Compliance N349
Validation Checks by Instafill.ai
1
Claim Number Format and Consistency Across Sections
Validates that the claim number entered in the court header section matches the claim number entered in the 'Order and claim details' section, and that both conform to the standard UK court claim number format (e.g., A1BC2345 or a numeric sequence). Discrepancies between the two claim number fields could indicate a clerical error or that the application references the wrong case. If the claim numbers do not match or are improperly formatted, the application may be rejected or processed against the wrong judgment.
2
Judgment Order Date is Valid and Not in the Future
Checks that the day, month, and year fields for the date the judgment or order was given combine to form a valid calendar date (e.g., not 31 February or 00/00/0000) and that the resulting date is not in the future. A future-dated judgment would be legally impossible and would indicate a data entry error. The year field must also be a plausible four-digit year when combined with the '20' prefix, falling within a reasonable historical range.
3
Judgment Amount and Amount Now Due Are Positive and Logically Consistent
Validates that both the original judgment amount (including costs and interest) and the amount now due are positive numeric values greater than zero, and that the amount now due does not exceed the original judgment amount unless further interest has been explicitly indicated. If the amount now due is greater than the original judgment amount without the further interest checkbox being selected, this represents a logical inconsistency that could undermine the application. Both fields must be present and formatted as valid currency amounts in pounds sterling.
4
Instalment Fields Completeness and Mutual Exclusivity
Ensures that exactly one of the two instalment options is selected: either the 'judgment did not provide for payment by instalments' checkbox is checked, or the instalment amount fields (amount of instalments fallen due and unpaid) are completed with a valid positive monetary value. If the instalment option is selected, the corresponding monetary amount must be provided and must not exceed the amount now due. Selecting both options simultaneously or leaving both blank creates an ambiguous and incomplete application.
5
Third Party Identification: Bank/Building Society vs. Non-Bank Mutual Exclusivity
Validates that the form clearly identifies the third party as either a bank or building society (with the corresponding bank-specific fields completed) or as a non-bank/building society entity (with the alternative name and England and Wales address fields completed), but not both simultaneously. Each path requires its own mandatory fields: the bank path requires at minimum the institution name and head office address, while the non-bank path requires the third party's name and address in England and Wales. Failure to clearly distinguish the type of third party will prevent the court from properly serving the interim order.
6
Bank Account Number and Sort Code Consistency
Checks that if the account number 'not known' checkbox is unchecked, a valid account number is provided in the adjacent field, and similarly that if the sort code 'not known' checkbox is unchecked, a valid sort code in the standard UK format (XX-XX-XX or six consecutive digits) is entered. Providing a sort code without an account number, or vice versa, reduces the utility of the information and may prevent the bank from identifying the correct account. Both fields must be internally consistent with their respective 'not known' checkbox states.
7
Branch Information Completeness When Branch is Known
Validates that when the 'branch known' option is selected (i.e., the 'branch not known' checkbox is not checked), both the branch name and the branch address fields are populated with non-empty values. Selecting that the branch is known but failing to provide the branch name or address renders the selection meaningless and may delay service of the order on the correct branch. The branch address should include sufficient detail (street and town/city at minimum) to identify the specific branch location.
8
Judgment Debtor Address and Postcode Format Validation
Ensures that the judgment debtor's address field is not left blank and that the postcode field conforms to the standard UK postcode format (e.g., SW1A 1AA or EC1A 1BB), including the correct use of letters and numbers in the appropriate positions. An incomplete or incorrectly formatted postcode may cause issues with court correspondence and service of documents. The address must be within a jurisdiction recognisable for the purposes of the application.
9
Other Persons' Interests: Mutual Exclusivity and Completeness of Details
Validates that exactly one of the two 'Other persons' interests' options is selected — either 'None' or 'The following' — and that if 'The following' is selected, at least one person's name, address, and details of their claim are provided in the corresponding fields. Selecting 'The following' without supplying any names or claim details leaves the section incomplete and may affect how the court handles competing claims to the funds. Selecting both 'None' and 'The following' simultaneously is a logical contradiction that must be flagged.
10
Sources and Grounds of Information Field Must Not Be Empty
Checks that the 'Sources and grounds of information' field (Section 5) contains a substantive, non-blank entry explaining why the judgment creditor believes the information in Sections 3 and 4 is correct. This field is critical because it provides the evidential basis for the application and supports the Statement of Truth. An empty or placeholder entry (e.g., a single space or generic text) should be flagged, as the court requires genuine grounds to be stated to assess the credibility of the application.
11
Previous Applications Mutual Exclusivity and Detail Completeness
Ensures that exactly one of the two 'Other applications' options is selected — either 'no other applications' or 'already made the following application(s)' — and that if the latter is selected, the details of the previous application(s), the third party's name, address, and postcode are all completed. Selecting that previous applications have been made without providing their details prevents the court from assessing whether a further order is appropriate. Both options being selected simultaneously is a logical error that must be rejected.
12
Statement of Truth Signatory Role Selection and Consistency
Validates that exactly one signatory role is selected from the three available options (Judgment creditor, Litigation friend, or Judgment creditor's legal representative), and that the selection is consistent with other fields completed on the form. If 'Judgment creditor's legal representative' is selected, the firm name and position/office fields must also be completed. If 'Litigation friend' is selected, this implies the judgment creditor is a child or patient, which should be consistent with any other contextual information provided on the form.
13
Statement of Truth Date is Valid and Not in the Future
Checks that the day, month, and year fields for the Statement of Truth signature date combine to form a valid calendar date and that the date is not in the future, as a future-dated signature would be legally invalid. The signature date should also not predate the judgment or order date, since an application cannot logically be signed before the underlying judgment exists. An invalid or missing signature date may render the Statement of Truth defective and expose the applicant to procedural challenges.
14
Full Name of Signatory is Provided and Not a Placeholder
Validates that the 'Full name' field in the Statement of Truth section is populated with a non-empty string that appears to represent a genuine personal name (i.e., contains at least two words and does not consist solely of numbers, special characters, or generic placeholder text). The full name is required to identify the individual who is verifying the truth of the application and who may be subject to contempt of court proceedings if the statement is false. An absent or clearly invalid name entry must be flagged as an error.
15
Contact Address for Documents: Mandatory Fields Completeness and Postcode Format
Ensures that the judgment creditor's or legal representative's address for service of documents includes at minimum the building and street field, the town or city field, and a correctly formatted UK postcode, as these are essential for the court to send documents to the correct location. The postcode must conform to the standard UK postcode format and must not be left blank. If a phone number or email address is provided in the optional fields, they should conform to standard UK phone number formats and valid email address syntax respectively.
16
Claimant, Defendant, and Judgment Debtor Name Consistency
Validates that the name entered as the judgment debtor in Section 1 corresponds to either the claimant or the defendant named in the parties section at the top of the form, consistent with the bracketed selection of '[claimant]' or '[defendant]' as the judgment debtor in the application preamble. A mismatch between the judgment debtor's name and the named parties would suggest an error in identifying the correct party against whom the order is sought. This cross-field consistency check is important to ensure the application correctly identifies all parties in their respective roles.