CCJ issued by Excel at my place of work!, options for getting it set aside?

nosferatu1001

So give them 14 days maybe. Covers xmas nicely for them.

aardll

Umkomaas wrote: »

Looks very much like they're starting to crumble.

Looks to be quite the opposite to be honest. Letter today saying we refute your costs and a few points as follows:


They're leaning quite heavily on the fact that my DVLA details weren't up to date (noting that the charges were issued in oct 18 and jan 19 this year). Second CCJ was dated May, details correct with DVLA as of March.



They've completely ignored the point I've made about passing the details on to a debt collection agency (ignoring practice direction).


Letter to sum it basically reads "we'll see you in court".


I'll post it up later if anyone's interested in reading it.

Redx

The DVLA issue is purely a matter between you and the DVLA

The DVLA guidance and I believe the CPR is that the claimant should check the details by tracing you , if some time has elapsed , before issuing the court papers

You were there to be found , so not following the rules is their problem

The see you in Court is only true if they did that , but often they chicken out or send a third party rep

Coupon-mad

A consumer not being quick to change the DVLA data makes no difference to a PPC and merely meant the first letters were never served.

The Claimant should have realised the keeper data was old/unreliable when they received no response, and should then have used a tracing agent, as the DVLA themselves told PPCs to do.

Press heavily that you were 'there to be found' with a soft search of data, as your bank account, insurance and important financial data was fully updated and you were on the voters' roll, so were not hiding from any liabilities at all and that serving a claim to an old address where they should have surmised (from your silence) that you were not able to be contacted, was not good service - fact.

aardll

Coupon-mad wrote: »

A consumer not being quick to change the DVLA data makes no difference to a PPC and merely meant the first letters were never served.

The Claimant should have realised the keeper data was old/unreliable when they received no response, and should then have used a tracing agent, as the DVLA themselves told PPCs to do.

Press heavily that you were 'there to be found' with a soft search of data, as your bank account, insurance and important financial data was fully updated and you were on the voters' roll, so were not hiding from any liabilities at all and that serving a claim to an old address where they should have surmised (from your silence) that you were not able to be contacted, was not good service - fact.

Coup, is there a link to a document issued by the DVLA which states that fact? I'll likely need to reference it in the hearing.

henrik777

aardll wrote: »

Coup, is there a link to a document issued by the DVLA which states that fact? I'll likely need to reference it in the hearing.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/494377/response/1185726/attach/2/FOIR6938%20Attachment.pdf?cookie_passthrough=1

B5

Coupon-mad

Not sure that has the bit about the DVLA telling PPCs they should use a tracing agent. Can anyone recall where that was said, because I know it was but can't recall in what document or FOI?

aardll

Hearing is scheduled for Wednesday 12th, haven't actually had any correspondence to say they have actually paid for the hearing and that it's actually going ahead - just assuming it is.

Any final tips or things I need to prepare beforehand?

Thanks for everyone's help so far.

KeithP

Did you send that 'without prejudice' costs letter that C-m suggested well before Christmas?

aardll

yeah I did