Civil Enforcement Limited - CCJ Obtained - Wrong adress on letter

RINCO

Coupon-mad said:

Yes because no defence is needed yet. 

You know that right now, it's just a Draft Order and WS (about why a discretionary set aside should be granted for this torture x 4 - make sure every WS lists ALL FOUR claims so the Judge can join up the dots. In each WS, ask for ONE hearing for the lot, to save the court time and money, and to resolve in one go, claims that should have been filed as one). 

Thanks I overlooked that step! 

Ok will prepare One N244 for all the claims and witness statement and any other bits looking in the threads linked in the sticky. Will post once done. 

So technically instead of paying 4x court fee She’d only have to pay one if the funding application was rejected? 

Le_Kirk

RINCO said:

Coupon-mad said:

Yes because no defence is needed yet. 
You know that right now, it's just a Draft Order and WS (about why a discretionary set aside should be granted for this torture x 4 - make sure every WS lists ALL FOUR claims so the Judge can join up the dots. In each WS, ask for ONE hearing for the lot, to save the court time and money, and to resolve in one go, claims that should have been filed as one). 

Thanks I overlooked that step! 

Ok will prepare One N244 for all the claims and witness statement and any other bits looking in the threads linked in the sticky. Will post once done. 

So technically instead of paying 4x court fee She’d only have to pay one if the funding application was rejected? 

We have seen posts where the court insisted on the number of fees equalling the number of claims but the court will advise.  As @Coupon-mad says, if you/your funding application is accepted it is a no brainer.

RINCO

Okay, Here is a draft witness statement. I've looked into Henderson V henderson on the forum and taken some extracts as it applies perfectly as CM stated. Thanks a lot for that. It is however difficult with the limited information I have and the overriding doubt in my mind that these letters may well have been ignored in the past regardless of the address being incorrect today. I would appreciate and addition or redaction suggestions. Ill draft the draft order shortly. 

In the County Court 

Between 

Civil Enforcement (Claimant)

and

xx (Defendant)

-------------------------

Witness Statement

-------------------------

1. I am xx, of xx, the Defendant in this matter. I will say as follows:

2. On 14/9/2020, I received a letter from Civil Enforcement (PCN reference xx). On 17/09/2020 I received a further 3 letters from Civil Enforcement  (PCN References; xx xx xx xx)

3. The issuing of separate claims, by the same Claimant and for essentially the same cause of action, is an abuse of the civil litigation process. The long-established case law in Henderson -v- Henderson [1843] 67 ER 313, and more recent authorities, establishes the principle that when a matter becomes the subject of litigation, the parties are required to advance their whole case. In the event that similar matters proceed to claim issue, they must be particularised as a single claim and not as multiple separate cases, otherwise (as an extreme analogy) a builder purportedly owed money by an individual customer, could file a separate claim for each brick laid.

The facts of these cases are duplicated in every respect: Claimant, Defendant, parking charge breach allegation, and added unrecoverable 'debt collection' and/or 'legal' costs for each case, that are an abuse of process in themselves, given that the Claimant did not in fact ever incur such costs and that they are disallowed by virtue of the ceilings set in the POFA 2012 and the Supreme Court decision in ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis.

Multiple claims and disproportionate added costs run contrary to the overriding objective of CPR 1.1, the disposal of cases justly and at proportionate cost.

5. It is not known who the contraventions state within the letters were supposedly committed by

6. It was noted that the address on the letters is incorrect. The address is a previous address of which I vacated April 2018. Address as follows; xx

7. Prior to this letter I not recall any communications from Civil Enforcement at my current address or previous. 

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 that the Defendant no longer resides. The claimant did not take reasonable steps to ascertain the address of my current residence despite having 24 months to establish an address. This has led to a defective service and an irregular judgement.

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.”

9. I feel harassed and distressed after being contacted in this manor at such a later stage with very little information and with it not being clear who has supposedly made the infringement. 

10. I invite the Court to; 

1. Grant a discretionary set aside.
2. Consolidate the claims to be determined at a single hearing 
3. To apply appropriate sanctions against the Claimant for a gross abuse of process and to strike out the imaginary and unrecoverable added 'damages/debt collector' costs, which do not exist even once, let alone multiple times per claim.

I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.

Signature

Date

1505grandad

Some observations:-

Have you stated the name of the claimant as it appears on the Court docs in the heading?

No number for para 4

Para 5  -  "It is not known who the contraventions (state) within ......"

should that be (stated)?

Para 7  -  "Prior to this letter I (not) recall any communications................)

(cannot)

Para 8  -  "The claimant did not take reasonable steps to ascertain the address of my current residence despite having 24 months to establish an address. This has led to a defective service and an (irregular judgement.)"

should that be (irregular default Judgment)?    -    also, note in this context there is no middle "e" in Judgment

You have not stated the full Statement of Truth at the end.

Coupon-mad

You need four N244s.  Each must reference the other three and all should be sent together with a covering email asking for one hearing.

RINCO

 

Thanks for the alterations Grandad will add those in. 

Coupon-mad said:

You need four N244s.  Each must reference the other three and all should be sent together with a covering email asking for one hearing.

In that case I need her to apply for the funding 4 times also? 

Coupon-mad

Yes...stupid isnt it?!

RINCO

Wow ok thanks! more typing to be done tomorrow.  

I am thinking of adding to the WS to demand CE pay the set aside fee IF the government assistance does not get approved 

RINCO

Ok 4x funding applications done , 4x N244's DONE. We Filled it in a similar manner to the thread here citing CPR 13.2 :
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6134970/surprise-ccj-please-help/p3

using some other formatting pointers from this thread here
https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/257421-help-filling-out-the-n244-form/

However in the name of the court do a put in the local county court or the Business Centre? And Am I sending my pack to the local county court or business centre?


Draft order Below::
DRAFT ORDER

IN THE COUNTY COURT AT

Civil Enforcement (Claimant)

And

xx (Defendant)

District Judge

UPON reading the Defendant's application dated 19th September 2020 and the annexed witness statement of Clare Stocks dated 19th September 2020

IT IS ORDERED that:

1. The 4 default judgments dated:

xx2016 (Claim No: xx

xx  2017 (Claim No: xx)

xx2017 (Claim No: xx)

xx 2017 (Claim No: xx)

Are

A.Collated into one single hearing

B. Costs to be reserved.

C. All enforcement be put on hold pending the outcome of the application.

2. Should the Claimant discontinue the Claim after the CCJ is set aside, the Claimant shall pay the Defendant's costs summarily assessed at £255 plus the Defendant's costs for attending the hearing.

Coupon-mad

It's up to you, and never clear.  You can do either!