Starting from a point of CCJ being issued

nosferatu1001

Paying the CCJ will have no impact. A satisfied judgement trashes the credit rating almost as much as an unsatisfied one

You could try for a "set aside by consent", which you must have read about by now - you get their agreement to pay in full, no complaints, and you pay the court £100 to hear the application.

Was the address precisely correct? ANu history of post going missing?

pumpkinman

nosferatu1001 wrote: »

Paying the CCJ will have no impact. A satisfied judgement trashes the credit rating almost as much as an unsatisfied one

You could try for a "set aside by consent", which you must have read about by now - you get their agreement to pay in full, no complaints, and you pay the court £100 to hear the application.

Was the address precisely correct? ANu history of post going missing?

OK, the set aside by consent does seem a better option tbh. Is this different to a Tomlin order? I have found info online but it's not very comprehensive so I still have questions. Should we contact the claimant in writing or by phone to get an agreement? I will search for some concrete details on how to proceed after that. I've found plenty of threads but nothing that spells it all out.

pumpkinman

OK, I've have found what looks like a decent guide tbh on LegalBeagles. It's titled "Parking Eye CCJ - Set aside ?". Can't post a link cos I'm a new member.

nosferatu1001

Tomlin is a form of consent order, youre just not needing one here as ther is a process in place for set aside by consent included on the N244 already .

IF you follow this process *it msut be in writing*
Call them so you get a response quickly, then follow in writing. They wil need to sign a consent order so you will have to allow time for that - email works well.

Coupon-mad

Should we contact the claimant in writing or by phone to get an agreement?

NEVER by phone, and only try a set aside with consent if:

(a) it is ParkingEye, who will at least play ball with that issue properly, and
(b) only if you believe the case is undefendable (e.g. retail park overstay like in Beavis with no clear defence points that distinguish it, such of unlit signs in the dark, or Equality Act/disabled person needing more time).

If it is P/Eye and the case is too like the Beavis case, then email:

enforcement@parkingeye.co.uk

If it is not P/Eye then pay the £255 for a set aside at a hearing (as long as he is in the country now and does not qualify for Help with Court Fees?) an then he should defend the scam PCN from scratch, as IMHO, you will not get any sense out of another PPC in trying a 'set aside with consent'.

Other PPCs will tie him in knots and he'll end up with a 'satisfied' CCJ which is NOT what he wants.

pumpkinman

Thanks for your input guys. From my very limited knowledge I believe the case is probably undefendable as the County Court confirmed a summons was sent out to the claimant while they were in the country and this wasn't acted upon. We actually managed to get the debt collector (ELMS Legal) who is handling it to agree to a reduction in the fee from £285 to £215 and then to a Set Aside By Consent if this was paid and they've been really helpful in helping us through that process. So it is paid now and we're just going through the process to get the CCJ removed from the Register.

pumpkinman

The original claim for the charge was Vehicle Control Services Limited by the way.

KeithP

pumpkinman wrote: »

Thanks for your input guys. From my very limited knowledge I believe the case is probably undefendable as the County Court confirmed a summons was sent out to the claimant while they were in the country and this wasn't acted upon. We actually managed to get the debt collector (ELMS Legal) who is handling it to agree to a reduction in the fee from £285 to £215 and then to a Set Aside By Consent if this was paid and they've been really helpful in helping us through that process. So it is paid now and we're just going through the process to get the CCJ removed from the Register.

No summons was sent out.

Even if it were, it was sent to the Defendant, not the Claimant.

pumpkinman wrote: »

The original claim for the charge was Vehicle Control Services Limited by the way.

What on earth does that mean?

pumpkinman

We got a response after sending in the request for a set aside by consent, which was of course agreed to by the claimant. The judge unfortunately decided to refuse as they "will not support credit washing". Not sure they really grasped the point that the defendant wasn't in the country to even respond to the CJJ when it was issued.

Coupon-mad

Bad luck! Does a set aside with consent even need to have a hearing, I am surprised it was declined by a Judge given you had no chance to defend it.