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

[b789]

The issue with transcript length is straightforward and commonly dealt with in small-claims bundles.

Many courts will only accept email attachments where the total bundle is 50 A4 pages or fewer. That limit is not a rule of law but a practical restriction used by many courts to manage email systems. Because of this, it is neither necessary nor expected that parties include entire transcripts of authorities where only a few passages are relied upon

When a witness statement refers to case law, the exhibit does not need to contain the full transcript. It is entirely acceptable to include only the specific pages containing the paragraphs relied upon. Judges in small-claims hearings do not expect to read dozens of pages of authority; they only need to see the passages that are actually being cited

For example, if the witness statement refers to particular paragraphs from a judgment such as Scott Brennan v Premier Parking Solutions (2023) [H6DP632H], Vehicle Control Services v Ian Mark Edward (2023) [H0KF6C9C], or Liberty Homes (Kent) Limited v Rajakanthan & Others [2022] EWHC 2201 (TCC), then the exhibit should simply include the page or pages containing those paragraphs, not the entire transcript.

This keeps the bundle concise and ensures it remains within the court’s email limits while still providing the judge with the exact passages relied upon.

The exhibits should be listed in a simple index and referred to consistently within the witness statement. For example:

Exhibit Index

XX-01 Photographs of site signage
XX-02 Photographs showing missing or obscured signage at the material time
XX-03 Extract from Scott Brennan v Premier Parking Solutions (2023) [H6DP632H] – relevant pages relied upon
XX-04 Extract from Vehicle Control Services v Ian Mark Edward (2023) [H0KF6C9C] – relevant pages relied upon
XX-05 Extract from Liberty Homes (Kent) Limited v Rajakanthan & Others [2022] EWHC 2201 (TCC) – relevant paragraphs relied upon
XX-06 Tenancy agreement – relevant pages relied upon
XX-07 Claimant’s contract or authority document relied upon

The bundle itself should then be ordered as follows:

1. Witness Statement
2. Exhibit Index
3. Exhibit XX-01
4. Exhibit XX-02
5. Exhibit XX-03
6. Exhibit XX-04
7. Exhibit XX-05
8. Exhibit XX-06
9. Exhibit XX-07

Only the relevant pages of any transcript need to be included. The case name and paragraph numbers should remain visible so the judge can see the authority being relied upon.

Finally, remember to replace the “XX” prefix with your own initials, so the exhibits correspond properly with the identifier used in your witness statement.

Edited to add:

Another option, if necessary, is to print the full bundle and hand-deliver it to the court office. Courts will usually accept a physical bundle even where email limits are restrictive.

The claimant’s solicitors do not face the same constraints. The bundle can simply be emailed to them in full, irrespective of page count.

[b789]

@Barbudaprince, I forgot to mention that producing a short skeleton argument at this stage is sensible. It helps the judge quickly understand the structure of the defence and directs them to the relevant parts of the bundle. It does not need to be long. In small claims matters, judges generally prefer something concise that simply identifies the issues and points them to the evidence.

The skeleton should sit at the very front of the bundle, before the witness statement. It should usually be no more than two or three pages and should refer to the exhibits using the same numbering system already used (for example XX-01, XX-02 etc).

A typical structure would be as follows.

SKELETON ARGUMENT OF THE DEFENDANT

1. This skeleton argument is provided to assist the Court by summarising the principal issues arising from the parties’ evidence and directing the Court to the relevant parts of the bundle.

2. The Defendant relies upon the Witness Statement and exhibits contained within the bundle and does not repeat that evidence here. This skeleton simply identifies the key issues.

Issue 1: Defective Particulars of Claim

3. The Particulars of Claim fail to comply with CPR 16.4 and Practice Direction 16 because they do not identify the contractual terms relied upon, the alleged breach, or how the sum claimed is calculated.

4. This procedural deficiency is addressed in paragraphs [X–X] of the Defendant’s Witness Statement.

5. The Defendant relies in particular on the reasoning in Liberty Homes (Kent) Limited v Rajakanthan & Others [2022] EWHC 2201 (TCC), exhibited at XX-05.

Issue 2: Failure to establish a “period of parking”

6. The Claimant’s case relies upon images of a vehicle but fails to specify any identifiable period of parking.

7. The requirement to specify a period of parking is addressed in Scott Brennan v Premier Parking Solutions (2023) [H6DP632H], relevant pages exhibited at XX-03.

Issue 3: Driver identity

8. The Claimant has produced no evidence identifying the driver.

9. The court in Vehicle Control Services v Ian Mark Edward (2023) [H0KF6C9C] confirmed that driver identity cannot simply be inferred without evidence. Relevant extracts appear at XX-04.

Issue 4: Signage and contractual offer

10. The Defendant has reviewed the signage relied upon by the Claimant.

11. The signage does not create any contractual offer capable of acceptance. Photographs of the signage appear at XX-01 and XX-02.

Conclusion

12. The Claimant has failed to establish a contractual cause of action and has not produced evidence capable of supporting the claim.

13. The Defendant therefore respectfully invites the Court to dismiss the claim.

This type of document helps the judge orient themselves quickly when reviewing the bundle. It should be placed at the front of the PDF so that when the judge opens the bundle, the structure of the case is immediately clear.

Just make sure that it is structured in the same sequence as the WS so as to flow correctly. Also, remember the court header has to be on the first page.

[Barbudaprince]

hi @b789 is it defo paragraph 35 of the liberty homes case?? is it not paragraph 144 on page 31.?

[b789]

Paragraphs 35–37 — explain what must be pleaded in a contractual claim.
Paragraph 144 — confirms that failure to plead those matters cannot later be remedied through evidence.

[Barbudaprince]

Paragraphs 35–37 — explain what must be pleaded in a contractual claim.
Paragraph 144 — confirms that failure to plead those matters cannot later be remedied through evidence.

oops - i changed it to para 144. sent now. :/

[b789]

If you're pressed for time to get your bundle ready, in practice, no judge is likely to penalise you for a delay of one working day in these circumstances, particularly where the delay was caused by the claimant’s late service of their bundle.

Under CPR 27.4 and the standard small claims directions, parties are normally required to file and serve witness statements and documents by the specified deadline. However, the small claims track is intended to be flexible and the court retains broad case management discretion. Judges regularly allow evidence that is served slightly late where there is a reasonable explanation.

The cause of the delay is important. As the claimant only served a physical bundle the day before the deadline, that significantly limits your ability to properly review the material and prepare your own bundle in response. A judge is far more likely to regard a short delay as reasonable where the defendant needed time to examine evidence that arrived at the last minute.

The length of the delay is also relevant. Moving from Friday 6 March at 4pm to Monday 9 March at 4pm is effectively one working day. Courts routinely tolerate delays of this length provided the other party is not prejudiced.

The sensible approach is to serve the bundle as soon as it is ready rather than delaying unnecessarily. When sending it, include a short covering note explaining that the bundle could not be finalised by the original deadline because the claimant’s evidence bundle was only received the day before. This demonstrates transparency and shows that the delay arose from circumstances outside your control.

In practical terms, the most likely outcome is that the judge admits the bundle without comment. Sometimes a judge may note the delay but still allow the evidence. It would be very unusual for the court to refuse to consider the material in circumstances where the claimant’s late service contributed to the situation.

The key point is that a short delay caused by the claimant serving their evidence late is not something that normally counts against a litigant in person at a small claims hearing, provided the defendant acts promptly once the material has been reviewed.

[b789]

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.

[Barbudaprince]

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.

I note that my notice of allocation to the small claims track (hearing) states the hearing of the claim will take place at 10 am on the 29th April 2026 unless the claimant does by 4 pm on the 30th of March 2026 pay to the court the trial fee of £59 and file a probably completed application. Is there anyway I can check if this hearing is still going ahead i.e the claiming as satisfied the two requirements? Would it be by emailing the court? Thanks

[b789]

You can call the court. However, in the meantime, proceed under the assumption that is going ahead.

[Barbudaprince]

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?