Claim Form received - VCS - WON - For the second time!

Fruitcake

Yes they are trying to get around the process because a warrant of control will cause them much more of a problem than if it isn't applied.

I am not legally trained so I can't give an accurate answer, but I am all for giving the scammers some of their own medicine.


If you do respond, I would use similar words to the scammers such as, The defendant is disappointed that the claimant has continued to refuse payment as ordered by the court simply because they have registered a complaint with the court on an entirely different matter.
The defendant avers this is unreasonable behaviour and they are at a loss as to why the claimant has continued to refuse to make payment as ordered as it will have no affect on the claimant's ability to request a set-aside of the that order made by District Judge Heppell.


However, if the warrant of control legal process does not require you to rely/respond, then personally I wouldn't. I would just make sure that I could show a judge, this is the CPR, section X and Y. Here are my document/applications. Here is the proof that I followed the correct legal process to the letter, so it cannot be considered unreasonable.
The scammers were ordered to pay me X amount, but failed to do so. I took appropriate legal steps to recover these monies owed to me. 

Hopefully one of the few legally trained regulars can give you a better answer.

lyndonp59

I've just looked at the email from JB again. It is poorly written, the TO: is to the person dealing with their complaint, but ALSO TO my son and TO the other legal guy at VCS instead of CC. I did wonder why it started as "Dear Madam"

beamerguy

I agree with Fruitcake.  This is a problem between VCS and the court and NOT YOU.

You have a right to issue a warrant because VCS refused to pay ... and still do.

You are not being unreasonable when a judge ordered the amount to be paid and VCS refused, it is VCS who are unreasonable. 

Why would you discontinue the warrant, it is your legal right to collect from a debtor ... the JUDGE said so.


Not a letter to be replied to, let VCS and the court sort it out

This really reminds me of "Fawlty Towers"

Coupon-mad

Hmmm...not sure. 

All parties must behave reasonably so you don't want to become viewed by the court as unreasonable at the last gasp moment.  However the warrant of control has cost him £110 so VCS should pay that cost IMHO if he suspends or ends up cancelling the warrant that he applied for in good faith.

lyndonp59

Coupon-mad said:

Hmmm...not sure. 

All parties must behave reasonably so you don't want to become viewed by the court as unreasonable at the last gasp moment.  However the warrant of control has cost him £110 so VCS should pay that cost IMHO if he suspends or ends up cancelling the warrant that he applied for in good faith.

CM - I misunderstood the email my son received from JB which I put on my post earlier today. It was actually addressed TO: the person who had been dealing with their complaint at court and it was to them JB was asking them to suspend it. The confusing thing was it was also TO: my son not CC'ed which was confusing when reading it initially.

I am asssuming we will receive a letter from the court about the set aside and then have to do a WS - is that correct? Can we also ask for phone hearing as VCS don't want a hearing or phone hearing - just heard on papers.

I can put the full N244 plus WS on here if that helps

KeithP

lyndonp59 said:

Coupon-mad said:

Hmmm...not sure. 

All parties must behave reasonably so you don't want to become viewed by the court as unreasonable at the last gasp moment.  However the warrant of control has cost him £110 so VCS should pay that cost IMHO if he suspends or ends up cancelling the warrant that he applied for in good faith.

CM - I misunderstood the email my son received from JB which I put on my post earlier today. It was actually addressed TO: the person who had been dealing with their complaint at court and it was to them JB was asking them to suspend it. The confusing thing was it was also TO: my son not CC'ed which was confusing when reading it initially.

Are you saying that VCS/Excel have sent you/your son a copy of a discussion taking place about someone else's court case?

I wonder if the words Data Protection need to be mentioned here?

Or have I totally misunderstood this?

lyndonp59

KeithP said:

lyndonp59 said:

Coupon-mad said:

Hmmm...not sure. 

All parties must behave reasonably so you don't want to become viewed by the court as unreasonable at the last gasp moment.  However the warrant of control has cost him £110 so VCS should pay that cost IMHO if he suspends or ends up cancelling the warrant that he applied for in good faith.

CM - I misunderstood the email my son received from JB which I put on my post earlier today. It was actually addressed TO: the person who had been dealing with their complaint at court and it was to them JB was asking them to suspend it. The confusing thing was it was also TO: my son not CC'ed which was confusing when reading it initially.

Are you saying that VCS/Excel have sent you/your son a copy of a discussion taking place about someone else's court case?

I wonder if the words Data Protection need to be mentioned here?

Or have I totally misunderstood this?

No it is my son’s  case. The email he received which I put on the post earlier looked like it was asking him to confirm suspending the warrant pending the outcome of the set aside. It was actually to the court person but JB had also put my son as a TO: and not a CC:  as it should have been addressed. If you saw the actual email I think you would know what I mean. 

The N244 application with WS was attached to it. 

I hope that clarifies it. 

Johnersh

As I understand it, the hearing went against C. They were unhappy.

They then chose not to apply/lodge an appeal but to complain. They were unsurprisingly later told to apply.

D was told C would complain, but was specifically advised by the court that there was no application and C did not make one. He did not apply for enforcement immediately but awaited any application or complaint notification. None was forthcoming. Had C made an application, D would not have sought enforcement nor would the court have issued a warrant.

C should also have copied you in to the complaint (as required by the cpr) it did not, until late in the day, by which time he had already put C on notice he would be enforcing.

This is a failure by C to protect their position by making an application. The fact that C has now filed an application, is simply them taking the step that they were always required to do. They cannot now complain that D has begun enforcement or that it was unreasonable to do so when they are the party in breach of a court order. 

Funnily enough, this is exactly the position I referred to on 09/03/2021 on this thread. 

beamerguy

lyndonp59 said:

KeithP said:

lyndonp59 said:

Coupon-mad said:

Hmmm...not sure. 

All parties must behave reasonably so you don't want to become viewed by the court as unreasonable at the last gasp moment.  However the warrant of control has cost him £110 so VCS should pay that cost IMHO if he suspends or ends up cancelling the warrant that he applied for in good faith.

CM - I misunderstood the email my son received from JB which I put on my post earlier today. It was actually addressed TO: the person who had been dealing with their complaint at court and it was to them JB was asking them to suspend it. The confusing thing was it was also TO: my son not CC'ed which was confusing when reading it initially.

Are you saying that VCS/Excel have sent you/your son a copy of a discussion taking place about someone else's court case?

I wonder if the words Data Protection need to be mentioned here?

Or have I totally misunderstood this?

No it is my son’s  case. The email he received which I put on the post earlier looked like it was asking him to confirm suspending the warrant pending the outcome of the set aside. It was actually to the court person but JB had also put my son as a TO: and not a CC:  as it should have been addressed. If you saw the actual email I think you would know what I mean. 

The N244 application with WS was attached to it. 

I hope that clarifies it. 

With the email header you should see the order it was sent.
IE: the court email first and then your son.

It should be a CC but maybe it was done on purpose to confuse

lyndonp59

Johnersh said:

As I understand it, the hearing went against C. They were unhappy.

They then chose not to apply/lodge an appeal but to complain. They were unsurprisingly later told to apply.

D was told C would complain, but was specifically advised by the court that there was no application and C did not make one. He did not apply for enforcement immediately but awaited any application or complaint notification. None was forthcoming. Had C made an application, D would not have sought enforcement nor would the court have issued a warrant.

C should also have copied you in to the complaint (as required by the cpr) it did not, until late in the day, by which time he had already put C on notice he would be enforcing.

This is a failure by C to protect their position by making an application. The fact that C has now filed an application, is simply them taking the step that they were always required to do. They cannot now complain that D has begun enforcement or that it was unreasonable to do so when they are the party in breach of a court order. 

Funnily enough, this is exactly the position I referred to on 09/03/2021 on this thread. 

Yes you have have it spot on!

VCS were unhappy because their legal rep did not get called to the hearing. They claim they sent contact details to the court, however on examining their email trail they did not comply with the order on sending the contact details within 48 hours of receiving the order - they were sent in the afternoon of day 7. They sent their complaint to the court on 25 January (judgment was dated 21st), we were first notified on 8th March by them only but after giving them 7 days to pay otherwise we would execute the warrant.

We sent an email to court, CC'ed VCS, on 11th March detailing all of this so it was on record and to make the court aware VCS had had not supplied contact details as ordered within 48 hrs. "MUST....48 hrs" was in bold and caps on the order. We did this as the court was apoligising for missing their email and I felt they should not have apoligised and instead should have said it was VCS's own fault for supplying them late. (they also didn't file their WS to us and the court by the deadline, that was a week late when it finally arrived, but again only after we had sent the email to court and CC'ed VCS, and the court had emailed them asking if they requried relief from sanctions)

The point VCS are deliberately ignoring is that we could have just executed the warrant 14 days after 21st January but didn't, and out of common courtesy notified them and gave them 7 days from 4th March which is 6 weeks after the 14 day court deadline.

The case was dismissed on evidence (is that the right word?) in our WS. The costs we were claiming of £95 were also detailed in our WS, along with other costs the judge would not award, so there was nothing VCS could say was not already available in writing prior to, and during the hearing even without their rep present. They chose not to offer any comments to our WS, but we did sumbit a supplementary WS to dismiss all their irrelevant points.

I have re-read you post 9/3/2021 thanks. So, assuming I will be able to submit a WS for the set aside, would I (and should I) quote Tibbles v SIG or does it not apply in my case? Would it complicate matters if I did?