CCJ set aside

nosferatu1001

If there were not particulars thent he claimant cannot get a default judgement, becauae there was no proper claim in the first place
This is hopefully obvious

IF they never sent PoC then the claim shoud be restarted, from scratch, with them paying a new filing fee - AIUI.

Fridge_Emptier

nosferatu1001 wrote: »

If there were not particulars thent he claimant cannot get a default judgement, becauae there was no proper claim in the first place
This is hopefully obvious

IF they never sent PoC then the claim shoud be restarted, from scratch, with them paying a new filing fee - AIUI.

Hmm, thanks.
So, is this a court mistake and that's why they have acted off their own back (if that is indeed the case)?
If that's all true then the claimant would be foolish to start again, knowing what I've already told them on the phone. I provided them with the VRN of my associate that had his fine cancelled - when we were both there in the same situation. They just failed to cancel mine.

nosferatu1001

If there were no PoC that is the claimants mistake, and the court should not have allowed a judgement to be entered.
Hence I imagine this is the court trying to sort this out as they compounded the Cs mistake.

Fridge_Emptier

nosferatu1001 wrote: »

If there were no PoC that is the claimants mistake, and the court should not have allowed a judgement to be entered.
Hence I imagine this is the court trying to sort this out as they compounded the Cs mistake.

Thanks again. Sounds quite likely, as you have put it.
Would perhaps explain the delay in me hearing anything for nearly 2 weeks.
Would the court then reverse the CCJ and the claimant be invited to start it off again or would they just decide, between them, to set it aside and cease forever?
The realist in me says the claimant will be allowed another go at it but they may choose not to now, knowing what I have told them on the phone.
I'm no legal expert though (just in case you had any doubts :rotfl:)

Or - would the claimant be stupid enough to try to claw some losses out of me by having another go?

Coupon-mad

acted off their own back

No such phrase, sorry but that one grates with me; it means nothing in English. You mean:

acted off their own bat

It's an old sporting term that became a phrase and has nothing to do with backs.

Grammar pedantry over for now!

Would the court then reverse the CCJ and the claimant be invited to start it off again

Yes, probably. I don't think this latest CCBC intervention is caused by CEL's doing, more likely from your phone call ages ago.

This issue is caused by the MCOL system, which is not designed for cases where the claim form says 'POC to follow'. So CEL have moved to get a default judgment and the fact there was a claim form lodged meant the CCJ just got waved through, and it was only your concerned & alarmed phone call that made someone at the CCBC look more closely and spot a lack of POC.

Fridge_Emptier

acted off their own bat

I genuinely thank you for that. I feel the same when people say "one fall swoop".
I can only say that I was using the derivation that came from mishearing 'bat' :-)

The default judgment was more than two years ago, so I am guessing they missed their 14 days deadline to server the POC :-)

I'm intrigued to find out what happens next. I'm hoping it'll be soon as I would like to get some credit as soon as possible!

System

Watching this one as it may be the Courts acting on some of the possible recommendations about default CCJ.

Perhaps the first line on any set-aside could be the lack of POC as the main reason for a default CCJ to be set-aside AND the costs being paid by the Claimant. The issue would then be for a judge to look at the PoC and if deficient, it will be a rubber stamped win with costs for the defendant.

Fridge_Emptier

Initially, having not visited this forum first, in the absence of any even basic knowledge in this area, I still found it odd that CEL, in one phonecall, went from making me an offer to settle the debt and have it marked as Satisfied, to offering to set it aside uncontested. I thought they were being kind in the given circumstances. I now believe they realised their error and hoped I'd pay for it.
They obviously did not tell me the proper process hadn't been followed.

However, when I spoke to the central court they did not make any comments about this error either.
I feel I have been failed at all possible points in this saga - until I came here to this forum :-)
I just hope I receive confirmation from the court of it being struck out and I never hear any more about it.
I may ponder a counter then relating to costs, anxiety, etc.

Coupon-mad

IamEmanresu wrote: »

Watching this one as it may be the Courts acting on some of the possible recommendations about default CCJ.

Perhaps the first line on any set-aside could be the lack of POC as the main reason for a default CCJ to be set-aside AND the costs being paid by the Claimant. The issue would then be for a judge to look at the PoC and if deficient, it will be a rubber stamped win with costs for the defendant.

Good idea, let's remember to do that in future set aside Witness Statements.

:T

Fridge_Emptier

I!!!8217;ll update here when I hear more. I have an email CCBC need to respond to asking for more details of what is going on. There!!!8217;s also the DJ I was told to wait to hear from.

Thanks to you all again. It!!!8217;s made me feel less isolated in dealing with this and the speed of the responses is unbelievable :-)