CCJs (x2) discovered after credit check from Parking Eye and Civil Enforcement

cyhb

Hi guys,
Appreciate the effort you all put in to this forum! I've gone through the NEWBIES thread and digested similar cases to mine.
Would appreciate some feedback on my Draft Orders & Witness Statements.

BRIEF TIMELINE:
08/17 Moved House
10/18 Alleged date of ParkingEye Ltd (PEL) Parking Offence
11/18 Alleged date of Civil Enforcement Ltd (CEL) Parking Offence
01/19 Date of Issue of new V5C Log Book (after realising I hadn't changed my address  on the V5C when moving house)
03/19 Parked in same CEL carpark)
03/19 Received PCN from CEL and paid CEL £60 for 03/19 offence, so they therefore had my new address in their records)
09/19 CCJ Issued at CCBS by CEL
01/20 CCJ Issued at CCBS by PEL
02/06/20 Joined checkmyfile
03/06/2020 Realised I had 2 x CCJs
03/06/2020 Contacted CCBS and discovered details of Claimants and locations of alleged offences.
03/06/2020 Downloaded reports from Registry Trust for all my recent residential addresses since 2014.
03/06/2020 Luckily managed to get some letters from my old address related to PEL Offence - Claim Form, Default Judgment, CCJ letter from PEL, Notice of Debt Recovery from DCBL.
07/06/2020 Emailed CCBS to request copy of CEL claim form as I have no paperwork at all from CEL.

ParkingEye Offence (10/18)
Although I have the above mentioned paperwork for this, all drivers of my vehicle have no recollection of having visited this car park. The closest I can find is a visit to the town in question 4 days earlier.

Civil Enforcement Offence (11/18)
This appears to have been a car park in which my partner had parked on a few occasions. This PEL carpark is situated right next to a council car park with a very low small fence acting as a divider. After discussion it appears she had regularly parked in the PEL Car Park but mistakenly purchased a parking from the council ticket machine. At first I thought this CCJ might have been somehow connected to the PCN which I had paid in 03/19, but subsequently confirmed from checking Google Timeline that this CCJ was related to 11/18.

DRAFT ORDER (same for both but with relevant dates etc changed)

IN THE COUNTY COURT AT: ________
CIVIL ENFORCEMENT LIMITED (Claimant)
And
MR NAME NAME NAME
CLAIM No: XXXXXXXXX

IT IS ORDERED that:
1. The default judgment dated XX/XX/19 be set aside.
2. Costs to be reserved.
3. Unless the Claimant serves a copy of the Claim Form on the Defendant by 4pm on __/__/2020 paragraph 2 shall cease to have effect and the Claimant shall pay the Defendant's costs summarily assessed at £255 and the claim shall be struck out.
4. If the Claimant serves the claim form as directed in paragraph 3 the Defendant shall file and serve a defence by 4pm on __/__/2020.
5. Should the Claimant discontinue the Claim after the CCJ is set aside, paragraph 2 shall cease to have effect and the Claimant shall pay the Defendant's costs summarily assessed at £255 plus the Defendant's costs for attending the hearing.
6. All enforcement be put on hold pending the outcome of the application.

WITNESS STATEMENT (below is CEL version, and PEL is similar but with 1.7 removed and all relevant dates, locations etc changed)
I am NAME NAME NAME and I am the defendant in this matter.

This is my supporting statement to my application dated 8th June 2020 requesting to:

a.      Set aside the Default Judgment CCJ XXXXXXXX from Parking Eye Ltd dated nnth September 2019 as it was not properly served at my current address.

c.      Order for the original claims to be dismissed.

d.      Order for the claimant to pay the defendant £255 as reimbursement for the set aside fee.

1. SET ASIDE DEFAULT JUDGMENT

1.1.       I was the registered keeper of the vehicle at the time of the alleged offence.

1.2.       I understand that the Claimant obtained a Default Judgment against me as the Defendant on nnth September 2019. I am aware that the Claimant is Parking Eye Ltd, and that the assumed claim is in respect of an unpaid Parking Charge Notice from nnth November 2018 at NAME NAME Car Park, TOWN NAME.

1.3.       The claim form was not served at my current address and thus I was not aware of the Default Judgement until 3rd June 2020 following a credit check online, as found in Schedule (X)

The address on the claim is [OLD ADDRESS]. I moved to my current address at [CURRENT ADDRESS] on nnth August 2017. In support of this I can provide a scanned copy of my deeds, and a current council tax bill; Schedule (X)

1.4.      In addition to the above, it should be highlighted that the integrity and law-abiding intention of the Defendant should be taken into consideration on the basis that;

1.4.1   I discovered a CCJ was lodged onto my credit file on the 3rd June 2020.

1.4.2   On the same day I contacted the County Court Business Centre to obtain relevant information relating to the Default Judgment

1.4.3   On 8th June 2020 I wilfully submitted my case to set aside this judgment and fairly present my case.

1.5.       It should be noted that at no time have I tried to avoid paying for any known debt and was at all times to be found by a simple trace. My name is unique worldwide, and a 5 second Google search would have revealed plenty of avenues to attempt contact with me. In fact I was contacted by a different claimant in January 2019 who had performed due diligence to ascertain my current address, and as a result I discovered that my V5C had not been updated with my current address. I promptly changed my address on the V5C and subsequently received an updated V5C issued on nnth January 2019, as can be seen in Schedule (X). As a result of correcting my current address with the DVLA a third claimant was able to find me.

1.6.       I believe the Claimant has behaved unreasonably in pursuing a claim against me without ensuring they held my correct contact details at the time of the claim.

1.7.       In fact, in March 2019 I received a Parking Charge Notice from the Claimant for a separate alleged offence at the same car park in the same vehicle, which I duly paid, as can be seen from my bank statement in Schedule (X), so since March 2019 they had my current address in their own records.

1.8.       On that basis, I believe the Claimant has not adhered to CPR 6.9 (3) where they had failed to show due diligence in using an address at which I no longer reside. The claimant did not take reasonable steps to ascertain the address of my current residence despite having some 10 months to establish an address. This has led to the claim being incorrectly served to an old address and an irregular judgement.

1.9.       According to publicly available information my circumstances are far from being unique. The industry’s persistent failure to use correct and current addresses results is an unnecessary burden for individuals and the justice system across the country.

Furthermore, Prime Minister May publicly pledged to investigate ‘abuse’ of the CCJ System and so called ‘Credit Clamping’ as reported in the Daily Mail article dated 12 September 2016. The Right Honourable Sir Oliver Heald on 23 December 2016 "announced a crackdown on unresolved debts which can damage people’s credit ratings without them knowing. The action comes after concerns were raised that companies were issuing claims to consumers using incorrect addresses."

The Minister added "It cannot be right that people who are unaware of debts can see their lives and finances ruined by county court judgments. That in the digital age, we must ensure companies pursuing unpaid debts make every reasonable effort to contact individuals, rather than simply relying on a letter to an old address.” Furtherance to points raised in 1.3 above.

1.10.    Considering the above I was unable to defend this claim. I believe that the Default Judgement against me was issued incorrectly and thus should be set aside and I ask the Court to kindly consider the reimbursement of the fee of £255 from the claimant should this request be successful.

2. ORDER DISMISSING THE CLAIM. 

Not done yet.

Statement of Truth:

I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.
Full Name: xxxxx
Defendant)
Dated xx June 2018

QUESTIONS

Am i unnecessarily muddying the waters in 1.5 and 1.7?

Is ORDER DISMISSING THE CLAIM necessary at this stage or can it wait?

Do I need to do a SAR with both claimants at this stage?

Ideally I need to get these CCJs removed asap as I was planning on applying for a mortgage. So whilst not ideal, I would be prepared to swallow paying the debt if it removed my CCJs much more quickly as every month delayed is effectively costing me in lost income. Will it take any longer by combining the set aside with an order dismissing the claim?

Many thanks for any replies!

KeithP

Google - april 2020 statement of truth.

Coupon-mad

I'd remove the word 'wilfully' which isnt quite right.  And as KeithP says, you need the new statement of truth.

Nice work, nice first post showing good research.  Always encouraging to see and hope your Judge agrees.

cyhb

Thanks very much, will remove 'wilfully' willingly haha. Copy and paste will let some amusing things through!
The whole process is melting my brain, but needs must!

cyhb

Whilst I have prepared this I have been reading on other threads that it may be worth contacting the PPCs and asking them to set aside with consent? Would this speed up the process (though still leave me liable for the debt of course)? If it shaved a couple of months off the time to get rid of the CCJs I would do it that way.

henrik777

You seem to want to argue defective service (the claimant is at fault), so i'm not sure why you'd ask for costs reserved. Where there's blame there's a claim (so to speak).

Specific to Parking Eye, why not ask for a witness statement from the people who gave you the paper work, including why the didn't return to sender etc ?



Deeds, council tax are extra weight to new address but not easily accessible to either, what about voters roll, bt directory enquiries etc 

Due diligence is not part of CPR 6.9(3).

http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part06#6.3

The choices are there.

Usually,particularly in regards parking it's 6.9 that's in play.

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

So usual/last know address is ok UNLESS there is reason to believe all is not as it appears.

(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’).


So your job is to persuade the court they had a "reason to believe" you were no longer resident there. Is no response in the time frame enough on it's own ? Perhaps. 

Coupon-mad

Yes you could change the costs to be 'reserved' to:

'The costs assessed at £255 (plus £xx loss of leave/salary for the set aside hearing day) are ordered to be repaid to the D by the C within 14 days of this Order.'

You are not liable for the sum, and asking if a PPC will consent to a set aside IS NOT offering to pay them!

cyhb

Thanks for your responses.

You seem to want to argue defective service (the claimant is at fault), so i'm not sure why you'd ask for costs reserved. Where there's blame there's a claim (so to speak).

I then need to understand what 'costs reserved' means - I'll look that up.

Specific to Parking Eye, why not ask for a witness statement from the people who gave you the paper work, including why the didn't return to sender etc ?

The current resident at my old address had kept them with the intention at some point of trying to find out where I lived (I think he moved in around Sep 2019. However I suspect he has certain mental health issues and didn't get round to attempting. The previous owners (to whom we sold the house) never forwarded any mail to us at all. What would be the benefit of the witness statement from this guy?

Deeds, council tax are extra weight to new address but not easily accessible to either, what about voters roll, bt directory enquiries etc 

Yes I will check those. I could easily do a print screen of a google search which would bring up my director details at companies house immediately with my office address, as well as all my social media and youtube pages. Would that help?

(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’).


So your job is to persuade the court they had a "reason to believe" you were no longer resident there. Is no response in the time frame enough on it's own ? Perhaps. 

Judging on the other threads, a lengthy time frame seems to be a common line of reasoning. Also would the fact that they sent me a PCN for the same car park and same car on a separate occasion to my new address be another good reason? Are there admin systems so poor that they cannot connect that data?

cyhb

Yes you could change the costs to be 'reserved' to:
'The costs assessed at £255 (plus £xx loss of leave/salary for the set aside hearing day) are ordered to be repaid to the D by the C within 14 days of this Order.'

Thanks for this coupon-mad. That makes sense. And now I understand more what costs reserved is. What you are specifying here for costs means that the Judge can make a decision there and there whether to agree to this?

You are not liable for the sum, and asking if a PPC will consent to a set aside IS NOT offering to pay them!

So really this is just beginining a conversation with them? I mean I'm sure they will say (as I'm sure I have seen elsewhere) "as long as you pay the debt and the court costs we'll consent to the set aside" Is that correct?

henrik777

Also would the fact that they sent me a PCN for the same car park and same car on a separate occasion to my new address be another good reason?

That's gold.

Yes length of time is a reason but alone it's dependant on the actual time and the less time it is the harder the argument is to win. However, given the extra information that they wrote to you elsewhere i'd say they've got an enormous problem.

Coupon-mad

cyhb said:

You are not liable for the sum, and asking if a PPC will consent to a set aside IS NOT offering to pay them!

So really this is just beginining a conversation with them? I mean I'm sure they will say (as I'm sure I have seen elsewhere) "as long as you pay the debt and the court costs we'll consent to the set aside" Is that correct?

With CEL they will say that!  We've seen them demand £300-odd, then not actually provide any form of consent at all and the person was still stuck with the CCJ.  I'd trust CEL only as far as I could throw them! 

In any case as they are the ones who already knew your address (was the 2nd PCN from them about the same car?) then you have such a strong case against them you can crack on against them and certainly ask the Judge to recognise their unreasonable conduct and order that CEL pay your costs!

But P/Eye can be easier to negaotiate with by email...and might not require any settlement if you point out that you are going to be putting in a N244 anyway, regardless of whether they agree or not, and given they took no steps to try to locate you, then you will be seeking a mandatory set aside and the costs (£255 plus your day off work for a hearing) against them. 

So what's in it for them, is to save that risk and agree to a set aside because they were at fault with the address.  They might agree to drop hands if (say) you don't seek your £100 'with consent' set aside cost, they might say they will consent to set aside and discontinue the claim.    The alternative being you will seek over £300 in costs against Parkingeye in front of a Judge and the CCJ (almost certainly) gets set aside anyway...

See what we mean?  You are giving P/Eye a choice that has value.  With them, you won't know till you ask but you have to spell out 'what's in it for them' in terms of costs. 

It also helps if you can say you have also complained to their client (landowner/retailer) who is horrified by what has happened to you, blah blah...  ParkingEye probably won't want to annoy a retailer for the sake of consenting to one set aside.

CEL won't give a stuff.  The two firms both operate horribly against consumers with unfair, flawed and hidden ANPR cameras, but they are like chalk and cheese.  The 'legal' person at CEL is ex-Wonga!

 I could easily do a print screen of a google search which would bring up my director details at companies house immediately with my office address, as well as all my social media and youtube pages. Would that help?   

Yes.