Gladstones and old address - 1 unknown CCJ, 1 unknown Claim

Le_Kirk

It's Res Judicata. It means: -

a matter that has been adjudicated by a competent court and therefore may not be pursued further by the same parties.

1505grandad

You say in the post for the Defence:-


"I am trying to fight 2 things, both from PCM (UK) via Gladstones. One is a CCJ I need set-aside, and the other is a county court claim. I have emailed the SAR and done the AoS for the claim. I thought I would start with the claim."

So not sure of the relevance of para 6(i):-

6(i). A requirement of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 is that this any Notice to Keeper served by the Claimant must be served within 14 days of the date of the alleged incident. Since I have not received any documentation from the Claimant prior to finding out about the Default Judgement, I submit the Claimant will not have complied with the requirements of the Act and thus cannot claim this charge against me as the Registered Keeper in any case.

Cannot see any other reference to the existing CCJ in the Defence.

[Deleted User]

Thank you for the reply. I did tell Gladstones my new address but they sent the latest claim form to my old address again

What exactly did you tell them? This could be defective service, which is worth exploiting only if you haven't filed an Acknowledgement of Service.

ShakeItOff

Hi Duckie

I've just finished my first draft of my defence, and came across some stuff you might find handy. Take a look at the threads on here: https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/search.php?searchid=192929836. I've searched for "Henderson v Henderson", which is still considered "good law", and supports the idea that a Claimant should bring their whole case, not multiple claims for the same issue.

Hope that helps!

henrik777

Johnersh wrote: »

What exactly did you tell them? This could be defective service, which is worth exploiting only if you haven't filed an Acknowledgement of Service.

Think AoS was filed but it's definitely worthy of a complaint to the SRA.

[Deleted User]

it's definitely worthy of a complaint to the SRA.

No it's not. It's a procedural error not misconduct and the o/p inadvertently accepted service in any event.

duckieb

1505grandad wrote: »

You say in the post for the Defence:-


"I am trying to fight 2 things, both from PCM (UK) via Gladstones. One is a CCJ I need set-aside, and the other is a county court claim. I have emailed the SAR and done the AoS for the claim. I thought I would start with the claim."

So not sure of the relevance of para 6(i):-

6(i). A requirement of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 is that this any Notice to Keeper served by the Claimant must be served within 14 days of the date of the alleged incident. Since I have not received any documentation from the Claimant prior to finding out about the Default Judgement, I submit the Claimant will not have complied with the requirements of the Act and thus cannot claim this charge against me as the Registered Keeper in any case.

Cannot see any other reference to the existing CCJ in the Defence.

I think I haven't been that clear. To clarify: I am in a situation where I have a CCJ for a ticket at a separate location, and a claim which came after for 3 tickets in a different location and a different time. I don't recall either. I found out about the CCJ incidentally via credit report, went to get letters from my old address and found the claim. I have posted the statement for the defence for the claim ONLY. The CCJ defence I have not yet posted. I have not referenced the CCJ in my claim defence as it is a different place/time/matter. Should I be referring to them? Surely that will only look worse as there will be multiple against me from different places?

The defence I posted is only for the claim specifically, which covers 3 tickets at the same location over 2 different days. I don't know if that changes things for res judicata/any of the comments.

henrik777

Johnersh wrote: »

No it's not. It's a procedural error not misconduct and the o/p inadvertently accepted service in any event.

It might be a procedural error but it's questionable at best. In any event, a complaint does 2 things.

1. It could highlight to the firm that they're doing something wrong and allow them to tighten up procedures in order to stop it happening in the future.

2. Allow the SRA to see if there is a pattern of this sort of behaviour.

Acknowledging service does not actually rectify service issues but the reality is a cpr 3.10 application will probably succeed where no prejudice has occurred.

https://www.civillitigationbrief.com/2016/12/07/disputing-service-using-the-right-procedure/

Le_Kirk

I hope you have reacted to discovering the CCJ, maybe not on this thread but maybe you have filled out the correct forms and prepared your six-point draft order. It is imperative to react swiftly upon discovering a CCJ as the courts don't like tardiness.

[Deleted User]

Well quite. The o/p hasn't lodged an application and it'd be unlikely to succeed, so effectively waives the point.

This forum is fast to refer to the SRA but I'm not sure it has the power/resources/inclination to take the action people think it does.

If the o/p is planning a set aside application it needs to be addressed promptly, so get to it!