URGENT Help needed! - Discovered CCJ from PCN

Toyaboya2

Evening all, would appreciate any help (I have read all the newbie section and posts over the last few days but looking for some advice on the particulars of my situation. I'll keep it brief:

I was Issued a parking fine in November 2016 Coventry (Local Parking Security Ltd - LPS). I had a valid ticket at the time which the inspector failed to spot (still have photo evidence). I received a letter from Debt Recovery Plus Limited in March 2017 - DRPL demanding payment. I emailed DRPL to say I had a valid ticket and showed photo proof of my ticket. DRPL said the time to contest has passed and I must pay. I told them I will not pay as I had a valid ticket via email and that was the end of our correspondence. 

Fast forward to 17th August 2022 and I find a CCJ on my record from 02 May 2022 through a credit search. I had moved address around 7 times in that time and had not received any formal comms related to the matter. I work a demanding job so took a while to contact Northampton CCBC, LPS and Gladstone Solicitors. Turns out Gladstone were instructed in November 2020 and sent the court forms to the Leamington address I moved out of in 2017. Gladstones allegedly sent a letter to 2 other addresses on my credit file (one where my parents lived and I remember my dad mentioning a parking letter [definitely not court forms] around a year ago, which may have been related, but was not followed up on by me). My DVLA address was updated around 4 and 1 years ago respectively to my current residences at the time (I don’t have exact dates).

I spent the week researching and sent an offer to Set Aside judgement to Gladstones on 1st Sept 2022. Foolishly I had not found the MSE forum at this time and offered to pay the £355 claim amount in full (with consent and Tomlin order) if they agree to set aside as the claim was served to an old address (I stupidly also mentioned in my email to Gladstones that it is important to remove the CCJ as I am looking to apply for a mortgage soon, I thought this would be the path of least resistance). 2 weeks later (today) I have not heard back from Gladstones and I am looking to start the N244 appeal to Set Aside.

 

What do you think my chances of success are given that:

-         I had already made email contact with DRPL in 2017 (from a letter they sent to my Leamington address) so they may have reason to believe it was the right address at the time

-         I found out about my CCJ nearly a month ago on the 17th August

-         The Claim forms were sent to an address I have not lived at for over 5 years and was never my DVLA registered address

-         I sent a request to set aside to Gladstones with a Tomlin order (never explicitly accepting liability for the debt), but offering to pay them within 28 if they agreed to set aside and mentioning I am looking to apply for a mortgage

 

Somebody please help I am so stressed out about this, help is greatly appreciated!

 

 

Coupon-mad

I think you are lucky Gladstones have not responded because you stitched yourself right up (unnecessarily) but as they are dragging their feet, that's great!  You need to urgently whack in a contested set aside application tomorrow with the CCBC,  & ring to pay the £275 fee.

And tell Gs by email that they have taken too long and any previous discussions were on a without prejudice basis and have now expired.  No liability is admitted, no Tomlin Order is on the table and you are aware you must act promptly so you have applied for a contested set aside.  Their client will be held liable for the £275 fee and any other associated costs of this application now, and no further discussions will be entertained because they have taken far too long.

What do you think my chances of success are given that:

-       "I had already made email contact with DRPL in 2017 (from a letter they sent to my Leamington address) so they may have reason to believe it was the right address at the time"

No worries.  Far too long ago.

-         I found out about my CCJ nearly a month ago on the 17th August 

But it will be a mandatory set aside anyway (CPR 13.2) and not dependent upon acting promptly which is only a consideration as a fallback (CPR 13.3).

-         The Claim forms were sent to an address I have not lived at for over 5 years and was never my DVLA registered address.

As usual!  They failed to take steps to check the address. Mandatory set aside. Breach of the CPRs and the applicable Code of Practice.

-         I sent a request to set aside to Gladstones with a Tomlin order (never explicitly accepting liability for the debt), but offering to pay them within 28 if they agreed to set aside and mentioning I am looking to apply for a mortgage 

Crack on with what I advised above BEFORE they respond.  Last thing you want is a Tomlin Order arriving that you suggested and agreed to...

Do the application in the morning.  See the thread by @Brokenchief and copy what he did. 

Toyaboya2

@Coupon-mad thank you very much for the advice, you are a hero. At 3am I have finished both the Witness Statement and Draft Order. Would it be possible to scan an eye through them quickly and help me out with a few questions at the bottom?

WITNESS STATEMENT OF DEFENDANT

 

1.         I am xxxx of xxxxx, and I am the Defendant against whom this claim is made. The facts are true to the best of my belief and my account has been prepared based upon my own knowledge.

2.         This is my supporting statement to my application dated 16th September 2022 requesting to:

a. Set aside the default judgment dated X May 2022 as it was not properly served at my current address.

b. Order for the original claim to be dismissed.

c. Order for the Claimant to pay the Defendant £275 as reimbursement for the set aside fee.

 

Default Judgment

3.         I was the registered keeper of the vehicle at the time of the alleged offence.

4.         I understand that the Claimant obtained a Default Judgment against me as the Defendant on X May 2022. I am aware that the Claimant is Local Parking Security Ltd, and that the assumed claim is in respect of an unpaid Parking Charge Notice.

5.          The claim form was not served at my current address, and thus I was not aware of the Default Judgment until I conducted a personal credit search through Credit Karma on 17th August 2022.

6.        The address on the claim is XXX, I moved out of this address over 5 years ago, in July 2017. Having lived at another address in-between, I moved to my current address at XXX in February 2019. In support of this, please see my tenancy agreement evidencing that my tenancy at XXX ended in July 2017 (Annex A) and a bank statement from Feb 2019 (Annex B ) evidencing residency at my current address. My DVLA registered address was updated to my current address in Feb 2019, and I do not believe was ever registered to the address where the claim was served.

7.         I never had any notification of the claim until 17th August 2022 but was advised in a phone call to Local Parking Security Ltd on 24th August 2022 that their claim relates to a parking charge in October 2016.

8.         The parking charge in question was incorrectly issued at XXpm on XX October 2016 as I had purchased a full day parking ticket for that day, for which I can supply photographic evidence.

9.       In addition to the above, it should be highlighted that the integrity and law-abiding intention of the Defendant should be taken into consideration on the basis that;

 

Sequence of Recent Events

10.      I discovered a CCJ was lodged onto my credit file after conducting a personal credit search through Credit Karma on 17th August 2022.

11.       On the 23rd of August, I contacted the County Court Business Centre to obtain relevant information relating to this default judgment.

12.       On 31st August I phoned the Claimant’s solicitor, Gladstones Solicitors Limited, to advise I will ask the court to set aside this default judgment as they sent all notifications to a previous address.

13.       On 1st September 2022 I willingly submitted my case in order to set-aside this judgment and fairly present my case.

14.      I believe the Claimant has behaved unreasonably in pursuing a claim against me without ensuring they held the Defendant’s correct contact details at the time of the claim.

15.       On that basis, I believe the Claimant has not adhered to CPR 6.9 (3) where they had failed to show due diligence in using an address that the Defendant no longer resides. The Claimant did not take reasonable steps to ascertain the address of my current residence despite having some 10 months to establish an address. This has led to the claim being incorrectly served to an old address and an irregular judgment.

16.       Under CPR 13.2 The court must set aside a judgment entered under part 12 if judgment was wrongly entered.  Given that CPR 6.9 (3) was not met, CPR 13.2 applies and the CCJ should be set aside.

17.       The Defendant was 'there to be found' for the sake of a 29pence bulk Experian trace or similar very inexpensive and immediate credit reference agency address check. I would then have been notified of this judgment and could have taken action to prevent it. Failure to carry out proper checks to establish the right address for service before filing a claim not only breaches the CPRs but also the pre-action protocol for debt claims and the British Parking Association Code of Practice.  The Claimant acted wholly unreasonably by negligently or deliberately disregarding all rules and caused the claim to be improperly served.  They failed to serve it at all.

18.       Given that more than 4 months has passed from issue of proceedings and service of the claim was defective (i.e. it was never served) the Defendant submits that this particular claim is dead and the period for service cannot be extended by this application process.  The Defendant has no details of this claim, therefore, if the Claimant believes there is a cause of action then the correct procedure would be to file a claim afresh and to the right address, after furnishing the Defendant with the information required under the pre-action protocol for debt claims, issued this time to the correct address for service for this Defendant, which is xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

19.       According to publicly available information my circumstances are far from being unique. The industry’s persistent failure to use correct and current addresses results is an unnecessary burden for individuals and the justice system across the country.

20.       Furthermore, Prime Minister May publicly pledged to investigate ‘abuse’ of the CCJ System and so called ‘Credit Clamping’ as reported in the Daily Mail article dated 12 September 2016.

21.       The Right Honourable Sir Oliver Heald on 23 December 2016 "announced a crackdown on unresolved debts which can damage people’s credit ratings without them knowing. The action comes after concerns were raised that companies were issuing claims to consumers using incorrect addresses." The Minister added "It cannot be right that people who are unaware of debts can see their lives and finances ruined by county court judgments. That in the digital age, we must ensure companies pursuing unpaid debts make every reasonable effort to contact individuals, rather than simply relying on a letter to an old address.” Furtherance to points raised in 1.3 above.

22.       In the alternative, CPR 13.3 applies and there are very good reasons to set aside this exaggerated claim, which includes a disproportionate and indeed, false 'debt recovery' sum.  In fact, no debt recovery occurred nor cost the Claimant any money whatsoever, in addition to £100 parking charge.  The Government has described the false fixed 'fee' of £70 as 'designed to extort money from motorists' in the new statutory Code of Practice this February, and has banned it.  The Defendant has good prospects of defending a claim, if served with one, but has seen no evidence, basis nor particulars of claim and the Claimant should be required to file afresh, if they believe they have a cause of action. 

23.       Considering the above I was unable to defend this claim. I believe that the Default Judgment against me was issued incorrectly and thus should be set aside and I ask the Court to kindly consider the reimbursement of the fee of £275 from the Claimant should this request be successful.

 

Statement of Truth

I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement 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 & dated

 

 

Annex A

Tenancy agreement from 2017

 

Annex B

Bank Statement dated February 2019

 

 

DRAFT ORDER

CLAIM No: XXX
BETWEEN:
Local Parking Security Ltd (Claimant)
-- and --
XXX (Defendant)
______________________________________________
DRAFT ORDER
______________________________________________

 

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

1. The default judgment dated on XXX be set aside.
2. Costs to be reserved.
3. Unless the Claimant serves a copy of the claim form on the Defendant by 4pm on XX/XX/22 [what date do i put here please???] paragraph 1.2 shall cease to have effect and the Claimant shall pay the Defendant's costs summarily assessed at £275 and the claim shall be struck out.
4. Should the Claimant discontinue the Claim after the CCJ is set aside, paragraph 1.2 shall cease to have effect and the Claimant shall pay the Defendant's costs summarily assessed at £275
5. All enforcement be put on hold pending the outcome of the application.

Questions:

- Do I need to submit a Draft Defence? 

- Do I understand correctly that there are no Cost Claims or Skeleton Arguements at his stage?

- For Section 10 in the N244 (What information will you be relying on...) do I need to tick the box and add anything for "the evidence set out in the box below"?

Your help is greatly appreciated!

ab2000

Presuming you still have the same vehicle, if you send a SAR request to the DVLA, you can get all the dates for V5C address changes on file.

Coupon-mad

The dates on the draft order remain BLANK.  It also stays as a word doc, not a PDF like the WS.

Your no 7 would be better in the Sequence of Events, where you missed out the phone call to LPS.

Where is your argument - as seen in the threads by @Brokenchief and @Jack5656  that the claim is 'dead' for want of service because 4 months has passed  since it was filed (but not served)?  It's the main point to dismiss the claim.

Are this company in the BPA AOS, have you checked they aren't IPC?

Toyaboya2

Hi both,


- I mention the '4 month dead' argument in point 18, is what I have written sufficient?

- I've checked and the Parking Company are not IPC. But they are registered with the BPA AOS. Do I need to change anything on my applicaton for this?

- What about the large text box in Section 10 on the N244, presume I leave this blank?


Thank you so much once again,

Le_Kirk

I would move the 4-month dead argument from paragraph 18 to the top of your list to give it more prominence.

Toyaboya2

@Coupon-mad @Le_Kirk thank you both 

So just to confirm, I do not have to submit a Draft Defence with my N244?

Just the N244, Witness Statement and Draft Order. 

Le_Kirk

In the days of guaranteed in-person hearing it was always recommended to have a defence "in your back pocket", just in case the judge asked and if you didn't get the set-aside on the basis of a mandatory set aside (CPR 13.2) and had to fall back on discretionary/any other reason (CPR 13.3).  Doesn't hurt to have the defence ready to go!

Toyaboya2

Hi @Coupon-mad and @Le_Kirk please help me I am extremely concerned!

I have my court hearing on Tuesday 24th and Gladstones have just responded with a 51 page Witness Statement for their client (Local Parking Security Ltd) saying they will challenge it in court. 

I received the parking ticket while living at my University address in 2016 and received a letter from Debt Recovery Plus Limited (not my DVLA address, apparently this was obtained through an Experian search).

At the time (Nov 2016) I responded to DRPL via email with a photo of my parking ticket from that day saying I will not be paying their fine as I had a ticket. They responded saying I could no longer appeal and had to pay the fine. I did not respond. Gladstones have included this email communication in their Court Document they sent me (see point 32 below).

I received one letter in 2016 to my Old address in Surrey saying I had a parking ticket, I did not respond.

In June 2021 I received a letter to my new address in Surrey (moved from the old address in Surrey to another one), from DRPL saying 'please pay the debt etc', I ignored this.

All other correspondence was sent to my University address including LBC and Court Pack etc.

Stupidly, when I found the CCJ on my record in Sept 2022 I sent Gladstones a Tomlin Order (see earlier in the post) requesting to pay their full fine if they agreed to set aside, they have noted this right at the bottom of their WS. They did not respond so I rescinded this and lodged the N244 Set Aside without Consent. 

Gladstone's are saying that the letter to my new address in Surrey in June 2021 is adequate enough to show they tried to obtain my address for service of the claim and took reasonable steps. 

Please can you help me? Do you think I have a good chance of reaching CPR 13.2 here? What is the best outcome for me, should I just pay the money and agree to set aside?

Gladstones have offered to set aside if I pay a slightly lower amount than the original claim and do not have any Court costs refunded 

If not, I'm worried the judge will side with them saying what else could they have done to obtain my correct address before service of the Claim?




Here is the WS they sent me:



"INTRODUCTION
1. I am a Legal Assistant, in the employment of Gladstones Solicitors Limited (hereinafter referred to as my ‘Firm’) based at their offices, at the address stated above.

2. My Firm are instructed by the aforementioned Claimant, in relation to this claim. I have conduct of this action, subject to the supervision of my Principle. The matters to which I refer are within my own knowledge, or based on information provided to me by my client within the course of my instruction, save where expressly stated to the contrary, and are true to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I am duly authorised by the Claimant to make this statement on its behalf.

3. Within this statement, I refer to various documents. The Claimant avers that these documents support its claim. These documents are now produced by me to the court as exhibits and are specifically referred to within the statement by reference to their exhibit numbers. Any reference to an exhibit number within this witness statement is a reference to the corresponding exhibit unless otherwise expressed to the contrary.

4. The Defendant has made an application to set aside the Judgment in default obtained on May 2022 in relation to this claim.

5. The Defendant prays in aid of the application:
i. That they were not living at the address where the Claim Form was served, at the time that proceedings were issued; ii. That they have acted promptly; and iii. That they believe they have a reasonable prospect of successfully defending the claim.

6. The Claimant has instructed my Firm to provide a witness statement in the following terms. SERVICE OF THE CLAIM

7. Due to the Parking Charge Notice (hereinafter referred to as ‘PCN’) to which this claim relates remaining unpaid, the Claimant referred the matter to my Firm for the purposes of recovery.

8. The case management system operated by my Firm confirms that acting in accordance with the clients instructions a letter was sent to the Defendant at University Address on June 2020 (Exhibit GS-1). This being the address supplied by Experian to Debt Recovery Plus Limited (‘DRPL’), which is further addressed below.

9. When no response was received to that correspondence, my Firm carried out an additional trace via Experian, in order to establish whether an alternative address could be ascertained, in order to satisfy the requirements for service of a Claim Form as prescribed by CPR 6.9.

10. The trace results did reveal a possible alternative address for the Defendant of New Surrey Address. The Claimant notes that this is the same address confirmed by the Defendant for service in their application.

11. My Firm sent out a letter to the Defendant at that address inviting them to contact us and confirm that this address was now their current address (Exhibit GS-2). As the Defendant failed to make contact with my Firm, that address could not be confirmed for GDPR purposes.

12. My Firm made further attempts to contact the Defendant including sending a Letter Before Claim (Exhibit GS-3) before submitting a claim to the County Court Business Centre, which was issued on the 8 th April 2022. The address provided for service of the Claim Form was University Address; this being the usual or last known residence of the Defendant for the purposes of CPR 6.9.

13. The Claimant therefore submits that the Claim Form can be deemed to be properly served.

BACKGROUND

14. The Claimant is and was at all material times involved in the management and enforcement of parking on private land. The Claimant achieves this by way of a variety of schemes including, but not limited to, warden controlled sites and Automatic Number Plate Recognition technology.

15. The Claimant does so in accordance with the authority granted to them under the terms of a Landholder agreement. In accordance with the terms of the Landholder agreement, the Claimant is authorised to manage and enforce parking on the land in question. The Claimant does so in return for a right to raise charges from the users of vehicles who infringe the ‘regulations’ (a relevant obligation) which relates to the entitlement to use the site. As a result, the Claimant does issue PCNs in relation to vehicles parked in breach of the terms and conditions, on sites that they manage and do have the right, under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) to pursue an unpaid parking charge against the Registered Keeper (‘RK’) of a vehicle, where specific criteria are met.

16. The Claimant is and was at all material times a member of an accredited Trade Association and was awarded Approved Operator Status, through its full compliance with their Code of Practice. 17. The Claimant provides, manages and enforces private parking at the land located at Car Park (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Site’).

18. Now shown at Exhibit GS-4 is a copy of the agreement (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Agreement’), which sets out, inter alia, the Claimant’s standing and rights to manage and enforce the regulations in situ at the Site.

19. The “regulations” referred to above (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Terms and Conditions’) are displayed on large highly prominent signs erected by the Claimant at various points throughout out the Site (Exhibit GS-5). The signs as to their size, content, font, location and number conforms to the Claimant’s Accredited Trade Associations Code of Practice.

20. The Terms and Conditions of the Site, inter alia, express the following conditions for any motorist using the Site; ALL CAR PARK USERS MUST PAY AND DISPLAY A VALID PARKING TICKET PARKING CHARGE NOTICES APPLY FOR: NOT DISPLAYING A VALID PARKING TICKET

Toyaboya2

Continued:

21. Users of the Site are informed that the Site is Private Property and that Terms and Conditions apply. If a user of the site is unsure about the Terms and Conditions for using the site, they should contact the Claimant (a contact phone number is prominently displayed on the signage) or they should refrain from parking.

22. The Claimant asserts that the signs are clearly displayed throughout the Site as evidenced by the attached site plan (Exhibit GS-6) and the driver would have had the opportunity to read and understand them when 3 entering and then parking at the Site. An objective observer would consider this action to have been done in acceptance of the Terms and Conditions. It is the signage that forms the basis of the contract between the driver and the Claimant (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Contract’).

23. The signage also states that any breach of the terms and conditions of using the Site will result in the issuing of a Parking Charge in the sum of £85.00, plus additional costs if the same remains unpaid.

24. The signage situated across the Site forms a unilateral offer to anyone wishing to park their vehicle at the location. As the offer is a unilateral one, there is no need for the motorist to communicate their acceptance, their performance of parking (as opposed to leaving) whether in accordance with the Terms and Conditions or not, is the act of acceptance.

25. The driver, by entering and proceeding to park the vehicle at the Site, wilfully agreed to abide by the Terms and Conditions, including those terms applicable to any breach. THE DEFENDANT’S BREACH OF THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS 26. On November 2016 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Contravention Date’), vehicle registration number XX (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Vehicle’) was observed to be parked in breach of the Terms and Conditions applicable at the Site. The photographic evidence (Exhibit GS-7) clearly shows the Vehicle parked without a valid ticket on display. As such, the PCN was accepted further to the driver’s performance. PCN

27. A PCN was affixed to the Vehicle’s windscreen at the time of the contravention (Exhibit GS-8). The PCN contained the following details: a. The PCN Number b. The issued date and time of the PCN c. The Vehicle Registration Number d. The reason for issue 28. The PCN afforded the recipient two options, to pay the £85 charge (discounted to £50 if paid within 14 days) or appeal the charge via the appeals process. No payment was made and no appeal was received.

29. As a result, the Claimant obtained the details of the Vehicle’s RK from the DVLA, under the terms of the KADOE. The Defendant was named as the RK at the address of Old Surrey address. The address supplied by the DVLA as being the RK’s address is deemed to be the relevant address as at the date of the event given that it is the RK’s responsibility to update the DVLA of any changes. The Claimant issued a postal notice to the Defendant on the 6 th December 2016 (Exhibit GS-9). 4

30. That notice gave the Defendant three options: i. To pay the PCN. ii. If they were not the driver to provide the Claimant with the drivers full name and a serviceable address, in order that liability could be transferred. iii. Appeal the PCN initially via the Claimants internal appeals process and then if dissatisfied by the outcome to appeal the PCN to Parking on Private Land Appeals (‘POPLA’) 31. POPLA is an independent appeals service for PCNs issued on private land and are administered by Ombudsman Services. The assessors make decisions based on Relevant Law, The BPA’s code of practice and evidence provided by both parties. Their findings are binding on the Parking Operator, but are not binding on the Appellant.

32. As the debt remained outstanding, the matter was referred to Debt Recovery Plus Limited (‘DRPL’). They conducted a trace in order to establish whether a new address for the Defendant could be found. DRPL were provided with a possible address of University Address. DRPL sent correspondence to this address, which the Defendant responded to, as shown in Exhibit GS-10. It therefore cannot be said that the Defendant was not aware of the matter.

THE APPLICATON

33. The Claimant prays in aid of its case, the contents of this statement together with the attached exhibits. The Claimant’s position is straightforward. They were authorised to operate a parking management scheme at the Site. There was clear and unambiguous signage in place at the Site, which formed the basis of the contract. The driver of the Vehicle parked in breach of those Terms and Conditions, thereby entering into the Contract, which is now breached owing to a failure to make payment. The driver of the Vehicle failed to respond to the PCN affixed to the Vehicle within the given time scales. Therefore, as the identity of the driver was not known to the Claimant, they were entitled to obtain the RK’s details from the DVLA and pursue the RK instead.

34. It is submitted that the evidence filed in support of the Claimants case is extremely compelling and that there is little or no prospect of the Defendant being able to successfully defend the claim.

35. The Defendant seeks to remove the Judgment on the basis that proceedings were served on their previous and incorrect address. As previously stated, the Defendant responded to correspondence sent to University Address. Consequently, if the Defendant had later moved address to New Surrey Address, it was their responsibility to update their contact information with the Claimant or DRPL to ensure future correspondence was received. Alternatively, the appropriate measures should have been put in place (such as a mail re-direct service). There is no evidence to suggest this was done.

36. In any event, the Defendant was sent a letter by my Firm to New Surrey Address, which is the address confirmed for service in the application. This letter confirmed ‘If you do not pay within the next 14 days, please keep our Client and ourselves updated as to your current address as we may need to correspond with you further, dependent on the further action our Client decides to take’. The Defendant failed to respond to this notice, which led to court proceedings being served at University Address.

37. Without prejudice to the previous, it is admitted that there is a small error with the Judgment sum outstanding. The Claimant wishes to highlight that they were only made aware of the issue after the Judgment had been registered and the Defendant had submitted their application.

38. It is still the Claimant’s position that the Judgment was entered regularly. However, the Claimant respectfully requests the Judgment be varied in line with the N225 Form contained in Exhibit GS-11. The sum now claimed is lower than the previous and therefore the Defendant has not suffered any prejudice.

39. It is the Claimant’s position that any costs associated with making the application, as far as the Defendant is concerned, should be met by them. The Claimant strongly denies the Defendant’s attempt to claim costs given that they have acted both reasonably and proportionately to date and have complied with the preaction protocol and CPR in relation to the service of the Claim Form.

40. It is noted that the Defendant contacted my Firm and advised that they would pay the full Judgment sum if the Judgment were removed (Exhibit GS-12).

As such, the Claimant respectfully requests the following Order be made;
a. The Judgment entered on the 5th May 2022 be and is hereby set aside;
b. The Defendant must make payment of £316.19 to my Firm within 28 days from the service of the Court Order setting the Judgment aside;
c. In default of the above, the Claimant be at liberty to re-enter Judgment against the Defendant; and
d. There be no Order as to Costs.

41. Alternatively, if the Judgment is set aside and the Defendant disputes liability for the PCN, the Claimant would invite the court to give standard directions regarding the progress of the Claim moving forward as it would be their intention to continue with the claim.

STATEMENT OF TRUTH The Claimant believes that the facts stated in witness statement are true. I am duly authorised by the Claimant to sign this statement of truth. 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."