Parking CCJ set aside advise

Confusedbylaw

henrik777 wrote: »

i can't see why you can't do both.

do you mean pay the CCJ and also send a letter to PCM to get consent for the set aside?

Coupon-mad

Yes he does.

Confusedbylaw

Doesn't paying the CCJ automatically means accepting mistake? Also what happens if PCM accepts or rejects my consented set aside letter?

henrik777

Doesn't paying the CCJ automatically means accepting mistake?

No.

You may have heard of Parking Eye v Beavis. I understand Beavis paid at an early stage, after the initial hearing, and still fought all the way to the supreme court.

There is good reason to pay, that being protecting a valuable credit rating.

Also what happens if PCM accepts or rejects my consented set aside letter?

You make an application. It'll either be by consent (agreement) or you do it without consent. (or you pay the money or not as you desire)

Confusedbylaw

As a status update, I have paid the CCJ off and have sent PCM to consent to a set aside. Awaiting their response. I have received response from gladstones for my SAR. in the pack there is a letter which apparently they sent to my new address but I never got it. The letter states that they believe I live at the new address and are therefore attempting to make contact with me yet went ahead and processed the CCJ using my old address. C

Can that work against them, as it's proof that they knew I have moved yet continued to use my old address for court work?

KeithP

If they sent a letter to your new address and received no response, then I believe that works in their favour.

If they received no response, it is reasonable to assume that the address used is wrong, so they will argue that reverting to the old address was the right thing to do.

Of course, if they never sent that letter, then a different conclusion can be drawn.

henrik777

Confusedbylaw wrote: »

As a status update, I have paid the CCJ off and have sent PCM to consent to a set aside. Awaiting their response. I have received response from gladstones for my SAR. in the pack there is a letter which apparently they sent to my new address but I never got it. The letter states that they believe I live at the new address and are therefore attempting to make contact with me yet went ahead and processed the CCJ using my old address. C

Can that work against them, as it's proof that they knew I have moved yet continued to use my old address for court work?

http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part06#6.9

(3) Where a claimant has reason to believe that the address of the defendant referred to in entries 1, 2 or 3 in the table in paragraph (2) is an address at which the defendant no longer resides or carries on business, the claimant must take reasonable steps to ascertain the address of the defendant’s current residence or place of business (‘current address’).
(4) Where, having taken the reasonable steps required by paragraph (3), the claimant –

(a) ascertains the defendant’s current address, the claim form must be served at that address; or

(b) is unable to ascertain the defendant’s current address, the claimant must consider whether there is –

(i) an alternative place where; or

(ii) an alternative method by which,

service may be effected.

(5) If, under paragraph (4)(b), there is such a place where or a method by which service may be effected, the claimant must make an application under rule 6.15.

(6) Where paragraph (3) applies, the claimant may serve on the defendant’s usual or last known address in accordance with the table in paragraph (2) where the claimant –

(a) cannot ascertain the defendant’s current residence or place of business; and

(b) cannot ascertain an alternative place or an alternative method under paragraph (4)(b).






The burden of proof is on the claimant. If they can show they couldn't find you, including by writing that letter to which no response came, it helps them.

If they sent a letter, got no response and just ploughed on regardless, it hurts them as they clearly had "reason to believe" that the address of the defendant referred to in entries 1, 2 or 3 in the table in paragraph (2) is an address at which the defendant no longer resides or carries on business. As such they were duty bound to take reasonable steps to find you.

Confusedbylaw

Sorry how will the judge see this? Is it in their favor or mine? Surely it reflects poor on them that they carried on using my old address although they found my new address albeit got no response from either. I made contact with Trace when I got their letter at my new address so the "group" knew where I resided

KeithP

Please re-read what Henrik and I have written.

A judge could decide either way.

Will a judge believe they send that letter that you claim not to have received? Who knows?

Or will a judge believe your version?

Depends on who puts up the most convincing argument.

As is so often said, the decision depends on the balance of probabilities.

henrik777

Confusedbylaw wrote: »

Sorry how will the judge see this? Is it in their favor or mine? Surely it reflects poor on them that they carried on using my old address although they found my new address albeit got no response from either. I made contact with Trace when I got their letter at my new address so the "group" knew where I resided

It's all about the details, and evidence. (mostly).

In my opinion, they won't have made much effort, in which case they will have little, if any, evidence to shift the burden of proof.

They must sway the balance of proof that they made enough effort to find you. Your rebuttal will be that if what they say is true WHY couldn't they find you. Voters roll, or any other way a tracing company could, or perhaps, should have found you. Now given they apparently did find you it's going to be very hard to persuade someone they couldn't.