Gladstone Solicitors/ Civil Enforcement LTD - CCJs at old address

CBoogie

I've just checked my credit file and have seen that Gladstone Solicitors has recently registered a CCJ at a previous address. I have not lived there for nearly 3 years. I did however receive in the post a two letter before claim. One addressed to the previous address and one to my current address but they were stapled and sent as one letter to my current address. I responded to Gladstone by letter (and got proof of postage) as there was no email address available and the claim ref no. was not recognised when entered into their website. This was in July, and did not hear anything since. So I am shocked now to see that they could do this? I've still got the two letters they sent me, but prior to this did not receive anything in the post regarding this fine. What can I do to remove the CCJ?

The same thing happened a year prior with Civil Enforcement Ltd, but again have been confused as to what to do as all documents were sent to a previous address. I changed my address, almost immediately with DVLA when I moved house in 2016, so how can these organisations still send court documents to my previous address when my most recent one is available. Both companies have been impossible to get hold of/ ignore any correspondence. These effect my credit massively, and especially being u25 I really do not want this impacting my life for the next 6 years.

Thanks in advance.

The_Deep

I moved house in 2016, so how can these organisations still send court documents to my previous address when my most recent one is available.

I do not know, but I think that you may be due for a large wedge in compensation from them. If I was in your position I would engage a solicitor specialising in getting rid of CCJs.

This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of alleged contracts for alleged parking offences, aided and abetted by a handful of low-rent solicitors.

Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, and others have already been named and shamed in the House of Commons as have Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (these two law firms take hundreds of these cases to court each week, hospital car parks and residential complex tickets have been especially mentioned. They lose most of them, and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P. for unprofessional conduct

The problem has become so widespread that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers. It has even been suggested that some of these companies have links with organised crime.

Watch the video of the Second Reading and committee stage in the House of Commons recently. MPs have a very low opinion of this industry.

http://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/2f0384f2-eba5-4fff-ab07-cf24b6a22918?in=12:49:41

https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2018-07-19/debates/2b90805c-bff8-4707-8bdc-b0bfae5a7ad5/Parking(CodeOfPractice)Bill(FirstSitting)

and complain in the most robust terms to your MP. With a fair wind they will be out of business by early in the New Year.

Quentin

CCJs do last on your record for 6 years unless you get them set aside, which is the only way to get them removed


Bear in mind now you have contacted them with your correct address you face the possibility they enforce the ccjs (eg with bailiffs/attachment of earnings etc)


So decide if you want to apply for set asides


You are required to apply promptly when you discover a CCJ on your record, but from what you say the first one was discovered a year ago


They won't be assisting you so forget trying to get them to correspond with you over these judgements


If you are prepared to pay them off, then consider set aside by consent (costs £100 court fee) or if you want to fight them then set aside applications cost £255


If you are successful in getting them set aside you may well have to defend new claims

The_Deep

Bear in mind now you have contacted them with your correct address ...

They had it before the CCJ was issued. They would be very unwise to start enforcement action in the circumstances.

Quentin

The_Deep wrote: »

Bear in mind now you have contacted them with your correct address ...

They had it before the CCJ was issued. They would be very unwise to start enforcement action in the circumstances.

That's irrelevant - they use the address they got at the time of the event, and hold court orders for their money!


To be sure there's no enforcement proceedings the OP needs court orders of his own - putting all enforcement proceedings on hold pending the outcome of his set aside applications

Coupon-mad

If you are prepared to pay them off, then consider set aside by consent (costs £100 court fee)

The OP won't get that from CEL; they cannot be trusted to do this, IMHO.

What can I do to remove the CCJ?

Get it set aside, like all the dozens of other CEL set aside threads here! Costs a £255 court fee (unless your income gets you help with court fees, check online) but that can be ordered to be refunded by CEL, when the Judge considers the case.

You need to read the 2nd post of NEWBIES PLEASE READ THESE FAQS FIRST and scroll down to the section there about SET ASIDES that are almost always against CEL, and are almost always granted in cases we help here. There is no reason to expect you would not get it set aside, and then can defend and win the entire case. It takes some work and reading on your part and a hearing (CEL are unlikely to attend) but you can simply copy what all the other posters in your shoes have done.

Easy enough once you grasp what the Judge wants to hear from you. And you can claim your costs for attending the hearings.

As well as reading about SET ASIDES in the NEWBIES thread 2nd post, please search the forum for CEL set aside draft order and read some threads about what to submit with your N244 and fee.

The_Deep

I am aware of that, but I repeat, enforcement action in these circumstances would be foolish in the extreme. They should concentrate on damage limitation, not digging themselves deeper into the hole they have created.

Did you actually read the opening post?

Coupon-mad

Yes, and the OP is not worried about enforcement action, per se, he/she wanted to know:

What can I do to remove the CCJ?

And it seems they have two, one from CEL and one from a Gladstones firm, and they need to get those set aside, as advised.

how can these organisations still send court documents to my previous address when my most recent one is available

Because the entire industry is based on a scam and they are notorious for this:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2016/12/government-announce-ccj-review-due-to.html

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-measures-to-protect-consumers-from-debt-claims

Complain to your MP but act quickly to start the ball rolling to set BOTH those trashy, scam CCJs aside.

Quentin

The_Deep wrote: »

I am aware of that, but I repeat, enforcement action in these circumstances would be foolish in the extreme. They should concentrate on damage limitation, not digging themselves deeper into the hole they have created.

Did you actually read the opening post?

The OP needs to be aware of the possibility of enforcement proceedings.


Should the claimant go down that route the defendant has to pay all costs involved


To date the claimant has the benefit of court orders on their side


The OP cannot assume no action will come just because the CCJs went to the wrong address


Until set aside they remain the trump cards!


Also the OP can't take your suggestion seriously that the Claimant will soon be out of business


That is just far too optimistic!


(I obviously read the OP - I replied to it!)

CBoogie

Thanks for your replies, I am in the process of drafting my WS and DO.

CEL issued the ccj last year July, would I still be able to apply for set aside?
Gladstone was in September.

Is there anything in particular that I would need (try) to obtain from both parties moving forward with this set aside?

CBoogie

Also, do I need to include anywhere that for Gladstone/CEL they knew of my correct address and decided to serve at the previous address anyway?