Debtor wants ccj set aside?

da_rule

Using the online phonebook and by searching the telephone number from the website I found an address on Katherines Place (not sure if this is the one the Op used for service).

Also, Op, in accordance with section 1202 of the Companies Act 2006, any company (regardless of whether it is a limited company or not), where it uses a trade name (that being a name that isn’t the person running its name) must, on any letters, invoices or receipts include an address on which documents can be served. The company must also supply this information to any person on demand.

If you want to make his life a bit awkward, I would also refer him to the ICO as his data protection statement is woefully inadequate and does not name a data protection office or provide any contact details.

When it comes to the set aside application, these are relatively easy to fight when you’re against someone who doesn’t know what they’re doing.

If he does challenge then he will need to provide an address which will be helpful.

Firstly, I would use his lack of compliance with the Companies Act. How could you possible know where to serve when he didn’t comply with the requirements? Therefore you did the best you could with what you had. If you have the email chains where he acknowledges receipt (or at least replies) then produce these as evidence. Although service by email generally requires consent of the court or consent of the person being served, it shows a level of knowledge on his part and also undermines his argument regarding a lack of knowledge. The aim isn’t just to be correct in what you’re saying but it’s also to make him appear to be lying (which he is) and therefore completely unreliable as a witness.

The application to set the judgment aside must be made as soon as possible therefore, if you have evidence to show that he has known about the judgment it would be beneficial to produce this.

Default judgment is a sanction and as such, and application to have it set aside is therefore an application for relief from sanction and also governed by Civil Procedure Rule 3.9.

There is a 3 stage test in relation to relief from sanction, as set out in the case of Denton v TH White Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 906 (known as the ‘Denton test’).

Stage 1 - Was the breach (the breach being the defendants failure to reply to the claim in time) serious or significant? I would argue yes. The time limits to reply are imposed so as to not allow parties to frustrate and prolong the legal process. Allowing such actions adds unreasonable costs, delays and uncertainty, not just for the other parties but also for the court itself. Even if the court finds against you at stage 1, it still has to then consider the next stages.

Stage 2 - Why did the breach occur? The defendant will argue it was because he wasn’t served. Your counter argument will be that he had the documents via email therefore suffered no prejudice and that it was his own failure to comply with the Companies Act which frustrated and possibly prevented service of hard copies and therefore the court should not be rewarding this breach. Also, you did serve on the address that you had.

Stage 3 - The court must consider all of the circumstances of the case. At this stage, the court must consider the two factors expressly set out in CPR 3.9. These are:
(a) the need for litigation to be conducted efficiently and at proportionate cost; and
(b) the need to enforce compliance with rules, practice directions and orders.
You would therefore argue that allowing a set aside after so many months prevents litigation being conducted efficiently and the cost of the set aside vs the claim amount is disproportionate. Whilst he will argue that you did not comply with the rules around service you will argue that he was the cause of the breach as above.

The other thing you may want to address is that he doesn’t actually have a defence to the claim and therefore, even if the judgment is set aside, the result is unlikely to be different.

Also, as this was a default judgment, the claim would not yet have been allocated to the small claims track and as such the general costs rules will apply. So you can therefore claim your costs in dealing with any application at the litigant in person rate. Keep a record of time spent and send a copy to the court and defendant a couple of days before any hearing.

Hope this is of some help, however it seems that he is probably unlikely to make an application as it would mean giving away his address and enable you to enforce the CCJ.

hollydays

How are you getting on, op?

Jumblebumble

DoaM wrote: »

UK phone number and Spanish phone number?

WHOIS returns nothing useful.

Companies House returns nothing for The GLH Academy. The GLH Hair Centre Limited is showing as dissolved 4 years ago. So who did you sue? Simon?

I know I am late to the party but most useful whois info has been removed by the registrars under GDPR