CEL Ltd default CCJ! Pls help!

Quentin

Jeff123 wrote: »

. Can i write the above letter drafted by loads of children to the courts and pick it from where i had left.....

Yes .

Jeff123

Hello everyone.
I received a letter from the court today and it reads as follows:

Upon reading the court file
And upon reading a letter from the defendant received 22 November 2018
And upon claimant not having complied with the order of 13 November 2017 (drawn on 22 November 2017) nor applied for relief from sanctions
And upon defendant seeking damages and costs
And upon the court considering the behaviour of the claimant is not unreasonable for the purposes of CPR 27.14(2)(g) but that defendant is entitled expenses of attending the hearing on 13 November 2017

IT IS ORDERED THAT
1. Claim struck out.
2. Claimant shall pay defendant £32.50 by 4pm on 26 November 2018.
3. “The court has made this order of its own initiative. You are entitled to apply to have this order set aside, varied or stayed but must do so within 7 days from the day on which this order is served upon you or such other period as may be directed above”

Dated 8 November 2018

Jeff123

Is this a joke?
I don’t understand too much of the court/legal jargon but has the judge just let CEL get away with it? After all that they have done, wasting my time, stressing me out and costing me money? What about the set aside fee?
Please help, I need to fight them and I only have limited time to do so.
Looks like the legal system is here to penalise if you are a law abiding citizen. Justice is not served!

Umkomaas

I've not been back through the thread, but was the set aside granted on the basis of CEL issuing proceedings to a former address?

At the time of the issue of the original PCN, did the DVLA have written confirmation from you - for your V5C logbook, not driving licence - of your new address?

Jeff123

The judge had agreed to set aside the judgement at the hearing. He was satisfied that the PCN was sent to my former adress and that I hadn’t received it. I had the proof from Royal mail for mail redirection. The judge was happy with that and the CCJ was removed from my credit file.

Umkomaas

If the PPC did 'nothing wrong' in corresponding with the former address (any failure of the redirection is not their responsibility) then you might not get your £255 back (it can only come from the claimant if they are at some 'fault').

Quentin

Jeff123 wrote: »

The judge had agreed to set aside the judgement at the hearing. He was satisfied that the PCN was sent to my former adress and that I hadn’t received it. I had the proof from Royal mail for mail redirection. The judge was happy with that and the CCJ was removed from my credit file.

That explains why your set aside application succeeded


But doesn't mean the judge was saying you would have succeeded with your defence had you dealt with the claim at the time

Coupon-mad

When a court makes an order like that I believe either party that it affects, has seven days to object to the order.

I wonder if one of the solicitor posters here (Johnersh or LoadsofChildren123 who post their opinions only, not advice) would say if it is worth the OP responding and pointing out that the Defendant believes that the court has erred in considering the behaviour of the claimant is not unreasonable for the purposes of CPR 27.14(2)(g) and talking about all the procedural failures and the £255 cost an asking for further consideration to be given to that fee.

Or not?

Jeff123

What I am most disappointed about is the fact that the judge has actually allowed CEL to walk away without any consequences despite ignoring all court judgements issued to them for this case. No wonder they are still in business because they know the legal system will allow them to get away with anything.

Jeff123

If anybody can advise me on further action I would really appreciate.