CCJ Set Aside

ShakeItOff

Another one bites the dust!

I am back home now after my court escapades. The hearing was listed for today at Exeter Crown Court. I was one of three cases that I spotted. One of the chaps was up against Euro Car Parks, who didn't attend, and he won his case. The second man was up against another one (can't remember who) - he came out before me, and hub said he didn't look very pleased.

Anyway... I won! :money: And not only that, but I asked for costs and got nearly all of them awarded! A huge, huge thank you to the regulars on here for sharing their experience, time and knowledge. I really couldn't have done this without you (especially you, Coupon Mad!).

In terms of what actually happened, my case was listed as part of a block hearing, and I went in about 40 minutes after my appointment time. BW Legal sent an advocate, who came up to me before the hearing and asked if I wanted to have a chat in a room to discuss a settlement. I thanked her for checking in with me, but unless that settlement was a zero, then I was happy to have the case heard. Unsurprisingly, the case was heard.

A lady joined us to observe the hearing. I'm not sure where she was from, but she seemed nice. The judge was very pleasant (when I have confirmation of who, I'll report back with the order) and seemed very knowledgeable about POFA. The judge asked the Claimant to sum up the case, but started picking through whether the NTK had actually been served as they (the Claimant) stated, given I had emailed 9 months later in response to a chasing letter (the first letter I'd actually received). There was some discussion around whether it was served, and the Claimant was asked if they had proof of postage (no). I was asked why one letter had come to me but the other hadn't. I couldn't explain it, but I did have a card up my sleeve in the form of the SAR (that some information hadn't been provided as the SAR, but had been provided in the bundle, which made me question their credibility).

From there, I was asked if I wanted to add anything before moving on. I added that even if the court was minded that the NTK was served correctly, in any event, it was non-compliant. The judge then asked the Claimant to go through para. 8 to understand how it was not compliant. One of the key things the judge was most interested in was para 8 (2)(f) - I should have been given 28 days in which to pay the charge, but they had allowed me 2 weeks.

The judge commented that my appeal had never actually been responded to, and that the response from PPS was simply a cut and paste that did not address my issues. I had been keen to make sure that, in my WS, I had pointed out their template nonsense.

I was asked who the driver was, and I explained who else had access to the vehicle. The judge asked how regularly others may drive it. I explained that others regularly had access, and with the best will in the world, the first I had heard about it was 9 months after the event, so I wasn't able to provide this information to the Claimant, even if I was obliged to under POFA (which I'm not). The judge asked if the Claimant had made any attempt to find the identity of the driver, but there was nothing provided in the bundle to suggest there was, and the advocate didn't know.

We didn't get into a discussion about contract formation or signage etc, and the NTK was completely non-compliant, and the judge dismissed the case. She asked what was held at my set aside hearing in respect of costs, and the Order for the set aside had stated "costs in the case". I had taken a schedule of costs with me, covering both the set aside hearing and today, as well at the set aside application fee. I provided the judge and the Claimant with one each. I had put in for unreasonableness costs too, but they weren't awarded. I was, however, complimented on my defence and witness statement. I was pretty chuffed with that, and that PPS now have to cough up to me .

At the end, the judge was chatting with the advocate, and they discussed success rates. The advocate that was acting for PPS in this case said she is only winning around 20% of the cases, and that most of them aren't succeeding because of POFA non-compliance.

However, this may not be the complete end. The PCN that they reckon was issued in 2014 (so the year before the one that went to court today was issued) has gone very quiet. I'm not sure whether they were hedging their bets with today or not, but they might try for this one now, especially as costs were awarded to me (fact of the matter is that the costs that were awarded to me today were much higher than the potential cost of the PCN in the first place). They issued their LBC, the deadline of which was in April, but no claim has been raised at this point. But, I am confident that if they did raise it, I would be able to defend it successfully.

So all in all, a good day! Thank you again, amazing forumites! :T

Redx

well done for winning against PPS and also for getting almost all of your costs too , a great win against these sc@mmers who fail POFA and then expect to win, even after serving papers to old addresses etc too

they deserve all they get , especially if they failed POFA after all the time they had to comply from 2012 to say 2014 or later - numpties

not surprised they are losing so many if this is an example of their failures

given that you already have this defence and WS etc to plagiarise , plus your court experience as well, it goes without saying that any more wont take up as much of your time and the unreasonableness factor comes into play if they try a second one against you (a rematch)

ShakeItOff

Thanks Redx! To be honest, the 2014 one is even worse, as I didn't know about this one until the SAR this year!

Coupon-mad

I had taken a schedule of costs with me, covering both the set aside hearing and today, as well at the set aside application fee. I provided the judge and the Claimant with one each. I had put in for unreasonableness costs too, but they weren't awarded. I was, however, complimented on my defence and witness statement. I was pretty chuffed with that, and that PPS now have to cough up to me (fact of the matter is that the costs that were awarded to me today were much higher than the potential cost of the PCN in the first place).

Hooray! VERY well done.

Another one bites the dust!

Great feeling, isn't it?!

However, this may not be the complete end. The PCN that they reckon was issued in 2014 (so the year before the one that went to court today was issued) has gone very quiet. I'm not sure whether they were hedging their bets with today or not, but they might try for this one now,

And you could try this line of attack:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/75910026#Comment_75910026

Nothing to lose. One day a Judge will do something outside the box.