relevant and only shown for emphasis).

Thank you again, I did CC myslf in and received that ok, checked the spelling and spam folder, I'll try again until it works.

What email client are you using? You can always set up a new email address using Gmail and try using that.

I use Apple Mail, I have multiple accounts for business and only the name before the @ is different, tried a different one and received an automated response straight away, puzzling but got there in the end, thanks for the advice again.

Check you MCOL history to see what date the defence was received. the next thing you should receive is a letter from HMCTS stating that you defence was received and a copy has been sent to the claimant.

When you sent your defence, did you receive an auto-response from claimresponses.cnbc@justice.gov.uk and id you receive a copy of the defence you CC'd to yourself?

Phone the CNBC first thing on Monday morning, preferably from 8:30am to avoid long wait. Ask them what is the status of the claim. Explain that you sent your defence and received both your CC copy and the auto-response from claimresponses.cnbc@justice.gov.uk on [date] but your MCOL history is not showing it as having been received.