LBBCC £7k

The_Deep

BrownTrout wrote: »

In addition you would be amazed that many debts are not enforced even once a CCJ has been obtained

Indeed, you cannot get money out of someone who has none.

Many years ago I took someone to court for £2,000 in unpaid rent. They had debts everywhere, council tax, income tax, utilities, corporation tax, v.a.t. They file for bankruptcy, I never received a penny.

Silly_UKPARK

Hi, Me again.
After doing my AOS and formulating my defence,


I missed the 1st April deadline due to myWife being Hospitalised (I also have 2 young children)


What should i now expect to happen! is there anything i can do to rectify or send to the courts?


Thankyou - please don't roast me

Umkomaas

Oh !!!!!!, a 7 GRAND court case against you and you failed to submit a defence on time? Whaaat? :doh:

What should i now expect to happen!

A Judgment in default for (at least) £7,000. Are you a past Lottery winner or something to allow that amount to go unchallenged (and £9k you’ve previously paid)?

is there anything i can do to rectify or send to the courts?

Urgently phone the court NOW, and explain the circumstances and ask if they will be able to expedite a ‘slightly’ late defence, especially given the size of the claim.

But I rather suspect the PPC might have already applied for enforcement and there’s a CCJ on your record.

Silly_UKPARK

[FONT=&quot]OK, I though as much[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Can anyone advise me on the bailiff process? [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]After going through the old paperwork knowing I had not received any notice that a bailiff was coming. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]I spotted that the ‘Writ of Control' had an incorrect Enforcement address. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot](it wasn’t my address but very similar – but somehow they came to the correct address) is this a known thing? Can I send him away next time?[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]So I did not receive notice or a chance to contact them prior to the doorstep visit.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]How or who do I contact now to make sure someone doesn't do the same again.[/FONT]

Coupon-mad

Stop right NOW and get a defence emailed to the CCBC, signed & dated.

Do this within the hour, NOW.

Use bargepole's concise defence from the NEWBIES thread this very minute. Make sure it's the one that includes the point about no landowner authority/no standing as the PPC doesn't own the site.

Tell us when you have printed, signed, dated and emailed it.

DO NOT PHONE THE CCBC FIRST - JUST EMAIL THE SIGNED/DATED DEFENCE AND THEN RING THEM URGENTLY TO GET THEM TO UPDATE MCOL!! YOU MIGHT BE LUCKY...

Or are you saying you have had a bailiff visit already this week?

I spotted that the ‘Writ of Control' had an incorrect Enforcement address.
(it wasn’t my address but very similar – but somehow they came to the correct address) is this a known thing? Can I send him away next time?

So I did not receive notice or a chance to contact them prior to the doorstep visit.

Silly_UKPARK

Coupon-mad


No bailiff has called this week - that was from the visit in January, it was odd I had no notice of visit



Searching for Bargepole's defence now

Coupon-mad

Right. Can I be clear and frank?

No taking the kids to the park today, no going out this afternoon till you've done this.

Sit down and change the headings to suit your own claimant/claim number/defendant (you?) on bargepole's standard concise defence (with the no landowner authority in it) and tell us by 3pm that it has been emailed to the CCBC with URGENT DEFENCE - CLAIM NO XXXXXXXXX in the subject line, and that you are in the queue on the phone to the CCBC to make sure they lodge the case as 'defended' TODAY.

Silly_UKPARK

Maybe im in blind panic, but i can't find the bargepole's 'standard concise defence'
Any pointers would be appriciated

Coupon-mad

Oh please don't.

You aren't trying to do this on a phone I hope? IMPOSSIBLE.

Go to the NEWBIES thread (2 clicks back, see my signature for where) and do CONTROL & F on a PC or laptop keyboard for the word 'concise' or 'bargepole' and find it.

I cannot believe you would risk seven grand (maybe financial ruin?) like this. SURELY you know exactly where the defences are in the NEWBIES thread? You did the AOS OK?

Silly_UKPARK

[FONT=&quot]is this correct?[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]DEFENCE[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot] ________________________________________

1. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.

2. The facts are that the vehicles, registrations , of which the Defendant is the registered keeper, was parked on the material date in a marked bay allocated to VU

3. The Particulars of Claim state that the Defendant!!! Was the registered keeper and the driver of the vehicles; these assertions indicate that the Claimant has failed to identify a Cause of Action, and is simply offering a menu of choices.

4. Due to the sparseness of the particulars, it is unclear as to what legal basis the claim is brought, whether for breach of contract, contractual liability, or trespass. However, it is denied that the Defendant, or any driver of the vehicle, entered into any contractual agreement with the Claimant, whether express, implied, or by conduct.

5. Further and in the alternative, it is denied that the claimant's signage sets out the terms in a sufficiently clear manner which would be capable of binding any reasonable person reading them. They merely state that vehicles must be parked correctly within their allocated parking bay, giving no definition of the term 'correctly parked', nor indicating which bays are allocated to whom.

6. The terms on the Claimant's signage are also displayed in a font which is too small to be read from a passing vehicle, and is in such a position that anyone attempting to read the tiny font would be unable to do so easily. It is, therefore, denied that the Claimant's signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract.

7. The Claimant is put to strict proof that it has sufficient proprietary interest in the land, or that it has the necessary authorisation from the landowner to issue parking charge notices, and to pursue payment by means of litigation.

8. The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4, at Section 4(5) states that the maximum sum that may be recovered from the keeper is the charge stated on the Notice to Keeper, in this case £100. The claim includes an additional £60, for which no calculation or explanation is given, and which appears to be an attempt at double recovery.

9. In summary, it is the Defendant's position that the claim discloses no cause of action, is without merit, and has no real prospect of success. Accordingly, the Court is invited to strike out the claim of its own initiative, using its case management powers pursuant to CPR 3.4.

I believe the facts contained in this Defence are true.

Name
Signature
Date[/FONT]