Successful hearing but very confused for next step

WaterKelpie

I have tried to be a good newbie and read all the threads and avoid posting - I thought I could do it myself but now I think I may need to use a solicitor. I definitely need some advice.

BACKGROUND:
May 2022 - I parked at a private car park attached to a hotel, attempted to use the app to pay - didn't work.
Called the number to do it manually and because it was after 6pm, I got the answerphone. Left my credit card details as per the message. Hung up, went into the hotel, dropped bags in room and headed out for dinner. Got a text message saying I had to reply "YES" to confirm payment.
Obviously this was after the 20mins allowance for payment.
Immediately emailed the car parking operator ("Phone & Pay") who said 'tough'! Well technically they said they can confirm I didn't pay and they can't backdate payment so I should contact Civil Enforcement Ltd directly. That's right - it's those guys.
Turns out Civil Enforcement Ltd (CEL) don't HAVE contact details on their website!
Called up Phone & Pay to speak to a human and they said I should try using the appeals form on the site.
Sooo I did that, messaged CEL my telephone number and email and told them to contact me for payment.  ...never heard back, forgot about it, moved house in December 2022. (Yes I updated all the relevant people and organisations)

June 2024 - Direct Collection Bailiffs send me a letter for recovery of costs from a default CCJ issued against me in September 2023!

USING THIS FORUM:
Sent in an N244 form within 1 week, paid my £303 to request judgement be set aside.
Hearing finally happened on 11 Nov. The judge hadn't read, and didn't have access to my Witness Statement or Draft Order which I'd spent ages on! So that threw me a bit.
Luckily the claimant (CEL) never showed up so it went in my favour.
The judge was speaking very fast and my hearing isn't great but he said:
- To "file and serve" my defence to the court and the claimant.
- Avoid "internet waffle"
- Use "Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 section 56"
- Something about 14 days. Then it would go to trial.
(maybe if he'd read the witness statement it would have been dealt with then and there?)
This is where I need some help..
I was a bit confused and asked the usher if I needed to do anything or if I just wait to receive info from the court for the next step. She said the court would be in touch. So I understood the 14 day thing to mean I should file and serve my defence at least 14 days before trial. I called the NCBC on the 22nd Nov to double check and they said nothing had been filed yet and there was no court order.
I have now received a letter from the court that has me second guessing and thinking I got it wrong.

THE ISSUE:
The letter from the court - "Form N24 General Form of Judgement or Order" is dated 11th Dec but refers to the hearing date of 11th Nov.
It states:
IT IS ORDERED THAT
1. The Defendant is granted relief from sanctions pursuant to CPR 3.9 and judgement in default is set aside pursuant to CPR 13.3
2. The Defendant shall by 4pm on 25 November 2024 whereupon the case shall be referred back to a judge for allocation and directions
Dated 11 November 2024

I haven't typed that wrong, it says I must do ...(something?)... by the date that has already passed!
So now I'm thinking my case is going to be thrown out and I'm in contempt of court etc!
'NCBC' have not been helpful. 'Support for Court' says it's probably just an update and to do nothing until I hear from them again.

So please, any advice,
Should I file and serve the defence immediately and say sorry in another witness statement so it can't be dismissed in default by the claimant?
Should I wait until I hear from the court?
Should I get a solicitor? (can I claim back the costs if I win?)


Happy to submit my WS if it might help others.
The crux of my defence is
a) I made reasonable attempts to pay
b) I was available to be found but they served to an old address.

Thanks all and apologies if this is posted wrong in some way.

LDast

2. The Defendant shall by 4pm on 25 November 2024 whereupon the case shall be referred back to a judge for allocation and directions

It looks like the Order was not typed out correctly. It is the order the judge made at the set aside haring on 11th November.

It most likely should have said that you should submit your defence to the original claim by 25th November (14 days after the 11th November set aside hearing). However, if it was only made on 11th December, it is an impossible situation.

You need to get in touch with the court that issued the order and evidence to them that they have issued an order on the 11th December that refers to a requirement that is undefined that should have been submitted by 25th November.

LDast

A formal complaint to the court manager:

Subject: Formal Complaint Regarding Procedural Issue with Order Dated 11 December 2024

Dear Court Manager,

I am writing to formally raise a complaint regarding procedural issues that have arisen in connection with an order issued by [Name of the Court] in relation to the set-aside hearing for case reference [Case Number].

On 11 November 2024, I attended a set-aside hearing where the Judge granted the application in my favour. I was informed by the Usher at the hearing that the judge's order would be sent to me in writing.

However, the order I eventually received, dated 11 December 2024 but only delivered to me on 18 December 2024, includes the following paragraph:

"The Defendant shall by 4pm on 25 November 2024 whereupon the case shall be referred back to a judge for allocation and directions."

This order raises the following issues:

1. Ambiguity in the Order: The order does not specify what action I was required to take by 4pm on 25 November 2024. The lack of clarity makes it impossible to determine what compliance was expected of me.

2. Impossibility of Compliance: Even if the order had been clear, it would have been impossible for me to comply with a deadline of 25 November 2024 when the order was not issued until 11 December 2024 and not received until 18 December 2024.

I respectfully request the court to address the following:

1. Provide clarification regarding what action was expected of me pursuant to the order.
2. Confirm how this matter can now be rectified, given that compliance was not feasible due to the delay in issuing and delivering the order.
3. Investigate the cause of this delay and take steps to ensure such procedural errors do not occur in the future.

This situation has caused unnecessary confusion and distress. I trust that you will take this matter seriously and provide an appropriate resolution to ensure fairness in the proceedings.

Please confirm receipt of this complaint and advise me of the next steps.

Yours faithfully,

Coupon-mad

No ... the important thing is to attempt to comply with the Order. That means urgent Defence!  You DO NOT need a solicitor.

Just send your defence by email to the local court and CEL (or DCB Legal if they filed the claim) now - THIS WEEK - referring in your covering email to the Order dated 11th December which has only just been received and sets a date in the past.

Attach your defence which will include CEL v Chan IF CEL FILED THIS CLAIM THEMSELVES (not using DCB Legal). Do you know?

Have you obtained a copy of the POC?  

WaterKelpie

Thank you very much for these replies, I shall indeed send in my defence (with evidence) immediately but it sounds like making the complaint to the court manager might be a good thing to do too? (Belt and braces?)

I have not obtained the Particulars Of Claim nor have I received any type of claim form. 
The only correspondence from anyone has been the notice of allocation (hearing date & time) and the N24 General Form of Judgement or Order.

No other info. Do I need to request something?

Coupon-mad

Yes. Urgent!

Ring the CNBC at 8.30am tomorrow morning & ask for an emailed copy of the Particulars of Claim (DO NOT SAY 'CLAIM FORM') and ask them whether the legal representative was DCB Legal or CEL themselves, in which case who has signed it, is it 'S. Wilson'?

DO NOT SEND THE DEFENCE YET BECAUSE YOU DON'T KNOW WHICH OF THE TWO VERSIONS TO USE.