Multiple PCN's from National Parking Control, in a Hire Car

StJohn81

Le_Kirk said:

Please note it is £313 now.

Jeez ha. Oh well, hopefully it won't be my problem...eventually. 
Thanks

Coupon-mad

We wish you'd told them when you moved. The claim was bound to come and we surely don't need to advise people to tell the litigious scammers if your address changes ... what a headache and an expensive mistake.

This below (and your WS) is very out of date. Search again for more recent CCJ Draft Order examples and WS that talk about VCS v Carr:

DRAFT ORDER
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
1. The default judgment dated xxxxxxxxx be set aside.
2. The Claimant shall pay the Defendant’s application fee of £303 within 14 days of service of this order.
3. Enforcement of the judgment is stayed pending the determination of this application.
4. The Claimant shall, if it intends to proceed, file and serve amended particulars of claim within 14 days of this order.
5. The Defendant shall file and serve a defence within 14 days thereafter.

Don't read threads older than 2025.

StJohn81

Coupon-mad said:

We wish you'd told them when you moved. Why didn't you? The claim was bound to come and we surely don't need to advise people to tell the litigious scammers if your address changes. Oh dear...what a headache and an expensive mistake.

This below (and your WS) is very out of date. Search again for more recent CCJ Draft Order examples and WS that talk about VCS v Carr:

DRAFT ORDER
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
1. The default judgment dated xxxxxxxxx be set aside.
2. The Claimant shall pay the Defendant’s application fee of £303 within 14 days of service of this order.
3. Enforcement of the judgment is stayed pending the determination of this application.
4. The Claimant shall, if it intends to proceed, file and serve amended particulars of claim within 14 days of this order.
5. The Defendant shall file and serve a defence within 14 days thereafter.

Don't read threads older than 2025.

With respect, trawling through the multitude of threads that are advised, to land on the exact piece of advice is a nightmare and unbelievably time-consuming and overwhelming when you work on laptops all day. Especially when the motto on the forum is 'refer to the newbies section' most of these are referring to older incidents than 2025. Maybe that newbies section needs trimming and updating? Are there no clear examples of incidents like this that can I can be directed to or easy to find? My head is spinning already...

As for the moving of address, yes, an expensive mistake which can't be undone. Is it expensive in the sense my N244 is pointless or will I just have to pay? Some clarity would be great. Thanks

StJohn81

I'm reading many posts and trying to put the knowledge into my case. 

Some points that seem important to consider are:

• After my appeals on Jan 29th, I got a letter to pay £510 in March.
• I moved house in June. I checked for the first few months for mail, and apparently there was none for me, but this could be lazy information from a resident at those flats. I visited the address in August/Sept (unrelated) - none there.
• The CCJ was applied in August, to old address
• No address verification on their part
• Default judgment obtained
• Discovered CCJ via credit check in Dec
• Emailed DCB legal 10th Dec and 14th Jan
• Immediate action → N244, on Jan 19th

I'm also wondering about my draft order and witness statement are indeed outdated, and if failure to provide address is THAT much of a deal. I looked up using AI, using legal understsnding and it says:

"There is NO legal duty on a consumer to:

• notify a private parking company of address changes indefinitely

• chase them after appeals

• assume litigation is coming months later

The Court of Appeal addressed this directly in VCS v Carr.

What Carr says in substance:

• Claimants are professional litigants

• Address checking is cheap, routine, and expected

• Litigation triggers higher duties than debt collection

• Failure to take reasonable steps = defective service

Even if:

• you didn’t notify them

• you received earlier letters

• you moved after debt collection stage

  None of that cures defective service of the claim.

Judges know this."

Also with regards to V5 updates (or not), it had this to add:

"If you did update the V5:

✔ strengthens your case (but not required)

If you did not update the V5:

❗ does NOT defeat a Carr-based set aside

Why?

• The claim was issued months later

• Carr makes clear: claimants must re-check before litigation

• DVLA data can be stale — courts accept this

District Judges routinely say:

“The DVLA is not a litigation address service.”

So:

• It may be mentioned by the claimant

• It does not block a mandatory set aside"

I wonder what the forums take on all this is.

Thanks

Coupon-mad

The AI has harvested all that from this forum so it is correct!

There was no need to ask AI. What you should have done is search the forum for a CCJ set aside thread from 2025 that cites VCS v Carr and has a Draft Order that requires the claim to be struck out, for want of service within the 4 month expiry limit after it was filed.

There are dozens and dozens here from last year alone.

Sadly I don't have a note of one, so it does require a relevant and specific keyword forum search for 'RECENT' results (never read results filtered as the default 'BEST MATCH'). I've put in bold above the keywords to mix and match & play around with until you find a good thread in your 2025 results.

I meant it's an 'expensive' oversight because you will have to shell out a £313 court fee up front, that you should get awarded against the Claimant (if you get a good judge) but it's not guaranteed.

Getting those costs back takes a lot of effort & good argument if you get a judge who is determined to blame you. Some have no idea that the Claimant is the one at most fault. We see that fairly often but TBF, most people get the £313 back when an old address was used.

It's a mandatory set aside case under CPR 13.2 (no court discretion: it MUST be set aside) but some judges don't even know that! Think of this as an uphill battle where everything will depend on what you say on the day.

I wasn't being harsh: you must bin that old draft. We want you to win AND get your costs back. Only read 2025 threads.

StJohn81

I'm going to send all this to applications.cnbc@justice.gov.uk

Is this the correct email address? 

Also, I've spent many hours reading the threads especially ones from @Truss_me and @ParkingParrot

I honestly can't differentiate between their cases, their orders, what I should and should be including in mine because their cases and details are different. The differences in mine is that I was in a hire car (yes I have read the inf in Newbies, and done appeals accordingly), also that I didn't get any paperwork, at any address, or notification of the CCJ. 

I would always prefer to speak to actual humans who are helpful but I've had to ask AI because I can't get anywhere trawling through the threads. 

Can someone tell me what it is that I need to either take out or include from my draft order, and why that is specific to my case?

Also, can anyone argue against this logic of why my draft order and witness statement are sound, and if so, why?

When I compared my case to Parking Parrot, AI says:

🔹 Your case

• You did not receive the claim

• You moved before proceedings

• Claim served to an old address

• Claimant took no reasonable steps

• You are providing:

  • ✔ utility bill dated June (excellent)

  • ✔ prompt action once discovered

• You rely on binding Court of Appeal authority

You are not saying:

“I told them but didn’t finish the job” (like in PP's case)

You are saying:

“They litigated without checking.”

That is much cleaner.

Your current witness statement already avoids the pitfall in that forum case because:

• You do not claim you told them and they ignored you

• You do not rely on “I emailed them”

• You rely on:

  • wrong address

  • move date

  • failure to check

  • Carr authority

You are now also adding:

• utility bill evidence (excellent)

• measured email-contact paragraph (already refined)

That is better structured than the forum example.

Bottom line 

That forum post does not undermine your case.
It actually confirms:

• Judges apply Carr practically

• Objective evidence of moving matters

• Claimant inertia matters

• Fees are often awarded

• Defence comes later

You:

• ✔ have stronger documentary evidence

• ✔ have cleaner procedural facts

• ✔ are relying on binding authority

• ✔ are not exposed to the “partial disclosure” criticism

---

🟢 Final advice before submission

Do not:

• add DVLA commentary unless asked

• over-explain responsibility

• pre-empt rebuttals

Do:

• include your utility bill as an exhibit

• keep the witness statement clean

• submit with confidence

You are not gambling here — you are correcting a procedural failure the Court of Appeal has already ruled on.

Coupon-mad

Are you sure those were CCJ set aside cases from late 2025?

Truss_me rings a bell as an older, pre-VCS v Carr case from 2 years ago, so I wouldn't even read it.

As advised you need a case relying on VCS v Carr. I said "Search again for more recent CCJ Draft Order examples and WS that talk about VCS v Carr:"

Are you changing your search filter to NEWEST? There have been some great examples in the last 6 months.

I can't bring myself to read AI generated twaddle, sorry. I detest that daft gobbledegook and cannot advise on it.

Can we have a normal conversation where our tried and tested stuff isn't fed into a clueless bot that has machine-learned from sources including here?

StJohn81

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81862713#Comment_81862713

The Truss Me case was late 2024 and ran into mid 2025, so thought that was in range? I'm doing searches with filters, yes. How am I supposed to differentiate the differences in newer cases?

This is the point I'm making about trawling through threads, it's very expensive on time and confusing. I personally have a house project going on, studying and working, trying to do this CCJ case.

Plus, I have already included reference to VCS v Carr in my documents, so I don't know what else I'm supposed to include.

I've been posting about this for the last 2 weeks and none the wiser as to a perfect draft order and witness statement. Sure, there is some good info I've picked up, but before I hit the red button and send it I want it bullet proof, not guess work. Its all a bit cryptic on here sometimes and pretty nervewracking for us newbs when you're unsure. Some people are better at it than others.

I trust you can help and its great that you spend your time on here doing so, but having read some other peoples threads it does seem like you send people all round the houses sometimes. And the 'moralising' is unnecessary 'oh dear….why did you do that? you should have done this' Surely you can see people are trying their best, awash in a sea of information that is difficult to digest. Maybe that's another reason people use bots - no moralising there.

It took me minutes to harvest that data, whereas I spend hours, days on here I really haven't got. I don't want to rely on them and in answer to your last question, yes, I would like and prefer the normal conversation with you and others.

I can see you have answered some people directly on their questions regarding specific changes, would you not recommend any of those here?

Thanks

Coupon-mad

I think the VCS v Carr judgment and transcript was available from early summer, so any case after that.

Truss_me's case is far too old.

Coupon-mad

@StJohn81 how is the application progressing?

This person just saw their Myrtle Parade NPC case off which was very similar to yours (a CCJ set aside application) only they used Jackson Yamba at Contestor Legal to do it for them (you don't need to):

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6597463/npc-dcbl-notice-of-debt-recovery-advice-needed-before-midnight-please