Parking ticket resulting in a CCJ

Coupon-mad

Just to add a timely update, bargepole has just assisted a couple who were wanting a set aside of two CCJs that they paid £255 x 2 to achieve. They got the set asides (so in your case you can see that stage is possible, even after paying the stupid thing by mistake) but the Defendants had not told bargepole that they had darn well PAID the stupid CCJ sums back in December, grrr!

bargepole's words from the case in question, heard today:

I assisted them with preparing their N244s, and Defence documents, and was hoping that today's hearing would result in the Judgments being set aside, and the claims being dismissed as well, on the basis that the Claimant had no realistic prospect of success.

But it turned out that they had spoken to their mortgage advisor in December, who had advised paying the Judgments, to avoid an adverse mark on their credit files. So they paid £264.96 and £265.21 respectively.

So the Judge said that while she was happy to make an order setting aside the Judgments, there was no procedure by which she could order the Claimant to repay the Judgment amounts. As the Judgments had been paid, there was no need for the Claimant to continue to pursue the claim, so there wouldn't be a substantive hearing. She said that you have to either pay or defend, you can't do both. She also refused to refund the set aside fees, for the same reasons.

So they are a combined total of over £1,000 down, for two PCNs which should never have been issued in the first place.

Sounds like they have a case against their mortgage adviser for the awful advice to pay off!!

They could have done the set asides, defended, claimed all their fees and costs back and not paid a penny. Ouch!

NEVER just pay off a stupid parking firm CCJ. You task here is now so much harder work and you WILL NOT get that money back, grrrrr.

People in your position should fill this Consultation about default CCJs in, NOW:

https://consult.justice.gov.uk/digital-communications/default-county-court-judgments-2/

Think it has just 48 hours left to fill it in so make sure you tell the Government about what happened to you, and what you want done about parking firms, specifically, who use and abuse the court service like this. Be really clear that their proposals do not nearly go far enough and give too much respect to parking firms, who are different because there is NO DEBT, no utility bill or CCA 1974 agreement in default. These are alleged 3 figure sums with NOTHING proven, just speculative trash from ex-clampers being given too much rope, and they should be treated differently from other industries and (for example) they should have to prove their cause of action/use paper forms, not MCOL.

Williams99

Hi,

I've seared the threads and can't find anything about the consent order.

Could you please send an example of the consent order and what i need to ask for.

At the current time Excel parking are not answering my emails and i'm still unable to get a copy of the original PCN. i've called and still had nothing back from them.

This will be my next port of call.

Thanks

Quentin

Set aside is covered in the Newbies FAQ thread #2

With links to related threads

Coupon-mad

Williams99 wrote: »

I've seared the threads and can't find anything about the consent order.

I don't have an example, but I know it's on PE threads when you search:

ParkingEye CCJ consent

...are you making the mistake of not changing the advanced search to SHOW POSTS?

Never search to 'show threads' which is horrible! Always search 'advanced' and SHOW POSTS.

waamo

Try this https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5782184

Williams99

Hi,

So i've finally received a copy of the original PCN from Excel parking.

The letter states the following " Liability for the parking charge notice ( PCN ) lies with the driver of the vehicle "

Does this mean with the new law that came in force in October 2012 that i do not need to disclose who was driving the vehicle and if they have no evidence of who was driving the PCN becomes invalid?

Thanks

nosferatu1001

1) You have never needed to disclose the identity of the driver
2) The PCN deosnt magiclaly become "invalid", they just dont have anyone they can hold liable - a difference there
3) You state back to them that, as you are the Keeper (and if you can say not the driver, state so) you therefore have no iliability in this matter - go chase the driver, who you woint / cant name. /