Surprise CCJ - please help!

henrik777

If you pass hurdle 2, it's set aside and game on, .......... I mean no need to care about method, provided result is what you need. 

Agreed.


But swapping what should be a cast iron set aside, with costs, for a chance at a set aside with a judge who's not exactly favourable is not something i'd decide upon without consideration.

123MrsT

henrik777 said:

If you pass hurdle 2, it's set aside and game on, .......... I mean no need to care about method, provided result is what you need. 

Agreed.


But swapping what should be a cast iron set aside, with costs, for a chance at a set aside with a judge who's not exactly favourable is not something i'd decide upon without consideration.

Thank you for your reply!

Just to double check, when you say it's not something you'd decide upon without consideration what do you mean? If I submit the evidence does this mean I cannot appeal the set aside decision at a later stage? 

Coupon-mad

I've contacted the director of the agency and asked them if they could write a letter confirming that I had the right to park in the bay on the dates of the PCN as part of my tenancy and noted that whilst the fob and permit were included in the inventory etc.  the judge wasn't sure this would be sufficient to evidence it (they were good with providing me with a copy of the tenancy agreement when I found out about my CCJ so hopefully they will come back and this will go some way to evidencing).
I also asked them if they would have a contract with the landlord that would show the flat is rented through them with the allocated bay. Then just to cover off every option, asked if there was another way they could help me evidence that I rented to the flat with the allocated bay in case there was anything else they had. 
If I don't hear back from the agent tomorrow, I'll contact the landlord to see if they're able to assist. 

That all sounds good, push and push for this evidence this week.

I would also include the proof again that Gladstones had your correct address (have I got that right?) and yet served a claim to a second address without any attempt to check which address was correct for service, and re-state that when the court reviews the position on receipt of this defence, the mandatory set aside position in CPR 13.2 is considered because the Defendant was upset and is not sure that she did justice to the position - that the Claimant had the right address but failed to use it, and you were there to be found.

Johnersh can no doubt put that better than me.  Hopefully another Judge will look at this, because it seems as if this hearing was extremely unfair and possibly wrong in law.

123MrsT

Coupon-mad said:

I've contacted the director of the agency and asked them if they could write a letter confirming that I had the right to park in the bay on the dates of the PCN as part of my tenancy and noted that whilst the fob and permit were included in the inventory etc.  the judge wasn't sure this would be sufficient to evidence it (they were good with providing me with a copy of the tenancy agreement when I found out about my CCJ so hopefully they will come back and this will go some way to evidencing).
I also asked them if they would have a contract with the landlord that would show the flat is rented through them with the allocated bay. Then just to cover off every option, asked if there was another way they could help me evidence that I rented to the flat with the allocated bay in case there was anything else they had. 
If I don't hear back from the agent tomorrow, I'll contact the landlord to see if they're able to assist. 

That all sounds good, push and push for this evidence this week.

I would also include the proof again that Gladstones had your correct address (have I got that right?) and yet served a claim to a second address without any attempt to check which address was correct for service, and re-state that when the court reviews the position on receipt of this defence, the mandatory set aside position in CPR 13.2 is considered because the Defendant was upset and is not sure that she did justice to the position - that the Claimant had the right address but failed to use it, and you were there to be found.

Johnersh can no doubt put that better than me.  Hopefully another Judge will look at this, because it seems as if this hearing was extremely unfair and possibly wrong in law.

Thank you Coupon-mad (and for all your help prior to this too!)  

Gladstone's said they had found me at my correct address and basically said they tried to confirm this by sending me a letter to contact them, however, I did not receive any letter from them (and I don't usually have issues with my post) and oddly despite including copies of all other communications they did not include a copy of this letter in the bundle. I was prepared for the judge to ask about this but she didn't ask at all and told me to stop talking when I began to mention this point! 

I've heard back from one of the landlords who was incredibly kind and sympathetic and said he will speak to the other (who manages the property) and they'll see what they can do, so fingers crossed.

I've also got a meeting with a solicitor tomorrow who's looking over my case so far to see if they're able to help me - they also were surprised and disagreed with the judge not considering the mandatory set aside and focusing on the tickets. They explained that I may already have anything and if so they'll just tell me this but otherwise they can help me with my drafting my defence (they normally get involved before the hearing). I'm mainly keen to get their view on what is acceptable evidence, for example, will a letter suffice or will I need a signed witness statement / is a contract between the agent and landlord the best bet etc.

123MrsT

*have everything not anything even

KeithP

123MrsT said:

*have everything not anything even

Feel free to edit your posts whenever you like.

D_P_Dance

Throw as much money at this as you can afford.  IMO there is a strong possibility that all will be refunded.

Johnersh

The correct approach (by the ppc) in this scenario, where uncertain as to which of 2 addresses the defendant resides at, is to get a claim form sent to both of the addresses.
What you have is *actual* knowledge from C that you may no longer be present at the first address. It ceases to be a last known address as potentially they know you to be elsewhere having obtained a new address.

There was obviously some evidence of a more recent address (potentially better evidence, actually, if their new address details were found from an equifax or equivalent search).

Always difficult where no transcript to look at. My previous comments take nothing away from the fact that the wrong rule appears to have been applied.

Here is an accessible description of how the tests should be applied:
https://www.civillitigationbrief.com/2014/05/18/service-of-the-claim-form-service-at-last-known-address-more-dangerbepoints-to-watch/ 

123MrsT

OK, so I have just very randomly come across this thread when searching the flat address and this the location in which I was parked (albeit in the car park not outside like OP). https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6146428/one-parking-solution-notice-to-keeper-pcn/p6. OP won their POPLA appeal based on the fact the area on the PCN was not under their jurisdiction (extract below). 

I acknowledge the appellants grounds of appeal and evidence provided to demonstrate that the area parked is not Plough Lane.

I have reviewed the operators evidence pack and the PCN stipulates Plough Lane. I have reviewed the site map provided by the operator and must note that Plough Lane is not under the operator’s jurisdiction and as such is not covered by their terms and conditions.

The PCN needs to stipulate the area parked but as this is not covered by the operator, I cannot conclude that the PCN has been issued correctly.

Accordingly, I must allow this appeal. I note the appellant has raised other points relating to the Parking Charge Notice, but as I have allowed the appeal it will have no bearing on the case.

I had always wondered about the post code and it being Plough Lane but wasn't aware this could be an issue. 

Furthermore, now looking at the site map they included in the bundle, per their boundaries it doesn't actually cover the underground car park area at all, only up to the entrance of the car park. I will try and attach a photo below. 



(The arrow is the entrance to the underground car park and the cross is approximately where my allocated space was)

I will also share with my solicitor and let you know their thoughts on also having this in the defence. 

Coupon-mad

Yes, all that adds to the defence but I hope you get a different Judge pick this up and agree that the MANDATORY set aside rule applied anyway.

BTW Johnersh is a solicitor.  Read his reply and link.