3 private parking tickets being pursued for all 3 and had a ccj claim made

[b789]

I've been on hold for 49 minutes. So I think I will go and visit the court in person for an update. Does it matter that the hearing is being held elsewhere at Wandsworth county court and not at Brentford? Should I be going to Wandsworth?

If the hearing is listed at Wandsworth, that is the court currently dealing with the case, so Brentford is unlikely to be the right place to ask. The two courts do not appear to operate as one combined court office, so there is no good reason to assume Brentford would have access to the up-to-date listing position, trial fee status, or any order made by Wandsworth.

If you are going to try in person, it should therefore be Wandsworth rather than Brentford. But unless Wandsworth is convenient, I would not make a special trip just for that. Keep preparing on the basis that the hearing is going ahead, and try to get confirmation from Wandsworth by phone or email.

Until the court confirms that the claim has been struck out or the hearing vacated, assume it is still live.

[Barbudaprince]

According to Wandsworth Court the hearing fee has been paid so the hearing is going ahead on the 29th April 2026 at 10am.

Obviously I need to know my skeleton argument and witness statement back to front front to back and need copies of the case law (?) but any further advice on how to represent myself - this will be my first time in this situation.

I also note you've advised previously the following:


An important point for the day of the hearing. There is one procedural issue you should be prepared to raise at the very beginning of the hearing before the case itself begins. This concerns the rights of audience of the person who may appear on behalf of the claimant.

In the covering letter to the claimant’s bundle, BW Legal state clearly: “Please note that our client will be represented by an advocate, who will be in attendance on our client’s behalf.” This wording is significant. It clearly states that BW Legal will not be sending one of their own solicitors or employees, but instead will instruct a third-party advocacy agent to attend the hearing on their behalf.

This is the common model used by bulk litigation firms. The solicitor on record conducts the litigation from their office and then instructs an advocacy agency to send a freelance advocate to the hearing. That advocate usually has had no involvement in the litigation and has simply received a brief shortly before the hearing.

This exact situation was considered in the case of VCS v Langley [2026] EWCC 1. In that case the court examined whether a freelance “solicitor’s agent” instructed through an advocacy agency had a right of audience. The court held that such an advocate does not automatically have that right.

The key finding in Langley was that advocacy alone does not amount to assisting in the conduct of litigation. If the person attending the hearing has done nothing in the case other than receive a brief and appear to speak at the hearing, they are not assisting in the conduct of litigation and therefore cannot qualify as an “exempt person” under the Legal Services Act 2007.

Because of this, you should be ready to raise the issue when the case is called on.

When the judge introduces the case, the claimant’s representative will normally introduce themselves. It will typically be something like: “I appear for the claimant as an advocate instructed by BW Legal” or “I am instructed by BW Legal through an advocacy agency.”

Once they have identified themselves, politely ask the judge if you may raise a preliminary matter before the hearing begins.

Explain that BW Legal’s letter states that an “advocate” will attend on the claimant’s behalf, and therefore you would like to clarify whether the individual present has rights of audience.

You should then ask two simple questions of the advocate.

First, ask whether they are employed by BW Legal, the solicitors on record for the claimant.

Second, ask whether they have taken any step in the conduct of the litigation, such as preparing documents, corresponding with the parties, or otherwise dealing with the case prior to today’s hearing.

In most cases the answer will be that they are a freelance advocate (sometimes referred to as a "solicitors agent") instructed by an advocacy agency and that they have had no involvement in the litigation before attending the hearing.

If that is the case, you can explain to the judge that this appears to be the same arrangement considered in Vehicle Control Services v Langley. In that case the court held that an advocate who has taken no part in the conduct of the litigation and has been instructed on an advocacy-only basis is not assisting in the conduct of litigation. The court therefore concluded that such an advocate does not qualify as an exempt person and has no automatic right of audience.

You can then respectfully invite the court to determine whether the claimant’s representative has any right of audience before the hearing proceeds.

The judge has discretion in how to deal with this. The judge may conclude that the advocate does not have rights of audience and require the claimant to proceed without them. The judge may exercise discretion and allow them to appear anyway. Alternatively, the judge may decide that the claimant cannot proceed if they are not properly represented.

The important point is that this issue must be raised before the substantive hearing begins. Once the case has started it becomes much harder to challenge the representative’s right to appear.

Do not argue the point aggressively. Simply raise it as a procedural issue based on the wording of BW Legal’s own letter and the reasoning in Langley, and then allow the judge to decide how to deal with it. Make sure you have copies of the transcript for both the judge and the advocate that you can provide at the time

[b789]

@Barbudaprince

Good, that confirms it is going ahead, so now it is just about being prepared rather than worrying about procedure.

First, completely drop the rights of audience point. Do not raise it at the hearing. The position has shifted following the Court of Appeal overturning Mazur last week, so it is no longer something worth pursuing. Even before that, it was always a side issue. Your focus needs to be entirely on the substance of your defence, not who turns up for BW Legal.

More generally, do not overthink this. Small claims hearings are not like what people imagine from TV or higher courts. Judges deal with litigants in person all the time. They will already know you are not legally trained and that this is likely your first time. Most judges are actually quite helpful in terms of explaining what is happening and guiding the structure of the hearing. You are not expected to know procedural rules inside out.

What you are expected to know is your case. So your preparation should be very simple and focused.

Read your witness statement, your skeleton argument, and the claimant’s witness statement a few times so that you are comfortable with them. You do not need to memorise everything word for word, but you do need to know the key points and where they are in the bundle.

Have your documents organised so you can find things instantly. Make sure your bundle and the claimant’s bundle are easy to navigate. Put tabs or markers on the important sections such as your witness statement, your skeleton, the Particulars of Claim, the key photos, and anything you rely on. The hearing becomes much easier if you can go straight to the right page if/when asked.

Take printed copies of the key authorities you may actually need, but keep it tight. In your case that means:

• Scott Brennan v Premier Parking Solutions (2023) [H6DP632H]
  
• Liberty Homes (Kent) Limited v Rajakanthan & Others [2022] EWHC 2201 (TCC)
  
• Vehicle Control Services v Ian Mark Edward (2023) [H0KF6C9C]
  

There is no need to take a large pile of authorities beyond those. Make sure the relevant paragraphs in each transcript are clearly marked so that, if necessary, you can take the judge straight to the passage you rely on without fumbling through pages.

On the day, just be calm and straightforward. You will normally be shown into the room and the judge will already be there. Address them simply as “Judge”. There is no need for anything more formal than that.

When it comes to speaking, do not try to read your whole witness statement out. The judge will have read it. Use your skeleton as your guide and focus on the main reasons why the claim should fail. Keep it clear and structured.

If BW Legal’s advocate says something you disagree with, make a note and deal with it when it is your turn. Do not feel the need to interrupt unless something genuinely needs correcting immediately.

If the judge asks you a question, answer it directly where you can. If you need a moment to find something, say so. If the answer is in the bundle, point to the page.

The one point to be careful about is driver identity. In a case such as this, where the claimant is attempting to rely on PoFA to pursue the registered keeper, and the driver has not been identified, it would be unfair for the court to expect you to fill that gap in the claimant’s case. The burden of proof remains on the claimant throughout. So if the judge were to ask directly who was driving, you do not need to assist the claimant by answering that question for them. You can respond politely along the lines that the claimant has chosen to pursue the keeper and rely on PoFA, the driver has not been identified, and you do not intend to make the claimant’s case for them. In simple terms, you are not required to assist the claimant in proving an essential element of their case.

The key thing is to stay focused on your strongest points. You do not need to win every argument. You just need to show the judge clearly why the claimant has not established their case.

Finally, try not to worry about it. This is a small claims hearing, not a high court trial. The judge is not expecting perfection. They are expecting a clear, honest explanation of your case, and you are already in a strong position if you know your documents and your main arguments.

If you go in organised and stick to your key points, you will be absolutely fine. Also, try to see this for what it is. It is a genuinely useful life experience, not something to be afraid of. You are dealing with the only truly independent arbiter in this process — a judge — and you will likely come out of it far more confident and informed regardless of the outcome.

[Barbudaprince]

In court hearing right now apparently a detailed particulars of claim was issued by the claimant which I did not receive. Judge not happy that case would be heard appropriately (sorry paraphrasing)

So I think he is making an order for a detailed particulars of claim to be issued to me and the court. Apparently there may have been some confusion on the claimants behalf as case was supposed to be held at Brentford and now at Wandsworth.

Are they allowed to be given more time to send a detailed particulars of claim.

Quick reply  appreciated.

[b789]

@Barbudaprince, yes, they are allowed to be given more time.

What is happening is case management. If the judge considers that you have not been properly served with detailed particulars, or that the case cannot be fairly heard on the current pleadings, the court has wide discretion to give the claimant an opportunity to correct that.

This is quite common where the judge thinks the case would be procedurally unfair to proceed today.

The key points for you:

1. The judge is not deciding the merits yet. They are effectively pausing the case to ensure both sides are on equal footing.
   
2. The claimant being given time to file and serve proper Particulars does not mean they are “winning” anything. It just means the court wants a properly pleaded case before determining it.
   
3. What matters now is the order the judge makes. Listen carefully (or ask for clarification) on:
   
4. The deadline for the claimant to serve the detailed Particulars on you and the court.
   
5. Whether you are given permission to file an amended defence or further witness statement in response.
   
6. Whether the hearing is adjourned and relisted.
   

If possible, ask the judge to confirm that once the new Particulars are served, you will have an opportunity to respond. That is important.

This is not unusual, and it is not something to panic about. It is actually the judge recognising that the case was not properly set up to be heard today.

[Barbudaprince]

The judge confirmed what you said. 

It's been rescheduled and a new order made. Date to be confirmed. 

I did raise the point to him to say is it not to procedural priority that the claiman did not serve the documents they're relying on to the correct parties. He replied no and said there is an acknowledgement in the order this issue will affect costs for both parties. I also mentioned does it not now impact upon my defense now the claimant has more time to prepare and is that not going to be considered and he replied and said the same answer as above. He also said I may factor this issue into my defense going forward.

It was a bit of a s*** show at the start because the first thing the judge said was have you served the detailed particular claims on the court and their legal rep fluffed around trying to find the proof of service. Anyways interesting experience
 He has also said that he's going to allow two and a half hours for the hearing up from one and a half hours today because there is lots of case or being referred to. You also said due to the confusion with the service of documents he is putting on the order that it will be held at ones with county court and all documents must be served in a bundle by the claimant including my defence with all of their documents they are relying on. Will share the order once I have received it because there was loads of detail some of which I didn't understand. 

Thanks,

[b789]

That is actually a decent outcome. Hopefully you found that it is not as scary as most people think it is going to be.

What the judge has done is prioritise a fair hearing over a technically defective one. If he had proceeded today knowing you hadn’t been properly served with the case you had to meet, that would itself have been unfair and open to challenge. So from his perspective, adjournment and proper pleading is the safer course.

The important part is that this is not a free pass for the claimant. The judge has already flagged that their failure on service may impact costs. That is the lever you now have. If their conduct has caused wasted time, unnecessary preparation, and a vacated hearing, you can raise that at the next hearing and seek your costs of today.

You also have a strategic advantage now. When the detailed Particulars are served, you get to see their full case properly set out. That allows you to tighten your position, refine your defence if needed, and target any new weaknesses. Many of these claims actually become more exposed once they are forced to plead them properly.

So the position now is:

• they have been required to properly plead their case;
  
• you will have an opportunity to respond to that properly;
  
• their procedural failure is on record and may have cost consequences.
  

It may feel like a setback, but it is more accurate to see it as the case being reset onto a procedurally correct footing, with the claimant already on the back foot in terms of conduct.

The judge has not brushed the service issue aside. He has adjourned because the case was not in a proper state to be heard, acknowledged that the service failure may affect costs, allowed you to factor it into your defence going forward, and increased the hearing time. That is all useful.

The important thing now is not to guess the next steps. Wait for the written order, then check:

1. the claimant’s deadline for serving the detailed Particulars of Claim;
   
2. your deadline for any amended defence or further evidence;
   
3. who must prepare and serve the final bundle;
   
4. the new hearing court and any hearing date;
   
5. whether the order says costs are reserved or mentions costs in the case.
   

The fact the claimant’s rep struggled over proof of service is very useful. Make a short note now while it is fresh: what the judge asked, what the rep said, and the fact they could not clearly show service. That also may matter later on costs or procedural fairness.