Please help- Please help !! PCN from Vehicle control services ltd

Coupon-mad

Yep, send to the local court and the Claimant's legals (the week before the hearing) a skeleton argument and 5 attachments (if not already in your WS exhibits) as seen in the thread by @Brokenchief  

There are 4 great authorities that tell the Judge the claim is DEAD because it wasn't served, and you certainly need the Code of Practice in evidence (if you haven't already) but in your case it's NOT the BPA code of course, it's the IPC one that says operators must check details if filing a claim 12 months or more later.

And remind us, did your WS already append proof of your address and proof of the amount you paid to DCBLtd when they allegedly demanded more money with menaces, in the 30 day period after judgment?

SoJacob

Thank you. I will have to have some understanding around the skeleton argument. I will look into the thread as you advised. 

The below was my WS and along with this I attached the proof travel. Also later, once I paid £950.43 to the DCBL I did notify the court with payment receipt requesting to cancel the entry on the public register. 

WITNESS STATEMENT OF---

 

WITNESS STATEMENT 

I am--- and I am the defendant in this matter. This is my supporting statement to my application dated ---- requesting to: 

1. Set aside the default judgment dated --- as it was served whilst I was absent from the country. 

2. If I had known about the claim, I would have defended it. 

3. A judgment was entered against me on --- without my knowledge. 

4. On the ---, I found out about the judgment when I returned to my home address

5. In addition, I wish to have judgment set aside because I have a real prospect of successfully defending the claim. 

6. I respectfully ask that the court orders that the judgment be set aside. 

7. Order for the claimant to pay the defendant £275 as reimbursement for the set aside fee. 

  

 DEFAULT JUDGMENT 

1.1. The defendant was the registered keeper of the vehicle at the time of the alleged offence. 

1.2. The claim form was served whilst the defendant was out of the country, and the defendant thus was not aware of the Default Judgment until--- upon returning home. After a leaving the country on---  and not returning to my home address until ----  late night. In support of this the defendant have attached copies of my air ticket, alongside the passport stamps which shows the dates of absence from the U.K. 

 

1.3. When the defendant contacted the DCBLtd on -- they asked me to pay £940.04. This was inexplicable and almost £200 more than the default judgment yet only days after it, at a point where no costs can be added. DCBLegal and DCBLtd appear to be the same organisation. The former filed the claim and yet the latter replied to contact and demanded monies as though they could already add bailiff/writ fees and ignored the fact the purpose of the contact was to ask for consent to the set aside application. DCB group have been provided with evidence of the Defendant's vulnerable status. Defendant is in the early stages of pregnancy and cannot take much stress due to past traumatic miscarriage. This is exacerbating the defendant's anxiety. Defendant is a mental health nurse and currently work as a specialist nurse who understands stress can be an increased risk factor for miscarriage. 

1.4. In addition to the above, it should be highlighted that the integrity and law abiding intention of the Defendant should be taken into consideration on the basis that; 

1.5. On -- the defendant have submitted my case in order to set-aside 

this judgment and fairly present my case. 

1.6. On the basis of CPR 13.3 (i) the defendant has a real prospect of successfully 

defending the claim and CPR 13.3 (ii) the defendant should be allowed to defend the claim 

(1) In any other case, the court may set aside or vary a judgment entered under Part 12 if - (a) the defendant has a real prospect of successfully defending the claim; or 

(b) it appears to the court that there is some other good reason why - 

(i) the judgment should be set aside or varied; or 

(ii) the defendant should be allowed to defend the claim. 

(2) In considering whether to set aside or vary a judgment entered under Part 12, the matters to which the court must have regard include whether the person seeking to 

set aside the judgment made an application to do so promptly. 

1.7. According to publicly available information my circumstances are far from 

being unique. The industry's persistent failure to use correct and current addresses results is an unnecessary burden for individuals and the justice system across the country. 

Furthermore, Ex-Prime Minister May publicly pledged to investigate 'abuse' of the CCJ System and so called 'Credit Clamping' as reported in the Daily Mail article dated 12 September 2016. The Right Honourable Sir Oliver Heald on 23 December 2016 "announced a crackdown on unresolved debts which can damage people's credit ratings without them knowing. The action comes after concerns were raised that companies were issuing claims to consumers using incorrect addresses." 

The Minister added "It cannot be right that people who are unaware of debts can see their lives and finances ruined by county court judgments. That in the digital age, we must ensure companies pursuing unpaid debts make every reasonable effort to contact individuals, rather than simply relying on a letter to an old address." Furtherance to points raised in 1.3 above. 

1.8. Considering the above the defendant was unable to defend this claim. The defendant believe that the Default Judgment against me was issued incorrectly and thus should be set aside and the defendant ask the Court to kindly consider the reimbursement of the fee of £275 from the claimant should this request be successful. 

ORDER DISMISSING THE CLAIM Statement of Truth 

I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. 

Defendant 

 

Coupon-mad

What exhibits were attached as evidence?
 

SoJacob

Hi @Coupon-mad
Please correct me if I have not understood you.

I have not attached any other evidences except my proof of travel and the receipt of the pay I made to DCBL. 

Coupon-mad

That's OK for that stage. But you need to do what I advised you to do in my reply on 23rd August.

SoJacob

Dear all, 

I managed to find some time to look into preparing for the hearing. I referred to the skeleton argument as advised by @Coupon-mad. I have removed the evidences as they seems not relevant in my case. I have got 3 PCNs for dropping off on closer days from Southend airport 2 for stopping (dropping off) on red route and another one for stopping (dropping off) in a bustop. I have already paid more than the judgement amount to DCBL. 

Please kindly look into my draft skeleton argument. I am unsure if I am on the right path.

Claim No.:  XXX

Between

XXX

(Claimant) 

- and -  

XXX

 (Defendant)

_________________

SKELETON ARGUMENT

2.1. Under CPR 13.2 The court must set aside a judgment entered under part 12 if judgment was wrongly entered.  Given that CPR 6.9 (3) was not met, CPR 13.2 applies and the CCJ should be set aside. As the claim form was served whilst the defendant was out of the country, and the defendant thus was not aware of the Default Judgment until 19th February 2022 upon returning home. After a leaving the country on 23rd January 2022 and not returning to my home address until 18th February 2022 late night. (Should I add this ->? In support of this the defendant have attached copies of my air ticket, alongside the passport stamps which shows the dates of absence from the U.K.)

2.2. - Given that more than 4 months has passed from issue of proceedings and service of the claim was defective (i.e. it was never served) the Defendant submits that this particular claim is dead and the period for service cannot be extended by this application process.  If the Claimant believes there is a cause of action then the correct procedure would be to file a claim afresh and to the right address, after furnishing the Defendant with the information required under the pre-action protocol for debt claims, issued this time to the correct address for service for this Defendant, which is XXX. -

 2.3. There are several authorities for this, including the judgment in Boxwood [2021] EWHC 947 (TCC) (please see attached Boxwood.pdf)  , which is a reminder of the strictness of the requirements of CPR 7.6 and how difficult it is to use other parts of the Civil Procedure Rules to rectify a failure to serve the claim form within the requisite period: “A claimant is not entitled to rely on the wide, general powers under CPR 3.10 or CPR 3.9 to circumvent the specific conditions set out in CPR 7.6(3) for extending the period for service of a claim form. 

  2.4. In Vinos v Marks & Spencer plc [2001] 3 All ER 784 (please see attached Vinos.pdf)  the Court of Appeal considered whether any extension of time should be granted under CPR 7.6 in circumstances where the defendant had been notified of the issue of a claim form but the claim form had not been served within four months as required by CPR 7.5 and the application was made after expiry of that period. The court refused to grant relief on the basis that it did not have power to do so.

2.5. In judgment of Deputy Master Marsh in Croke & Anor v National Westminster Bank Plc & Ors [2022] EWHC 1367 (Ch)  (please see attached Croke.pdf) the claimant was one day late in properly serving the Particulars of Claim to the Defendant and the claimant’s application for relief from sanctions was refused. In section 65 of the transcript of the trial (which is attached) Deputy Master Marsh stated “The defendants were entitled to know within the four month period specified in the CPR whether a claim had been made against them and to be able to understand that claim. [...] Unless an extension of time is granted, the claim will cease to have any validity and will be struck out." 

2.6. In Piepenbrock-v-Associated News Limited [2020] EWHC 1708 (QB) (please see attached Pipenbrock.pdf) the High Court refused the Claimant’s application for a retrospective extension of time to serve a Claim Form after the Claimant failed to demonstrate they took all reasonable steps to serve the Claim form in the period of its validity.

“Ultimately, the problem was that the Claimant had made no attempt to serve in accordance with the rules…Although I sympathise with the Claimant that the consequences for him of the error of not validly serving the Claim Form will be serious, there is nothing that really separates his case from many others who have made similar mistakes when attempting to serve a Claim Form…I am afraid, in this case, the responsibility for the failure validly to serve the Claim Form rests solely with the Claimant’s side…

Delete above as they are not relevant to my case since in my case the claim was served to the right address

2. It should be highlighted that the integrity and law-abiding intention of the Defendant should be taken into consideration on the basis that; 

2.1.  On the basis of CPR 13.3 (i) the defendant has a real prospect of successfully defending the claim and CPR 13.3 (ii) the defendant should be allowed to defend the claim  

(1) In any other case, the court may set aside or vary a judgment entered under Part 12 if – 
(a) the defendant has a real prospect of successfully defending the claim; or

(b) it appears to the court that there is some other good reason why - 

(i) the judgment should be set aside or varied; or

(ii) the defendant should be allowed to defend the claim.

(2) In considering whether to set aside or vary a judgment entered under Part 12, the matters to which the court must have regard include whether the person seeking to set aside the judgment made an application to do so promptly.

2.3.     According to publicly available information my circumstances are far from being unique. The industry’s persistent failure to use correct and current addresses results is an unnecessary burden for individuals and the justice system across the country.

Furthermore, Ex-Prime Minister May publicly pledged to investigate ‘abuse’ of the CCJ System and so called ‘Credit Clamping’ as reported in the Daily Mail article dated 12 September 2016. The Right Honourable Sir Oliver Heald on 23 December 2016 "announced a crackdown on unresolved debts which can damage people’s credit ratings without them knowing. The action comes after concerns were raised that companies were issuing claims to consumers using incorrect addresses."

 The Minister added "It cannot be right that people who are unaware of debts can see their lives and finances ruined by county court judgments. That in the digital age, we must ensure companies pursuing unpaid debts make every reasonable effort to contact individuals, rather than simply relying on a letter to an old address.”  

I believe that the facts stated in this Skeleton Argument are true.

NAME DATE

 

Coupon-mad

Yes, you MUST attach proof that you were out of the country when the claim arrived.  That's potentially what will get the CCJ set aside.

Also attach copies of the emails you frantically sent to DCBL (and their replies, and texts if you have those) if you didn't ready attach those with your WS.  You need to show you were duped.

Add something at the end that DCBL threatened, intimidated and (as you say) lied about the recoverable amount of the judgment, and under pressure and protest the exorbitant sum of £xxxx.xx was obtained with menaces.  This was during the 30 day period after judgment (during which the sum in the CCJ is the only amount due) and was an unconscionable, inflated sum.

This was paid out of fear and DCBL were well aware that a set aside application was being made and would know that no bailiff fees could legally be added during the initial 30 days.

The court is invited to find that the enhanced money obtained by DCBL 'in terrorem' was an abuse of the court process and a misleading business practice under the CPUTRS 2008. A Claimant must not profit from illegality. The latin maxim ex turpi causa non oritur actio refers to the fact that no action may be founded on illegal or immoral conduct. This maxim applies not only to tort law but also to contract and restitution.  Where the maxim of ex turpi causa is successfully applied it acts as a complete bar on recovery.

The sum paid in terrorem was obtained contrary to the CPUTRS and was not any admission of liability.  That sum must be returned to the Defendant when the CCJ is set aside to allow the Defendant to defend the case. 

--------

Have you sent a draft defence? You need to, because I think your case will see the CCJ set aside under 13.3 (discretionary set aside for a 'good reason' as opposed to a mandatory one).

You need to remove all of this because you say the claim was sent to the right address:

2.3.     According to publicly available information my circumstances are far from being unique. The industry’s persistent failure to use correct and current addresses results is an unnecessary burden for individuals and the justice system across the country.

Furthermore, Ex-Prime Minister May publicly pledged to investigate ‘abuse’ of the CCJ System and so called ‘Credit Clamping’ as reported in the Daily Mail article dated 12 September 2016. The Right Honourable Sir Oliver Heald on 23 December 2016 "announced a crackdown on unresolved debts which can damage people’s credit ratings without them knowing. The action comes after concerns were raised that companies were issuing claims to consumers using incorrect addresses."

 The Minister added "It cannot be right that people who are unaware of debts can see their lives and finances ruined by county court judgments. That in the digital age, we must ensure companies pursuing unpaid debts make every reasonable effort to contact individuals, rather than simply relying on a letter to an old address.”  

SoJacob

Thank you. I will amend my skeleton argument according to your advice. 

I checked the emails to the court. I have emailed witness statement, draft order along with n244 and evidenced which proves that I was out of the country. Is there any draft defence I could refer to? And by when should I email the draft defence? 

SoJacob

Please can someone have a look my skeleton argument and let me know if this is good submit? 

Claim No.:  XXX

Between

XXX

(Claimant) 

- and -  

XXX

 (Defendant)

_________________

SKELETON ARGUMENT

1.    Under CPR 13.2 The court must set aside a judgment entered under part 12 if judgment was wrongly entered.  CPR 13.2 applies and the CCJ should be set aside. As the claim form was served whilst the defendant was out of the country, and the defendant thus was not aware of the Default Judgment until 19th February 2022 upon returning home. After a leaving the country on 23rd January 2022 and not returning to my home address until 18th February 2022 late night. In support of this the defendant have attached copies of my air ticket, alongside the passport stamps which shows the dates of absence from the U.K.

2.    It should be highlighted that the integrity and law-abiding intention of the Defendant should be taken into consideration on the basis that; 

2.1.  On the basis of CPR 13.3 (i) the defendant has a real prospect of successfully defending the claim and CPR 13.3 (ii) the defendant should be allowed to defend the claim  

(1) In any other case, the court may set aside or vary a judgment entered under Part 12 if – 
(a) the defendant has a real prospect of successfully defending the claim; or

(b) it appears to the court that there is some other good reason why - 

(i) the judgment should be set aside or varied; or

(ii) the defendant should be allowed to defend the claim.

(2) In considering whether to set aside or vary a judgment entered under Part 12, the matters to which the court must have regard include whether the person seeking to set aside the judgment made an application to do so promptly.

3.   DCB legal refused accept the payment and advised the defendant to contact DCBLtd who refused to accept the amount stated on the Judgment despite it still being within 30 days and DCBLtd knew that the defended was medically vulnerable person. DCBL threatened, intimidated and lied about the recoverable amount of the judgment, and under pressure and protest the exorbitant sum of £950.43 was obtained with menaces and the defendant have recorded the call.

The defended felt pressured paid DCBLtd £950.43 out of fear which is £200 more than the judgment, which was already inflated by £180 of false costs that the Government banned on 7th February. When the defended contacted DCBLtd on 26/02/2022 to discuss the judgement DCBLtd advised the defended to pay £940.04. When the defended questioned this unconscionable, inflated sum DCBLtd advised the sum changed on the 21/2/2022. DCBL were well aware that a set aside application was being made and would know that no bailiff fees could legally be added during the initial 30 days. In support of this the defendant have attached the copy of Notice of enforcement and the receipt from the DCBLtd.  

 

I believe that the facts stated in this Skeleton Argument are true.

NAME DATE

SoJacob

Dear all 

I am getting so worried closer to the date hearing of application to set aside judgement. I am stuck with my defence. Do I need the defence at this stage? or is to be done after the judgement set aside and defence during the 2nd hearing? Is my defence should talk about how unfair that a private parking firm ruling out private land? 

I am so sorry to be nuisance. I have no other help other than you all.