To set aside or not? CCJ

ValHaller

Dovah_diva wrote: »

Except that this is an area I am knowledgeable in, as it is my line of work - and not just opinion.

But even then you got it wrong in the first place and are effectively conceding my point: OP makes it clear in the opening post that he had been updating with his correspondence address multiple times.

Dovah_diva wrote: »

That does change things a bit. When we are in the process of referring to court, we always check the address on the Land Reg and also whatever correspondance we've received from the leaseholder. Ultimately, the address we have on the Land Reg takes precedence. For example, if we have a correspodance address on our systems but are receiving no responses from the leaseholder and have the property address on Land Reg, we then write to and ultimately refer using the Land reg address. So what address is on Land Reg?

The HA are very likely to argue that they did not receive the COA requests you made. I know that when I have used the on-line forms of my HA they have gone ignored - unfortunately though, I have no evidence I even sent it!

Do you have any evidence of the requests you've made?

Dovah_diva

ValHaller wrote: »

But even then you got it wrong in the first place and are effectively conceding my point: OP makes it clear in the opening post that he had been updating with his correspondence address multiple times.

Not at all - I didn't have all the information in the first instance - and I have said, repeatedly, that simply claiming to have lodged a change of address form will not be sufficient to overturn the CCJ.

Leasehold law demands that Freeholders send notices etc, to either the property address or a correspondence address. Most, if not all, LA's will also double check what address is on the Land Reg. If the HA have not received the new change of address and the Land Reg shows the address that the HA did serve the papers to, then without evidence that they wrote to change the address, the OP is going to struggle to get the CCJ overturned.

Ultimately, the burden of proof will be on the OP and therefore, s/he should take advice from LEASE.

You seem determined to argue and score points, but this is not helping the OP. They should get impartial advice before deciding on a course of action.

ValHaller

Dovah_diva wrote: »

Not at all - I didn't have all the information in the first instance - and I have said, repeatedly, that simply claiming to have lodged a change of address form will not be sufficient to overturn the CCJ.

It was all in the opening post

Dovah_diva wrote: »

You seem determined to argue and score points, but this is not helping the OP. They should get impartial advice before deciding on a course of action.

You started out by pouring cold water on the very idea of a set aside. and you start from the perspective that you are a professional in the industry. You seem to have looked at the case with your office glasses and addressed the matter as though you were trying to deter one of your customers from a set aside. If you think OP should take impartial advice, you are not it.

Dovah_diva

ValHaller wrote: »

It was all in the opening post


You started out by pouring cold water on the very idea of a set aside. and you start from the perspective that you are a professional in the industry. You seem to have looked at the case with your office glasses and addressed the matter as though you were trying to deter one of your customers from a set aside. If you think OP should take impartial advice, you are not it.

No, it was not. Indeed, we've still not been offered all the relevant information.

Fact is, trying to get a CCJ for non payment of service charges set aside on the basis that they (the OP) wrote and requested a change of address is not going to work. There are other factors that are important - like the address on the Land Registry document. At least I have offered the OP some help.

I am not prepared to argue with you any longer. Clearly it really matters that you have the last word - so please, be my guest.

rizla_king

If the OP gave them a new address and a claim form was sent to the old when it was clear to them that it was the wrong address for service, then that is grounds for a set aside as it is.

As in, if I had received a legitimate demand or claim to the correct address then I would have paid it.

Address on the the land registry mean jack !!!! on litigation , if a claim against the person then it must be served to their last known addess.

Thrugelmir

rizla_king wrote: »

If the OP gave them a new address and a claim form was sent to the old when it was clear to them that it was the wrong address for service, then that is grounds for a set aside as it is.

I would advise that a change of address should be sent by letter i.e. in a signed form. So as to provide tangible proof of the change. Many organisations will not change important details with this basic evidence to retain on their files.

Joe_Bloggs

Is it ethical or legal to sublet a housing association property ? Even with permission is it an an appropriate path forward to allow the fortunate today to become Housing Association 'Sub Landlords' when they move on and up into other properties.
J_B.
I could be wrong , tell me if I am.

Dovah_diva

Joe_Bloggs wrote: »

Is it ethical or legal to sublet a housing association property ? Even with permission is it an an appropriate path forward to allow the fortunate today to become Housing Association 'Sub Landlords' when they move on and up into other properties.
J_B.
I could be wrong , tell me if I am.

It is perfectly legal. Ethical? Well that is up for debate. In some cases, I despair when we sell social housing homes for a fraction of their price, only for them to be immediately sub let back to the council for a handsome profit (for the leaseholder). On the other hand, if a person has bought the leasehold property as a second or third generation (and therefore is not the person that bought it under the right to buy) then they can do what they like with it. Some of the flats in high rise blocks are unmortgagable, so are only sold to buy to let landlords as they are often the only ones that can afford them without a mortgage.

leachyd

Lolling out loud at dovah here.

The OP hasnt been back to post since, but I also found a 4 year old CCJ on my file that i didnt know about when i was planning to apply for a mortgage. It was £100 to dvla for not declaring a vehicle sorn.

Contrary to what dovah believes, it is possible to have a CCJ set aside for non receipt of the initial demands and more importantly, the initial claim form. These should both have been served to your most recent address, of which it is your responsibility to keep the creditor up to date. Beyond giving them your address via multiple media, there isnt much more you can do to to achieve this. That their internal processes have quite clearly failed is not your fault, and it is of my opinion that you have a good chance of the rulling being set aside. That has the effect of cancelling it and taking the rulling back to a state where it didnt even happen, and as youve paid up will no longer stand.

In my case I didnt update the DVLA of my adress change for a scrapped car but still applied for set aside as i hadnt received the paperwork. I went to the court alone for the "hearing" (or whatever its actually called), gave my reason for requesting set aside, and stating that i was willing to pay the debt, the magistrate asked the DVLA rep if they had objections to the application, they didnt (Why should they if they get their money in the end) and i was given 30 days to pay the debt off before the CCJ was reinstated. I paid, and it left my file a month later.

Civil law is a lot more pragmatic and far less burdonsome than criminal law (in my opinion) and I'd hope that if you applied for set aside, you'd achieve a similar result (thought the fact that youve already settled might have an impact, im not sure). t

Regarding your predicament, the CCJ will "fall off" the credit report after 6 years regardless of whether they get to link your address as a result of a set aside application. I see four options.

Apply for a mortgage now, without doing anything about the CCJ
Apply to set the CCJ aside, win, apply for a mortgage now
Apply to set the CCJ aside, lose, apply for a mortgage in Jan 2015
Wait, apply for a mortage in Jan 2015

The last one is irrelevent really, so its time to either apply for a mortgage or set aside. Id probably apply for set aside, but i guess theres a slight risk given that house prices are unlikely to crash!

ValHaller

Dovah_diva wrote: »

No, it was not. Indeed, we've still not been offered all the relevant information.

Fact is, trying to get a CCJ for non payment of service charges set aside on the basis that they (the OP) wrote and requested a change of address is not going to work. There are other factors that are important - like the address on the Land Registry document. At least I have offered the OP some help.

I am not prepared to argue with you any longer. Clearly it really matters that you have the last word - so please, be my guest.

What you are not getting is that while the substance of the claim against OP is entirely based on leasehold law, the process of the claim is not under leasehold law - it is under civil procedure rules. So the set aside is dictated by CPR's and not by arguments based on leasehold law. In this case, it appears that CPR's have not been followed and the Housing Association have either wilfully or neglectfully chose to take the easiest course to landing a CCJ on OP without regard for the CPR way which is to address correspondence to last known address.

Hopefully you will see this with your office glasses on and be better equipped to do your job.