UK CPM - CCJ issued

Le_Kirk

Documents go to claimant, look on the original claim form to see who it is.

Coupon-mad

No, you are not dealing with UKCPM directly, course not.

Don't try to rely on mitigation.  You might not even need to worry about that.

Read the new example threads in the NEWBIES thread section on set asides.

You have TWO bases upon which the Judge can set aside the CCJ, either will do!

One is mandatory (no need to have filed the N244 promptly, but it helps) based on defective service of the claim

and alternatively:

one (your fallback position) is discretionary and depends on you filing the N244 promptly and having good prospects of success in defending the claim once the CCJ is wiped and the claim reset.

Read LOTS of posts by @henrik777 -  I mean look on his profile and read EVERY REPLY he has made for, say, two months...it will help!

hiphop99

Le_Kirk said:

Documents go to claimant, look on the original claim form to see who it is.

ok going by that, I will send the bundle of documents to UK CPM. I just assumed that sending it to Gladstones would satisfy this? Is this definitely not the case? I do not have a contact so I can just share with their enquiries email.

Coupon-mad

I will send the bundle of documents to UK CPM.

No,  because the claim form shows they are using a solicitor...how can that be confusing? 

When we say 'send stuff to the claimant' we mean via their solicitors because you know they are using them.  The claim form tells you they are using Gladstones.  Why would anything be sent direct to UKCPM if they are using a legal firm?

Le_Kirk

hiphop99 said:

Le_Kirk said:

Documents go to claimant, look on the original claim form to see who it is.

ok going by that, I will send the bundle of documents to UK CPM. I just assumed that sending it to Gladstones would satisfy this? Is this definitely not the case? I do not have a contact so I can just share with their enquiries email.

Le_Kirk said:

Documents go to claimant, look on the original claim form to see who it is.

Coupon-mad said:

I will send the bundle of documents to UK CPM.

No,  because the claim form shows they are using a solicitor...how can that be confusing? 
When we say 'send stuff to the claimant' we mean via their solicitors because you know they are using them.  The claim form tells you they are using Gladstones.  Why would anything be sent direct to UKCPM if they are using a legal firm?

Got it now?

hiphop99

Coupon-mad said:

I will send the bundle of documents to UK CPM.

No,  because the claim form shows they are using a solicitor...how can that be confusing? 

When we say 'send stuff to the claimant' we mean via their solicitors because you know they are using them.  The claim form tells you they are using Gladstones.  Why would anything be sent direct to UKCPM if they are using a legal firm?

Sorry - Le Kirk's comments confused me. Have already sent to Gladstones. Should I expect to receive anything ahead of the hearing?

With respect to the hearing, I am making notes from all those threads now + my chronology etc in preparation. Need to be as robust as possible.

Feeling quite anxious as the impact of the CCJ is so huge and we genuinely were not living there. The draft order mentions 13.2 and then I can raise 13.3 if that is unsuccessful? Have I got that right?

Lastly, I apologise about some of my questions - If they are stupid or repetitive. It's a very stressful time for me and I truly appreciate all the help.

Coupon-mad

The draft order mentions 13.2 and then I can raise 13.3 if that is unsuccessful? Have I got that right?

Yes, like I said below.

Coupon-mad said:
You have TWO bases upon which the Judge can set aside the CCJ, either will do!
One is mandatory (no need to have filed the N244 promptly, but it helps) based on defective service of the claim
and alternatively:
one (your fallback position) is discretionary and depends on you filing the N244 promptly and having good prospects of success in defending the claim once the CCJ is wiped and the claim reset.

Read LOTS of posts by @henrik777 -  I mean look on his profile and read EVERY REPLY he has made for, say, two months...it will help!

Read the new example threads in the NEWBIES thread section on set asides.

hiphop99

Been blindsided by a 30 page document from Gladstones.

Main gist of it is that they tried to trace my wife (via credit checks) but they were unable to as she hasn't yet anything out. They therefore delivered to the last known address so the set aside should not be considered.

I was anxious before but my stress levels are way higher - How can I possibly fight this?

Coupon-mad

Did they prove they tried to trace her, if not, it's hot air.
Was she on the electoral roll (public version) that they could have found?
Does she have social media accounts or Linked In they could have found?
If they've covered those bases and proved they did traces, then you still have your fallback safety net anyway, as we already discussed.  

Johnersh

hiphop99
I was anxious before but my stress levels are way higher - How can I possibly fight this?

By unpacking exactly what they did (and didn't do).

But first, let's have some fun and consider how likely it was that you were actually still resident and disregarding their post, statistically.

SOURCE: Office for National Statistics (ONS) Social Trends 41 (ST41), published 2011

In 2009, 37 per cent of households in Great Britain were buying their homes with a mortgage (Table 3). Almost a third (32 per cent) owned their home outright and 31 per cent rented their homes either from the social sector (18 per cent) or privately (13 per cent). 
Private renters were much more mobile with an average length of residence of around one year; 36.5 per cent had lived in their home for less than a year and a further 17.5 per cent for more than a year but less than two years. Only one in ten (10.7 per cent) private renters had lived in their home 10 years or more. 

So, imagine you work for a parking company.  You start correspondence in 2018 in connection with a PCN at a block of flats.  The driver engages in correspondence and then after a break of a few months, you resume writing but the correspondence is no longer responded to - despite exhortations that you will litigate. 

Is it not distinctly possible you have moved,  a full year after the events in question? YES.  In fact, it is more likely than not that you have, if we work on the basis that flats tend to have higher turnover and fewer owner/occupiers.  Indeed, the PPC then go to efforts to locate the individual concerned.  They fail.  They do a credit check.  How nice. Could they do more?

* They could have used an enquiry agent.  It's cheap to do - https://www.vilcol.com/uk-tracing-services  Indeed, if they had thrown a bit more money at it, they probably would find you.  Indeed, an enquiry agent probably could find you through the car, if the address had been changed with the DVLA. The PPC did the minimum.  

Did they do the obvious?
* Did they ever check whether they issued a new permit to a new resident at that address?  Potentially they had (corporately) ACTUAL knowledge that you were no longer there or were wilfully blind to the probability that you weren't. 
* Did they even check with the managing agent (who employ them) as to whether there was a forwarding address? Even if they couldn't give the details, they could have sent on a letter for the PPC. 
* Did they check the electoral roll - 192.com lists persons resident in the same household
* Did they check for an email address on file to contact you at?

So now we've established what the obvious information they should have had/lines of enquiry, let's look at the rules...

CPR 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.

Alternative means of service - say what?
Could they have found either of you via social media.  Something like LinkedIn or Facebook?  Both are alternative methods which can (and have in other cases), on application to the court, been permissible methods of service.  At the very least, they could have reengaged in correspondence to get a new address. 

It would be my suggestion that ALL of the alternatives to just using the "dead" address need to be considered before they actually do.  It is only if they can demonstrably show there were no alternatives that the service can safely be regarded as effective. 

It would be my suggestion that the real reason that they simply dispatched the documents to the old address is because the searches are expensive.  But the CPR says reasonable steps - when they are chasing down a £200+ debt (once we add their bolt-on costs) it's not unreasonable to ask that they make a few phone calls or spend less than £50 on an enhanced search.