CCJ Set aside CEL help please

a6915137

Hi All,

I would appreciate your help in this mutter please.

On The 15 of January I checked my Credit Score, to find out that my score went down by more than 200 points. I used Experian service and trust online website to find the reason. Then I found that a company called Civil Enforcement Ltd filed CCJ against me. The whole story was about a parking fine that was sent to a previous address. I didn’t like to have a CCJ in my record as I am planning to have a mortgage soon and I feel it is not fair as the parking fine was sent to a previous address.

I filled a N422 form and paid £255 to set the CCJ aside. Along the N422 form I have sent my HSBC bank statement dated to June ******showing that my address is “New /current address” at the time when the fine is issued. Which mean that the parking fine was sent to my previous address.

The car related this mutter was a hired car (I hire it for a long period, a couple of months used as TAXI).I have changed my address during this period, but I have let the company know my current address. As prove of this, a letter was sent to my current address from the hiring company on the 14/11/2018 asking for some compensation of the damage that I caused to their car because of an accident (I have not sent this letter to the court). So the company definitely have my current address.

Any way the court sent me a letter asking if I wish to redact the bank statements ? my question is: in this case I can only redact the outgoing and in going fund but I should leave other details: my name and address.


In another page of the letter I received from the court it says:

IT IS ORDERED THAT

1. The application to set judgement aside be stayed because the application contains inadequate grounds of a defence. If the defendant fails to file adequate supplemental particulars by 7 March 2019 the application be struck out.

2. Because this order has been made by the court without considering representation from the parties, any party affected has a right to apply to have the order set a side, varied or stayed. A party wishing to make an application must send or deliver the application to the court to arrive at the court office 7 days from the date of the service. No court fee will be payable
Dated 7 February 2019

I am confused that the letter saying (inadequate ground) . Can someone please shed light on these two statements and what should I do.


I really appreciate your help, this really confusing me thanks.

Exodi

Hi a6915137,

I think you need to take a step back and look at what you're saying.

You're not disputing or defending the fine, which is what the CCJ relates to but instead which address it was sent to? Can't you see why this isn't relevant to the court?

Typically parking fines are sent to 'the registered keeper' that the DVLA has (the hiring company) who will then most likely pull up the file for whomever hired the car at that time and request the matter be resolved through you - I'd imagine they probably just look at a scanned copy of your drivers license and provided that address. You could argue with the hiring company about negligence but it's of little relevance to the court and claimant at this stage. I'm also surprised you didn't send the only slightly relevant piece of evidence (proof the hiring company were aware of your current address) but I think it makes little difference now.

What exactly is it you're hoping for? If you don't refute the grounds of the fine then I'm failing to see how you're going to get this CCJ set aside. I'd also imagine you haven't paid anything towards the fine (even the original amount)?

EDIT: In response to

Any way the court sent me a letter asking if I wish to redact the bank statements ? my question is: in this case I can only redact the outgoing and in going fund but I should leave other details: my name and address."

With all due respect, sit and think on this - what would be the point of submitting a bank statement as proof of address if you redact your address from it? Also, what does sending a bank statement prove exactly? What address the bank has for you?

WhenIam64

There is a lot more specialist help on the Parking ticket forum here

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/forumdisplay.php?f=163

As the mod to move it but don't delay. You have a clear instruction to put in a defence and not an explanation of why you failed the process

In any case, they'll sort out a defence for you over there as they deal with Civil Enforcement default CCJ's every day.

sourcrates

Hi, we move threads if we think they’ll get more help elsewhere (please read the forum rule) so this post/thread has been moved to another board. If you have any questions about this policy please email [EMAIL="forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com"]forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com[/EMAIL].

Coupon-mad

I'd also imagine you haven't paid anything towards the fine (even the original amount)?

Of COURSE they haven't, these fake PCNs are always a scam! It's not even a 'fine'.

You're not disputing or defending the fine, which is what the CCJ relates to but instead which address it was sent to?
Can't you see why this isn't relevant to the court?

That's not correct, not for a parking charge set aside hearing. We get set asides of these scam PCNs agreed all the time, hundreds of them every year (I can only recall two that failed due to the Judge...). The lack of proper service of the claim IS relevant info that a Judge will want to hear, at a set aside hearing:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/74864199#Comment_74864199

Here is someone preparing for a set aside hearing this week:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/75512066#Comment_75512066

And here is one of many who has just achieved their set aside:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5920366/gladstone-solicitors-civil-enforcement-ltd-ccjs-at-old-address&page=2

I see the Judge has said this:

IT IS ORDERED THAT

1. The application to set judgement aside be stayed because the application contains inadequate grounds of a defence. If the defendant fails to file adequate supplemental particulars by 7 March 2019 the application be struck out.

2. Because this order has been made by the court without considering representation from the parties, any party affected has a right to apply to have the order set a side, varied or stayed. A party wishing to make an application must send or deliver the application to the court to arrive at the court office 7 days from the date of the service. No court fee will be payable
Dated 7 February 2019

So, a6915137:

it sounds like you didn't include a Witness Statement setting out why the CCJ should be set aside? Did you just send the form and £255 fee and a bank statement, and said something far too brief in the box, like ''I didn’t like to have a CCJ in my record as I am planning to have a mortgage soon and I feel it is not fair as the parking fine was sent to a previous address.''

You needed to plead the case better to get a hearing, and you still can!

You need to file:

Witness statement
A separate statement telling the story that you moved house and knew nothing about any private PCN (if true) or had appealed it and thought is was cancelled as you received no further letters (if true), paying particular attention to the rules for service and the claimants defective approach, and to the CPR provision for set aside (look those up).

Draft defence
Unusually, the Judge seems to expect you to attach a draft defence as an 'exhibit', to evidence that your case is defensible, which they always are but maybe he/she is a stickler for detail and has his/her own ideas.

Easy enough, look at ANY other CEL defence and any other CEL set aside case.

Exodi

Please don't take my post sarcastically as that isn't the intention and I can appreciate you're a great deal more experienced in this field than I - your answers are for my personal knowledge.

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Of COURSE they haven't, these fake PCNs are always a scam! It's not even a 'fine'.

This would be the first I've heard of fake/scam PCN's (but I don't frequent the parking forums). Are these common? Are you saying that PCN's are issued to random cars (presumably to meet targets)?

Coupon-mad wrote: »

That's not correct, not for a parking charge set aside hearing. We get set asides of these scam PCNs agreed all the time, hundreds of them every year (I can only recall two that failed due to the Judge...). The lack of proper service of the claim IS relevant info that a Judge will want to hear, at a set aside hearing:

Would lack of proper service be a full defence even if the grounds of the PCN were valid/undisputed? Or would it be along the lines of 'as I was unaware of the PCN, I was unable to confirm it's validity'? Would it be set aside even if the claimant provided images of a vehicle (is this commonplace?)

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Witness statement
A separate statement telling the story that you moved house and knew nothing about any private PCN (if true) or had appealed it and thought is was cancelled as you received no further letters (if true), paying particular attention to the rules for service and the claimants defective approach, and to the CPR provision for set aside (look those up).

Does the 'unaware of private PCN' only apply to 'automated' car parks of which you'd receive no immediate notice or can it even apply in the case that a yellow wallet has been attached to the windscreen as it could be argued that it wasn't there when you returned to your vehicle?

Again, please don't take the above negatively, I appreciate you'll be far more knowledgeable on this field and I'm curious.

ShakeItOff

Exodi, it could be that the person has no knowledge at all - often the case if they have failed to update their log book with the DVLA. However, in many cases, it is that the parking company waits a long time to bring the case (in my case, 2015 parking charge issued, and 2018, claim brought), and you have moved in that time. They rely on an old address, when it is likely they can use a tracing service or credit check, but carry on to issue the claim at the old address.

Far be it from my cynical head to say that it is an easy default CCJ to obtain - no court, no anything, all because they used an old address and should know better.

The_Deep

This would be the first I've heard of fake/scam PCN's … Are these common?

Very common, several million a year I believe.

The whole industry is a scam, relying on threats of court, and the public's ignorance of the Law, A bill is currently before parliament which will regulate the scammers, many of whom are ex-clampers.

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. Is has been suggested by an MP that some of these companies may have connections to organised crime.

Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, (especially 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.

Sir Greg Knight's Private Members Bill to curb the excesses, and perhaps close down, some of these companies passed its Second Reading in the Lords this month, and, with a fair wind, will l become Law later this year..

All five readings are available to watch on the internet, (some 7-8 hours), and published in Hansard. MPs have an extremely low opinion of the industry. Many are complaining that they are becoming overwhelmed by complaints from members of the public. Add to their burden, complain in the most robust terms about the scammers.

nosferatu1001

OP - you need to VERY QUICKLY get reading
You went off half cocked intpo a legal process and didnt do it right

You also failed to give us any real facts

1) At the time of the alleged issue, did the hire company have your CORRECT CURRENT address? Yes or No?
2) If NO, when did you update them with your address?

You need to show the court ONE of TWO things, IN A WITNESS STATEMENT

1) That they failed to serve court papers to a good address, meaning an automatic set aside under CPR13.2. You failed to tell the court this, so theyre looking for a DEFENCE to the underlying charge which is...
2) What theyre asking you to do. CPR13.3 means you can get a set aside if you have a good chance of success against the *underlying* issue. WHich we know nothing about, as you havent told us.

nosferatu1001

Also - if this is about CEL, why does the title say Parking Eye?

Coupon-mad

Exodi wrote: »

This would be the first I've heard of fake/scam PCN's (but I don't frequent the parking forums). Are these common?

IMHO all private parking firms are operating a scam, and I am not alone in thinking this is endemic in the entire industry:

https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2018-02-02/debates/CC84AF5E-AC6E-4E14-81B1-066E6A892807/Parking(CodeOfPractice)Bill

''Rip-offs from car park Cowboys must stop''; unfair treatment; signage deliberately confusing to ensure a PCN is issued; ''years of abuse by rogue parking companies''; bloodsuckers; ''the current system of regulation is hopeless, like putting Dracula in charge of the blood-bank''; extortionate fines; rogue operators; ''sense of injustice''; unfair charges and notices; wilfully misleading; signage is a deliberate act to deceive or mislead; ''confusing signs are often deliberate, to trap innocent drivers''; unreasonable; a curse; harassing; operating in a disgusting way; appeals service is no guarantee of a fair hearing; loathed; outrageous scam; dodgy practice; outrageous abuse; unscrupulous practices; ''the British Parking Association is as much use as a multi-storey car park in the Gobi desert''; and finally, by way of unanimous conclusion: ''we need to crack down on these rogue companies. They are an absolute disgrace to this country. Ordinary motorists and ordinary residents should not have to put up with this''.

These are the exact words used by MPs a year ago. The Private Parking Bill in question is now being swiftly pushed successfully through the House of Lords, but will be limited to creating a fair appeals system.

Doesn't help people like this victim. This is common and measures have been discussed to try to stop parking firms doing this (stealth CCJs to an old address):

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

Are you saying that PCN's are issued to random cars (presumably to meet targets)?

All private PCNs are a scam.

Would lack of proper service be a full defence

Yes, that's mainly what is needed for a set aside. Nothing to do with a defence. A set aside hearing isn't the actual hearing about the scam ticket.

even if the grounds of the PCN were valid/undisputed?

Why wouldn't they be, the entire thing is a scam.

Or would it be along the lines of 'as I was unaware of the PCN,

Nothing to do with being unaware of the PCN. A set aside is about a D being unaware of the CLAIM.

I was unable to confirm it's validity'?

There is no validity!

Would it be set aside even if the claimant provided images of a vehicle (is this commonplace?)

Nothing to do with images, a set aside is a hearing about the fact the D has not received a claim and has had no chance to defend (and that they have grounds to defend - not difficult!).

Does the 'unaware of private PCN' only apply to 'automated' car parks of which you'd receive no immediate notice or can it even apply in the case that a yellow wallet has been attached to the windscreen as it could be argued that it wasn't there when you returned to your vehicle?

Often a set aside is nothing to do with people saying they were unaware of the PCN. Quite often they've appealed it 4 years ago and fully expected the con had been cancelled, then they move house. the scammers wait a year or two then serve a claim on what they should reasonably be able to ascertain is an OLD address. Deliberately, to get a CCJ for some £350 (triple the real claim) that they know later on will likely cause the D problems, and they will get money from desperate people all the time trying to rid themselves of what we call 'credit clamping'.

This situation is far, far worse than clamping used to be, but with many of the same thugs running these 'firms' and abusing the court system now, as their lever, instead of a physical clamp.

And the DVLA gives these scammers our data for £2.50 and we can't opt out.