Court form received help requested

sadwithoutmynelson

Yes that’s correct but they have asked me to send a bundle in. That’s why I was confused . I don’t understand if this hearing is just for the set aside or for the claim to be struck out. I’m not sure where I’m at to be honest. I applied immediately for the set aside . That was in March and this this first next step after that. I also have another claim pending for which I did things in a timely manner but nothing of that has come yet. I really need the ccj removed as I am unable to lease my car due to it and am stuck. I can’t believe all this due it parking on my own land. I have again wrote to the developers of my property and the estate management company to try remove these penalty charges but doubt il have much luck as to date they haven’t done much. It’s just ridiculous for parking on my own land. 

Could someone please advise me further ? 

My neighbours are happy to write permission letters that state I can park outside their house also as some pcns were in their slots- land which they own. There are 11 pcns in total with 2 in the Moneyclaim system with this one having a hearing in a few weeks time which has the ccj by default . 

Thank all so much for your help. 

Le_Kirk

sadwithoutmynelson said:

Yes that’s correct but they have asked me to send a bundle in. 

Look at the notice of allocation or court hearing letter and it will tell you what has to be in the bundle.  It should also tell you whether the hearing is for just the set-aside, for set-aside and original case (unusual) or for a different case entirely.  If you like, you could post a picture of the letter(s) with all your personal details covered.

sadwithoutmynelson

Thankyou. Iv read the notice but still don’t understand. I’m guessing it’s for the set aside only then? I have a clean credit history but have been given a ccj from this one hence the set aside and it seems cpm will keep taking each one to court for something to do. 

 Thankyou so much for your help. Here is a picture. 

Le_Kirk

It doesn't actually say what the hearing is about but presumably you have the claim number so can look back through your documents and find out what is is likely to be about.  Reading the court's instructions you are to get together (by e-mail or telephone presumably) with the claimant and AGREE a bundle. If it is a set-aside , you need six-point draft order and witness statement which is your case for having it set aside.  You should have a defence "in your back pocket" for the original issue, if the judge asks.  Contact the claimant and see what they are sending.

sadwithoutmynelson

I looked through the claim number and it was the original parking charge that got a default due to me missing the deadline. Then I applied for the set aside and now this is the first thing so I presume it’s the set aside . So I should contact cpm to agree a bundle  ?
i started the witness statement above ....

Coupon-mad

Yes this will be the hearing for your application to set aside the CCJ.

Have a look at the documents in the case by @Chucky1000 who won his/her case this week and the entire claim was struck out.  Your bundle will include your defence and your WS as to what happened and evidence that UKCPM filed two claims against you so you were confused as to your deadlines (ONLY if the second claim was filed before you made that mistake - was it?).  Can you give us a chronology please?

sadwithoutmynelson

Thankyou. It makes sense that it’s for the set aside. Thankyou for your help.  In terms of the chronology for this claim it’s as the following :- 

A claim was issued against you on 12/02/2020

Your acknowledgment of service was submitted on 28/02/2020 at 00:24:32

Your acknowledgment of service was received on 28/02/2020 at 08:05:18

A judgment was issued against you on 17/03/2020 at 19:24:49

An application to set aside (remove) judgment was submitted on MCOL on 21/03/2020 at 00:31:20

An application to set aside (remove) judgment was submitted to the court on 23/03/2020 at 01:15:20

Your claim was transferred to # on 24/03/2020

The other claim is showing as :-

A claim was issued against you on 09/12/2019

Your acknowledgment of service was submitted on 20/12/2019 at 22:41:34

Your acknowledgment of service was received on 23/12/2019 at 01:17:13

Your defence was received on 13/01/2020

DQ sent to you on 18/02/2020

DQ filed by claimant on 18/02/2020

You filed a DQ on 04/03/2020

Your claim was transferred to # on 04/03/2020. This just on the mcol website. 

Coupon-mad

OK, that chronology of the two claims helps! 

Add that as a separate page attached to your WS to assist the Judge to understand your confusion.

Your witness statement needs to say you received two duplicate claims (give both claim numbers and say a MCOL chronology is attached to assist the Judge to see your difficulty in understanding what was going on). Say that the Claimant has taken advantage of a litigant-in-person to get a CCJ for a second (duplicate facts) claim while you were dealing with the first one.   

State that a defence had been filed on 13/01/2020 and you were at N180 stage and believed you had done all that was required, having been bombarded with paperwork for years, and now overwhelmed by two claims when they should have filed only one.  

Then continue with these words (also append the defence you filed in January):

From the point of Letter before Claim stage this Claimant has played fast and loose with the pre-action protocol (PAP) and the court process in order to intimidate the Defendant and obtain a CCJ on the one hand, whilst continuing with the first claim on the other. 

Using discretionary grounds, the court is invited to recognise the good reasons why the second claim should be struck out and that CCJ should be set aside, due to the Claimant's multiple failures, including:

Pre-action stage:

(a) failing to advance their whole case in one single, compliant Letter before Claim appending a copy of the contract (the sign) they are relying upon;

(b) failing to break down the unconscionable sum of £160 per PCN, no doubt because it constitutes double recovery;

(c) failing to pay regard to the wording and enclosures needed for Letters before Claim, as required under the pre-action protocol for debt claims;

(d) failing to attach the Reply forms required under the pre-action protocol for debt claims;

Commencement of proceedings stage:

(e) failing to advance their whole case at the time of filing their first claim on 09/12/2019.  By issuing separate claims, each which rely upon essentially duplicate particulars and facts, there has been an abuse of the civil litigation process.  The courts may estop a second claim where the cause of action is substantially the same as another.

In Arnold v National Westminster Bank plc [1991] 3 All ER 41 the court noted that cause of action estoppel “…applies where a cause of action in a second action is identical to a cause of action in the first, the latter having been between the same parties or their privies and having involved the same subject matter.”

In Henderson -v- Henderson [1843] 67 ER 313 the court noted the following:

(i) when a matter becomes subject to litigation, the parties are required to advance their whole case;
(ii) the Court will not permit the same parties to re-open the same subject of litigation regarding matters which should have been advanced in the earlier litigation, but were not owing to negligence, inadvertence, or error;
(iii) this bar applies to all matters, both those on which the Court determined in the original litigation and those which would have been advanced if the party in question had exercised ''reasonable diligence''.

There has been no reasonable diligence exhibited in this case by the Claimant. 

Whilst the Defendant did receive the second claim form in February and acknowledged it, in the same week a Directions Questionnaire for the first claim arrived and was duly completed, so there was no attempt by the Defendant to ignore or avoid responding to the court papers as they arrived.  Given that a defence (copy attached) had already been filed via MCOL, the Defendant believed that the matter(s) were being transferred to their home court and never expected that the Claimant had actually issued more than one claim after all these months/years, in a ''drip, drip'' form of harassment.  To then trip a consumer up for not repeating the defence they've already filed is surely conduct that the court should not countenance.

sadwithoutmynelson

Thankyou so much. You all are so helpful. I’m currently having sleepless nights with all this on my mind and more. But you guys are amazing truly. 

 Should I add all this to what I wrote before on the witness statement? Also should I still contact cpm and do i still need the 6 point draft order? 

Coupon-mad

Yes add it, like I said.  Show us how it looks if you have time, before signing it.

But you guys are amazing truly. 

I am a gal!

I would also attach a 6 point draft order, as a WORD DOCUMENT so the Judge can use it, and add a point 7 that both claims should be struck out for multiple abuses of the court process and the pre-action protocol and that the two claims are exaggerated and have no prospects of success.

All of it has to be copied to UKCPM's solicitors by email as well as your local court.

Also should I still contact cpm

What were you contacting UKCPM for - a SAR?