PCM Numerous PCNs in Own Bay - kind of

Coupon-mad

Sounds good but you need a WS at this stage to accompany your N244.

So, you could convert that skelly into a WS by tweaking it into a submission written in the first person instead, with a statement of truth.

ParkingParrot

i've been finalising my WS this evening and just noticed that the total cost of the PCNs (3 nr) was £480

originally, they were £100 each, so there is £60 added to each. 

Additionally, these guys have been charging interest at 8% a year for 4years - given its taken them that long to bring the case, is this legit?

I have seen mention of this on other threads but can't find it again now - i've got about 20 thread tabs open. Is this even relevant for this set-aside hearing? 

Coupon-mad

Not relevant for this hearing.

ParkingParrot

Draft Order & Witness Statement

IN THE COUNTY COURT AT: Civic National Business Centre

CLAIM No: (Removed by Forum Team)

BETWEEN:

PARKING CONTROL MANAGEMENT UK LIMITED (Claimant)

-- and --

(Removed by Forum Team) (Defendant)

______________________________________________

DRAFT ORDER

______________________________________________
It is ordered that:

1. The default judgment dated xxxxxxx2025 be set aside pursuant to CPR 13.2  and/or CPR 13.3(1).

2. The Claimant to pay the Defendant’s costs of this application to the sum of £303

3. Unless the Claimant serves a copy of the claim form on the Defendant by 4pm on XX/XX/XX paragraph 2 shall cease to have effect and the Claimant shall pay the Defendant's costs summarily assessed at £303 and the claim shall be struck out.

4. If the Claimant serves the claim form as directed in paragraph 3 the Defendant shall file and serve a defence by 4pm on XX/XX/XX.

5. Should the Claimant discontinue the Claim after the CCJ is set aside, paragraph 2 shall cease to have effect and the Claimant shall pay the Defendant's costs summarily assessed at £303 plus the Defendant's costs for attending the hearing.

6. All enforcement be put on hold pending the outcome of the application.

WITNESS STATEMENT

I, XXXX, of XXXXXXXX State as follows:

1.      I am the defendant in this matter.

 

2.       This is my witness statement in support of my application dated xxth May 2025 requesting to:

2.1.   Set aside the default judgment dated XXXXXXX 2025

3.      Legal Basis for Application

3.1.   Improper Service (CPR 13.2)

3.1.1.      The court must set aside the judgment if it was not properly served in accordance with CPR 6.9, which requires that an individual be served at their “usual or last known residence.”

3.1.2.      The claim was sent to XXXXXXX, an address where I no longer resided at the time of service. I moved to my current address at XXXXXXXX in December 2022 as evidenced by his solicitors “Letter to client confirming completion” (Exb 1). The DVLA were made aware within a week of the move and a new licence was issued (Exb 5). I made the claimant aware of a change of address via Trace Recovery. A postal redirection service was also set up via Royal Mail.

3.1.3.      The Claimant failed to take reasonable steps to verify the my current address, as required by CPR 6.9(3) instead relying on a trace from XX August 2021 according to Moorside Legal Services. A simple and inexpensive “soft trace” would have revealed the my current address.

3.1.4.      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. A recording of the Court of Appeal hearing can be viewed here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FvK6XwAGHcs .

3.2.   Discretionary Set Aside (CPR 13.3)

3.2.1.      Even if service is deemed valid, I, the Defendant, have a real prospect of successfully defending the claim.

3.2.1.1.            I had, and still have a copy of, a lease that grants exclusive use in accordance with the provisions of paragraph (l) of Part I of the Second Schedule. Please see Exb 2 for lease.

3.2.1.2.            The lease grants me an ancillary right to exclusive parking within this space which is not subject to a parking scheme agreement nor have I subsequently opted into a parking scheme agreement. When SDL gave notice of their intention to engage a parking company I emailed on 20th February “I do not wish to be part of this scheme so please remove XXADDRESSXX from the scheme and advise me when you have done so. Any tickets issued in the meantime will be ignored and disposed of.” No response was received. The lease cannot be amended without the agreement of the lessee.

3.2.1.3.            When the parking scheme was introduced at November 2020, the claimant’s parking attendants were constantly issuing parking charge notices despite being fully aware through various complaints, that I and other occupiers of the block were still waiting on parking permits to be delivered through the post. Any parking charge notices received were notified to the landowner advised that they could not intervene to have the “fines” cancelled. The Managing Agent acknowledged this is in a letter dated 23 November 2020 advising “as from the date of the letter you will be required to display the resident parking permit”. According to the particulars of the claim, all PCNs to which this matter relates were issued before this date. See Exb 6

3.2.2.      The claim is therefore without merit, and the Defendant should be given the opportunity to defend it properly.

4.      JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS

4.1.   VCS v Carr (CA-2024-001179, Court of Appeal, 4 March 2025)

4.1.1.      The Court of Appeal in VCS Ltd v Carr 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.

4.1.2.      The court also highlighted the importance of the overriding objective in which requires the court to consider the justice of the case. I, in this case, was unable to defend the claim due to improper service, and the judgment should be set aside to avoid injustice.

4.2.   Civil Enforcement Ltd v Chan (Luton County Court, August 2023)

4.2.1.      In CEL v Chan, 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.

4.2.2.      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.

4.3.   CPMS Ltd v Akande (Manchester County Court, May 2024)

4.3.1.      In CPMS v Akande, the court dismissed a parking claim due to the Claimant’s failure to specify the nature of the breach in the particulars of claim. The court held that the Defendant must be able to understand the case against them, which was not possible in that case.

4.3.2.      The same applies here. The Claimant has failed to specify the nature of the alleged breach, and the claim should be struck out.

5.      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;

5.1.   I discovered a CCJ was lodged onto my credit file on the 30th April 2025.

5.2.   On 30th April and 1st May I contacted the County Court Business Centre to obtain relevant information relating to this default judgement; Exb 3).

5.3.   On 6th May I contacted the claimant and their legal representative seeking a set aside by  consent. No response was received. (see Exb 4).

5.4.   On 12th May I have wilfully submitted my case in order to set-aside this judgement and fairly present my case.

5.5.   The above shows that I have complied with CPR 13.3.2 satisfying the requirement to act promptly. Given the time that has elapsed between the supposed ‘infringement and the date of issue on the Case Details, the same cannot be said of the claimant.

 

 

6.      Conclusion

6.1.   I, the Defendant respectfully submits that the default judgment should be set aside due to improper service, and the claim should be struck out as it is without merit and fails to comply with the CPR.

7.      Statement of Truth

7.1.   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.

any comments welcome

h2g2

For 3.1.2, notifying the DVLA is a bit of red-herring. They may only obtain your address from the DVLA once per parking event, so if they had already requested it the cannot ask again.

How long was the postal redirection set up for, and how relevant is it?

However, you should make more of the fact that you notified them of your change of address. If you still have actual dates it would help greatly:

Something like this, perhaps (I'm not a lawyer, so hopefully someone with more experience on these can correct me if I've erred):

"On xx/xx/xxx I notified the Trace Recovery, acting as agents for the claimant, and [Moorside Legal?] via [e-mail? - I notice you don't actually say in the original post] that I no longer resided at [old address] and that I was to be contacted by e-mail. My e-mail address for contact was provided to both parties, and has at all material times been a reliable method to contact me, since it does not change even when my address does.

"[Mention any acknowledgement of this message: if they replied, say that here and include their reply in your evidence. If you know from the mail redirection that they stopped writing to that address, or that they started contacting you through the e-mail address instead, say that. Anything to evidence that they received and understood the "I no longer live at [address]" message.]

"This should have been enough to put the claimants on notice that [old address] was serviceable, following the principles established in VCS Ltd v Carr (CA-2024-001179, Court of Appeal, 4 March 2025) where a phone call was considered enough notice put VCS Ltd (the original claimants in that case) on notice.

"However, on xx/xx/xxxx they served a court claim [old address]

"In this case PCM Ltd had a known e-mail address to contact me. They should have used this to confirm my address for service. Had they asked for this information I would have supplied it. Serving the claim to an address they should have known was no longer valid bears no reasonable explanation."

If you have a copy still of the e-mail you told them you had moved, make you to include it in your evidence.

h2g2

Also, please edit your last post to remove what I assume is your real name!

Coupon-mad

Your fee is £313 not £303 these days.

And it's not the 'Civic' National Business Centre.

And you seem to have copied an old example because you DO NOT want an order saying this:

3. Unless the Claimant serves a copy of the claim form on the Defendant by 4pm on XX/XX/XX paragraph 2 shall cease to have effect and the Claimant shall pay the Defendant's costs summarily assessed at £303 and the claim shall be struck out.
4. If the Claimant serves the claim form as directed in paragraph 3 the Defendant shall file and serve a defence by 4pm on XX/XX/XX.

You want an Order like the ones seen in recent cases, such as by @Truss_me

ParkingParrot

this draft order:

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

1                 The default judgment entered against the Defendant dated 12 July 2024 (the "Default Judgment") be set aside pursuant to CPR 13.2 [CPR 13.3(1)];

2                 The claim (no. XXXX) ("Claim") is dismissed.

3                 No order as to costs in respect of the Claim.

4                 The Claimant/Respondent shall pay the Defendant's/Applicant's costs of and occasioned by the Application. 

@h2g2 - given there are multiple parking events - is this a red herring? they could have carried out at least 3 searches - one for each of the PCNs this relates to. They did respond to my email regarding change of address, but failed to acknowledge that key bit of info. However, their response was via email (so acceptance) also, they continued to post letters to old address.

i actually never heard from Moorside at all - I was only aware of their involvement after CCJ was issued. I was in contact with Shakespeare Martineau (for other tickets issued at the same place to the same car), and they were advised of change of address in addition to Trace Recovery. 

I will update and repost.

Coupon-mad

Trace Debt Recovery are the same organisation as Moorside Legal. 

h2g2

ParkingParrot said:

h2g2 - given there are multiple parking events - is this a red herring? they could have carried out at least 3 searches - one for each of the PCNs this relates to. 

Depends on the dates, I guess. Typically they'll have obtained keeper details reasonably soon after each PCN. They KADOE, I believe, does not allow them to use the address obtained for PCN x to pursue PCN y. So they would likely have made three checks to the DVLA database fairly soon after each PCN.

ParkingParrot said:

They did respond to my email regarding change of address, but failed to acknowledge that key bit of info. However, their response was via email (so acceptance) also, they continued to post letters to old address.

This is good. They provably got your e-mail telling them. They have zero wiggle for claiming the e-mail was sent to the wrong address or not read. If they didn't act on it, that's their problem. You can make the point in the witness statement that you had good reason to believe they knew the old address was no longer serviceable, and that avoiding a surprise CCJ due to having the wrong address was one of the reasons you made sure they still had a way to contact you.