Ccj set aside application as improperly served to old address - DCBL - Euro Car Parks Ltd

jdub1206

Thanks @Coupon-mad. We are already way over the original deadline which was 13th October. They then finally contacted me around a week ago asking for my personal information to confirm my identity. I responded to that but now haven't heard anything again. Do you think I should just proceed with the set aside myself and then claim for my expenses etc? Do I need to put in my set aside application that I am wanting to claim my costs back? Thank you again for your help. John.

jdub1206

Hi @Coupon-mad. Thank you. We are already way beyond the original deadline we gave them which was 13th October. Then just over a week ago they finally contacted me asking for my personal details. I've confirmed this but still not heard back from them after that seven days later. Do you think I should just proceed now with the set aside? When I applied for the set aside, do I need to state at that point that I'm wanting to claim my expenses? Thank you for your assistance. 

Coupon-mad

Yes crack on and the Draft Order in your bundle will include that you want your costs as well as CCJ set aside and claim dismissed for want of proper service within the 4 month window.

Read a good 4 or 5 CCJ set aside threads from SUMMER this year that include the VCS v Carr hearing link - the final judgment from MAY.

jdub1206

Hi everyone. Hi @Coupon-mad

Well, I'm finally about to submit my N244 set aside. If you have a moment to look over my draft order and witness statement, I would be grateful.

This has taken much longer than I had expected. Unfortunately, my mother-in-law passed away in November. I'm hoping that the court have leniency and compassion given our personal circumstances. It has been a very difficult time and we are still dealing with grief. Anyway, that's the reason why it's not been done yet. Here is my draft. Thank you, I really appreciate everyone's support.

CCJ Witness statement / Draft Order

Draft Order

DRAFT ORDER

IN THE COUNTY COURT AT: CNBC

CLAIM No: XXXXXX

 BETWEEN:

EURO CAR PARKS (Claimant)

-- and --

XXXXXX (Defendant)

______________________________________________

DRAFT ORDER

______________________________________________

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

1. The default judgment dated on 23rd June 2025 be set aside.

2. That the claim is dismissed for want of proper service within the 4 month window.

3. That all costs be paid. This includes the £313 court fee for the set aside.

WITNESS STATEMENT

I, XXXXXXX, of XXXXXXX, will say as follows:

1. I make this statement in support of my application to set aside the default judgment entered against me. The judgment was obtained without proper service of the claim form, and I had no knowledge of the proceedings until after the judgment was entered. I respectfully request the Court set aside the judgment under CPR 13.2 and/or CPR 13.3.

2. I believe I have a strong and legitimate defence to the claim. In the event that the claim is not dismissed, I respectfully request the opportunity to defend it fully and fairly, in accordance with CPR 13.3, which provides for the setting aside of a default judgment where the defendant has a real prospect of successfully defending the claim.

3. I understand that the Claimant obtained a Default Judgment against me on 23/06/2025. I am aware that Euro Car Parks is the Claimant, and the claim appears to relate to an unpaid Parking Charge Notice.

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 EVENTS

4. The address listed on the claim form is XXXXXX. I moved from this address to my current residence at XXXXX on 4th April 2025. In support of this, I provide evidence of the most recent DVLA updated in April 2025 and a copy of my mortgage completion date. I also submit my electoral roll update, dated 1st June 2025. 

[see Exhibit A - proof V5C updated in Aug 2025, copy of my mortgage competition documents and electoral Roll updated in Sep 2025 ].

4a. I also state that I contacted Euro Car Parks data protection officer via email on 9/05/2025 to update them of my change of address. They responded to this on the same day, asking if my change of address was Related to a PCN. I replied, immediately, confirming that it was, and provided them with the PCN number and the registration of the vehicle. 

[see Exhibit B - a copy of the email exchange with DPO@eurocarparks .com]

 5. I was unaware of the claim made against me until I obtained a credit report from TransUnion in September 2025 through my bank app. 

6. A few days after this, I called CNBC and made immediate enquiries regarding the claim against me from which I was able to establish that: 

- the claim relates to an alleged parking event in February 2024;

- the claim form was sent to an old address at which I no longer reside; and if I had been given the opportunity to do so, I would have successfully defended the claim.

CNBC instructed me that I had to submit a N244 form if I would like to set aside the Judgment and pay the fee £313

8.  On the 29th September 2025, I contacted the Claimant DCB Legal and invited them to join me in an application to set aside the judgement and dismiss the claim, with the claimant paying the court fee and no order as to costs. I offered them time to reply till 13th October 2025 [see Exhibit C - email sent to DCB legal]

10. A notice of debt recovery (Unpaid CCJ £295.08) was sent to my current address by DCBL on 18th August 2025 and again on 3rd October 2025, (reference number 10067243) [see Exhibit D]. This shows that the Claimant was aware their original address was incorrect, and had successfully traced and identified my correct address as of August 2025. 

10a. I would like to submit reasons as to why this matter was not dealt with sooner. During the period of August - December 2025, we were dealing with the care and support of my mother-in-law, whose health was rapidly declining. When I received the initial letter regarding the CCJ debt outstanding in August, we had just been informed that my mother-in-law had 6-12 months to live. Therefore, the reality of the initial letter from DCBL was overlooked. Sadly, my mother-in-law declined much quicker than we were expecting, and she passed away on 5th November 2025. This situation caused extreme stress, anxiety, and financial strain, and therefore, we were unable to commence the N244 set aside application sooner than today. I would ask the court to take our very difficult personal circumstances into consideration when it comes to the timeline of events connected to the CCJ. Thank you

11. Despite having been provided with the correct address on May 9th 2025, as well as my V5c being updated in April 2025 and My electoral roll details being updated as of April 2025, The Claimant's continued use of my old address renders service of the claim form invalid. The default judgment was consequently entered without proper notice, denying me the opportunity to respond or defend the claim. 

12.  On Friday 6th February, I carried out research on CheckMyFile, and I got an extract of my credit file which demonstrated I was registered on the Electoral roll at my current address, XXXXXX, from April 2025. [see Exhibit F - credit file attachment]. The Claimant failed to take reasonable steps to verify the Defendant’s current address, as required by CPR 6.9(3) and the BPA Code of Practice 24.1c. A simple and inexpensive “soft trace” (costing around 28 pence) would have revealed the Defendant’s current address. 

13. The claimant demonstrated that they could have easily found the defendant’s current address to properly serve the claim and thus could have easily complied with CPR 6.9, having very quickly sent notice of Debt recovery to the correct address, once a default CCJ had been obtained in the defendant’s absence.  Additionally, this appears to be a common method of operation used by the clamant to obtain default judgments. This failure to take proper steps is not an isolated case. Many individuals across the country have been similarly affected by the parking industry's failure to confirm accurate addresses, resulting in undue stress and legal burdens. This failure mirrors the principles established in VCS Ltd v Carr (CA-2024-001179, Court of Appeal, 4 March 2025), where the court held that claimants must take reasonable steps to ensure service is effective. The court emphasised that serving a claim at an outdated address, without reasonable diligence, renders the judgment void. Initial findings from the Court of Appeal hearing are provided separately for the court’s reference: Phillip Carr v Vehicle Control Services LTD Neutral Citation Number[2025] EWCA Civ 713 (points. 39).

14.   The defendants lack of response to ANY correspondence from the clamant, up to and including pre court action (Letter before Claim), should have reasonably put the claimant on notice that the address was likely not current and suitable to serve the claim, therefore requiring further reasonable steps to be taken to ensure proper service of claim.

16.  The KADOE (Keeper at Date of Event) system offers only a snapshot of where a vehicle was registered at a particular time, not a reliable service address for court claims.

17.  Operators are permitted to query the DVLA only once. Therefore, the IPC Code mandates that reasonable steps be taken to confirm the defendant’s current address prior to issuing a claim.

18.  The use of an outdated DVLA address, without soft trace checks (which are inexpensive and readily available), breaches the IPC Code of Practice, the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims, and CPR requirements to take reasonable steps to ensure proper service.

19.  In “Civil Enforcement Ltd v Chan” (2018), the court held that sending court documents to a previous address when a more recent one is known is not proper service [see Exhibit G]. The court struck out a claim due to the Claimant’s failure to comply with CPR 16.4 and Practice Direction 16.7.5. The court held that the particulars of claim must specify the conduct constituting the breach, which was not done in that case. Similarly, in this case, the Claimant has failed to provide sufficient details of the alleged breach, rendering the claim defective and liable to be struck out.

CLAIM SHOULD BE STRUCK OUT

20.  I respectfully bring to the Court’s attention that I was never served with the Particulars of Claim. As a result, I have been denied a fair opportunity to understand or respond to the allegations made.

21.  Under CPR 3.4(2), the Court may strike out a statement of case if it: (a) discloses no reasonable grounds for bringing the claim; or (b) constitutes an abuse of the Court’s process or is otherwise likely to obstruct the just disposal of the proceedings. This claim satisfies both of these grounds.

22.  In Venulum Property Investments Ltd v Space Architecture & Others [2013] EWHC 1242 (TCC), the Court held that a failure to serve claim forms properly, combined with deliberate procedural delays, amounted to an abuse of process and warranted the claim being struck out under CPR 3.4 .

23.  Similarly, in Nugent v Nugent [2019] EWHC 1151 (Ch), the Court struck out proceedings on the basis that the claim had not been properly served and the claimant had failed to adhere to principles of procedural fairness.

24.  These authorities reinforce the proposition that where a party fails to comply with fundamental service requirements and undermines the fair progression of proceedings, striking out the claim is not only justified but necessary to uphold the integrity of the judicial process.

25.  The Claimant should not be permitted to waste further Court time or resources, particularly where they have failed to comply with key procedural obligations, including the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims, the IPC Code of Practice, and CPR 6.9, which obliges a claimant to take ‘reasonable steps’ to verify a defendant’s current address prior to service. The failure to do so is particularly egregious given the Claimant had access to an Experian trace identifying the correct address, yet chose to ignore it.

26.  If the Claimant believes they still have a cause of action, the correct course is to commence proceedings afresh—this time complying with all relevant procedural requirements. This includes sending a proper Letter Before Claim to the correct address, as required by the Pre-Action Protocol. To date, I have received no claim form or Particulars of Claim at my current address, and therefore have had no opportunity to understand or respond to the case.

27.  For these reasons, I respectfully request that the Court strike out the claim under CPR 3.4(2)(a) and (b). The claim is procedurally defective and was never validly served.

CONSIDERATION OF PROMPTNESS

28. I respectfully request that the Court take this into account when considering the issue of promptness under CPR 13.3(2). Once I became aware of the judgment and was able to understand the situation fully, I acted as swiftly as I reasonably could in making this application. 

28a. I respectfully request that the court take into consideration our difficult personal circumstances as described in point 10a. Had this not been the case, we would have acted sooner and submitted our N244 application earlier.   

COSTS

29. In accordance with CPR 46.5, I respectfully request that the Court allow a reasonable amount of preparation time at the Litigant in Person rate of £24 per hour. I estimate that I have spent approximately:

• 6 hours dealing with DCB Legal correspondence and N244 preparation @ £24/hr = £144 

• 20 hours studying case law and preparing this Witness Statement £15/hr = £380

• £150 Emotional distress of getting a CCJ on my credit file and unable to get loans or credit.

I also respectfully request that the Court consider ordering the Claimant to reimburse the £313 court fee I was required to pay in order to apply for this set-aside, as well as my reasonable costs for attending any hearing.

Total: £987

I submit that is a fair and proportionate amount in the circumstances and ask the Court to include this in any costs award.

RELIEF SOUGHT

30. In light of the above, I was unable to file a defence or properly respond to the claim. I therefore submit that the Default Judgment was entered incorrectly and respectfully request that it be set aside. The Defendant respectfully requests the Court to:

• Set aside the Default Judgment dated 23/06/2025 under CPR 13.2 and/or 13.3;

• Strike out the underlying claim as it was improperly served and lacks merit; and

• Order the Claimant to reimburse the Defendant’s costs as detailed above.

STATEMENT OF TRUTH:

31.  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:
Date:

Coupon-mad

Very good!

Get this in next week but first, add abut more:

Read my post the other day about Brookes (to force the matter of getting your costs back) and Mazur (the claim form wasn't signed by a solicitor).

jdub1206

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81873713#Comment_81873713

Thank you. Just to check, are you referring to the post on this thread:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81870571#Comment_81870571

If so, are you saying I need To include some or all of this in my witness statement? Or is this a guideline to what I should say at the hearing?

Thank you so much For all your assistance.

Coupon-mad

Yes.

Adapt it to suit! Just add to your WS, the arguments and case law about:

• why the usual rule is you get your costs and why the small claims costs limitation doesn't apply (Brookes)
• Mazur and the fact SE signed the Claim Form & what that means.

jdub1206

Thank you. One more thing. I received an email from DCB Legal on 10/11/25. It read as follows:

Dear Sirs,

We thank you for your recent email.

We take the confidentiality of our matters very seriously and as a result, we ask you to answer the following security questions in full before we can correspond with you via email.

Please could you confirm:

Your full name

First line of your address

Postcode

By responding to this email, you consent for us to use this email address for communication in relation to your case, this may contain information that is personal to you. When communicating by email, please remember that it may be ‘unsecure’. If at any time, you no longer wish for your personal information to be communicated by email, or you no longer have access to this mailbox, please notify us immediately.

Should you prefer to discuss this matter on the telephone, please do not hesitate to contact us on 0203 434 0437.

Kind Regards,

(Removed by Forum Team)

DCB Legal Ltd

I replied providing the information requested. They replied on 10/12/2025. Stating the following:

Dear Sirs,

We thank you for your recent email.

We confirm the address provided does not match what we hold on file for you, and as a result, we ask you to answer the following security questions in full before we can correspond with you via email.

Please could you confirm:

First line of your address

Postcode

I did not reply to this. We had so much going on with funerals etc. plus, they'd already written, (well dcbl) to my current address.

However, should I be including this in my WS? If so, how? Thank you.

Coupon-mad

No because thet's 6 months after the CCJ.

jdub1206

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81873984#Comment_81873984

Ok, thank you. With regards to…

"Mazur and the fact SE signed the Claim Form & what that means."

Who is SE? Is this who would've signed the ccj claim form? Apologies for my lack of knowledge. Thank you for your help.