Thank you ive done all that. Can you please see if this plan below is good for tomorrow?
SMALL CLAIMS HEARING PLAN (NCP PCN) DATE: OCTOBER 8TH1. Opening Statement
"Your Honor, I maintain this claim is
fundamentally flawed and discloses no reasonable cause of action due to the Claimant's failure to comply with the Civil Procedure Rules and issues of solicitor misconduct."
2. Core Legal Defence: CPR Non-Compliance (Priority 1)
- The Claimant's Particulars of Claim fail to meet CPR 16.4(1)(a).
- The claim is defective because it fails to state:
- The exact wording of the contract I am alleged to have breached.
- The precise nature of the breach.
- Whether I am being pursued as the driver or the keeper.
- I rely on the persuasive judgments in CEL v Chan and CPMS v Akande, which confirm that claims with these flaws must be struck out (dismissed).
3. Improper Conduct & Regulatory Issues (Priority 2)
- The Mazur Issue: The Claimant's paralegal, Ms. Safina Zubair, stated in her Witness Statement that she "has conduct of this matter." This contradicts the High Court ruling in Mazur & Anor v CRS LLP, which makes conduct by a non-authorised person improper.
- The Claim Form Issue: The Claim Form was issued under the name of Mr. Ibrar Ahmad, who is registered with the SRA as a solicitor at a different firm (Osbourne Pinner Ltd), not Moorside Legal. I have reported this to the SRA.
- Summary: This constitutes a pattern of unreasonable conduct in proceedings.
4. Conclusion and Request
- Primary Request: I respectfully request that the Court strike out this claim pursuant to CPR 3.4(2)(a) and (b).
- Costs Request (If Successful): I ask for my costs under CPR 27.14(2)(g) for the Claimant's unreasonable conduct, referencing the Costs Note I provided.
- Costs Request (If Unsuccessful): I ask that I be relieved of the Claimant's costs due to their documented history of improper conduct.
Keep those notes handy. You address a district judge as "Judge". No "your Honour" or anything else.
Rooting for you!
❌ LOST HEARING REPORT: - October 8th, 2025
Outcome: Judgment for the Claimant (NCP). Ordered to pay
£280 over 12 months.
Claimant Attendance: No one from NCP or Moorside Legal attended the hearing.
Summary of the Hearing
1. Claimant Non-Attendance & Initial Comments:
- The hearing proceeded with only myself and the Judge, as the Claimant's representative (Moorside Legal) did not attend.
- The Judge stated that Moorside should have sent an email notifying non-attendance, but I confirmed I had received no such communication.
2. Procedural & CPR Arguments (Defense Main Focus):
- Defective Particulars of Claim (PoC): I argued the PoC failed to provide key details, including the sum breakdown and the contract wording.
- Judge's Ruling: The Judge rejected this, stating that all the missing specific wordings and necessary details were cured by being included in the Witness Statement (WS). She was satisfied the WS mentioned I was pursued as the keeper, the nature of the breach, and the wording of the contract.
- Case Law (CEL v Chan / CPMS v Akande): I cited these cases where identical PoC failures led to strike-outs.
- Judge's Ruling: The Judge stated these were County Court decisions and were therefore not binding on her court, and she would not consider them.
- Failure to File a Motion to Strike: The Judge noted that my arguments were procedural, but I had not formally filed a separate motion/application to strike out the claim. This significantly undermined the procedural point.
3. Solicitor Misconduct & Regulatory Arguments:
- SRA Reports / Mazur Issue: I raised the Mazur point regarding Ms. Safina Zubair having conduct and the SRA report regarding the use of Mr. Ibrar Ahmad's name (a solicitor from another firm).
- Judge's Ruling: The Judge dismissed this entirely, stating that the SRA report was irrelevant to this hearing. Regarding Mr. Ahmad, she found it "very likely" he worked for Moorside when the claim was filed seven months ago and has since moved firms, and she would not accept my lack of proof to the contrary.
- N180 Form & Tom Clough: I mentioned the N180 form being signed only by 'Moorside Legal' and the contradictory information about Mr. Tom Clough having conduct.
- Judge's Ruling: The Judge did not comment or give weight to these specific points.
- Relief from Claimant's Costs: I asked for the Claimant's fixed costs to be relieved due to their conduct issues.
- Judge's Ruling: This was rejected.
4. Factual Arguments (Parking):
- Denial of Driver / 13 Minutes: I mentioned I was not the driver and the vehicle was only present for 13 minutes.
- Judge's Ruling: The Judge did not consider these points to be material.
- Signage: The Judge showed photos of the signage.
- Judge's Ruling: The Judge found the signage to be "legible enough to be read," which satisfied the requirement for forming a contract.
5. Conclusion:- The Judge concluded that my case was "not very well defended."
- Order: I was ordered to pay £280 to the Claimant over a 12-month period.
I feel quite defeated to be honest. I didn't have a great understanding of my case and the judge was asking difficult questions which I couldn't answer. Law is not my speciality and I believe this made me lose the case.
This has put me off any appealing any other fines I may get to be honest as from the information I was given it seemed that this case was very easily won, but the outcome was very different.
I’m really sorry this went the way it did. Losing on the day is bruising, especially when you’re there alone and the claimant can’t be bothered to turn up.
This judge bingo… you had a shitty judge.
Because judgment has been entered, you now have two distinct paths. If you pay the full judgment sum within one calendar month of the judgment date (deadline 8 November 2025), no County Court Judgment will be registered on your credit file. If you do not clear the full balance within that month and instead pay by instalments, the CCJ will be registered and remain for six years, later marked “satisfied” only once the full sum is paid.
If preserving your credit file is important, pay the entire £280 by 8 November 2025 to the payee stated on the order (normally the claimant’s solicitors or the claimant directly). Use a traceable method (bank transfer with reference, or card payment) and retain proof.
After paying in full within the month, check the public Register of Judgments after approximately 2 to 4 weeks. If the CCJ appears despite full payment within one month, contact the Registry Trust to have it removed and write to the court with evidence of timely payment asking them to notify the Registry that the judgment was paid within the statutory one-month period.
The deadline to file an appeal is 21 days from judgment. Your time limit therefore expires on 29 October 2025.
To appeal, file an appellant’s notice (form N164) at the hearing centre that made the decision, serve it on the respondent, pay the appeal fee or apply for help with fees, and include a draft of your grounds of appeal and the sealed order.
You will also need either the judge’s permission (which you can ask for in N164) or permission from the appeal court. Appeals are not a rehearing of the facts; you must show an error of law, a wrong exercise of discretion, or serious procedural unfairness that materially affected the outcome.
From what you recorded: the judge’s approach to treating thin particulars as cured by the witness statement, her assessment that signage was legible enough, her view that non-attendance could be overlooked, and her factual findings on driver identity and time on site are all case-management and fact assessments squarely within a trial judge’s discretion, especially a shitty one. County Court authorities such as CEL v Chan and CPMS v Akande are persuasive, not binding. Absent a prior strike-out application under CPR 3.4 or a timely application under CPR 24, an appeal on those points has low prospects unfortunately.
I asked a family member today about this decision and showed him the WS and evidence. He said he would have come to a completely different conclusion.
You can still complain to the SRA about any concerns you hold, but that will not set aside or vary today’s order.
I am as surprised and disappointed as you with this judges decision. But as I said, it is judge bingo. You can a name the judge so that we can be aware of her decision and track her for other case if they crop up.
Thank you. It's quite unfortunate that NCP can have legal representation that does not bother to come to the hearing and yet still win the case.
With the payment, i've attached the letter. I want to double check this will still register a CCJ to my name, just as I am universal credit so I would rather pay monthly if possible but I definitely dont want a CCJ for 6 years
If i were to pay upfront, I would need to contact moorside to get bank information? as there is nothing on the letter.
https://ibb.co/9kbtbt4gthanks
Unless the CCJ is paid in full within 30 days, it will be registered as "satisfied" but will remain on your credit file for 6 years. If you want a clear credit record, it has to be paid in full, in which case there is nothing on your credit record. It is completely expunged from the record.
Whilst a "satisfied" CCJ is much better than one that reminds unpaid, it is still likely to cause you issue for the next 6 years with some firms treating it almost the same as having an unsatisfied one. It can also lead to higher credit fees and insurance premiums etc.
If you can manage to pay the whole CCJ, it is going to be much better for you in the long run. It would be much better in the long run if you can arrange to borrow the full amount and pay that off in instalments rather than paying the CCJ itself in instalments.
The only thing I'll give that shitty judge credit for, is that she didn't allow the fake £60-£70 debt recovery fee that was also claimed.
As I said, I have a family member who is a long serving district judge and I showed him this case and the decision reached. He agreed that the decision is not one he would have reached and was surprised at some of the reasoning given, based on your report of what happened.
You make the payment through Moorside Legal as they are the claimants legal representative.
It would be much better in the long run if you can arrange to borrow the full amount and pay that off in instalments rather than paying the CCJ itself in instalments.
Just a general comment for NBSCMN's benefit - we are not a financial advice website and if you are considering borrowing money or seeking other such debt advice you may wish to consult a suitable specialist, such as a debt advice charity.
Agree x 2
View List