Help re Setting aside 2x CCJ

1505grandad

A heads up:-

Check that the title of the parking company is correct in the heading.

"DEFAULT JUDGMENT"  -  as per documents in front of you "Judgment" is correctly spelt in this context.

"1.2. I understand that the Claimant obtained a Default Judgement .........."  -  however you have also used the incorrect spelling in numerous places (i.e. there is no middle "e" in this context).

Shubsta

henrik777 said:

Coupon-mad said:

I've put in my N244 Form that I have set aside the judgement,

You haven't.  You have paid the outstanding sum without admission of liability because you believed this was what was required.  You have not set the judgment aside.

The draft order on legal beagles looks pretty straight forward, If i'm being honest I'm not too sure what its for...? Am I correct in saying it's covers the costs of the Set Aside?
1. The judgment dated 04/12/2018 be set aside.
2. The Defendant shall file and serve its Defence by 4pm on [insert date].
3. The Claimant do pay the Defendant’s costs of this application to the sum of £255
4. The Claimant has permission to file and serve a reply if so required.

The purpose is to provide that Draft Order as a WORD document attachment, so the Judge can see what it is that you are asking for in your application and if he/she agrees and applies discretion to set the CCJ aside due to the claim not being served properly, he/she can use that draft order.  You do this merely to make the Judge's life easier and it's standard court protocol for these cases.  Hopefully the Judge will agree.

I've crossed out the stuff about defence and reply, because you paid the sum.  There is no defence stage now because you have settled the claim.  We have more detailed Draft Orders on the two example set aside threads that I link in the set aside CCJ section of the NEWBIES thread.

If it's set aside then it goes back to the defence stage. Doesn't matter that they paid. But i would ask for my money back in the draft order.

Should I in that case keep the parts that coupon-mad has crossed off the order. For the parking eye ticket I have a defence for the original fine, for BW legal I don’t. 

Thank you all again for your input 

Shubsta

Dear X

Our Client: Britannia Parking Group Limited t/a Britannia Parking

Client Reference:

Our Reference:

We write with reference to the above matter and our previous telephone conversations.

We confirm that we have received the total sum of £130.00. Accordingly, your debt under the above Account Number is satisfied which brings this matter to a close.

Yours sincerely,

BW Legal Just got a response from BW legal, I feel this is a standard response for all claims already satisfied. Should I in that case just go ahead with setting aside without consent and not waste my time trying to convince them too?

Coupon-mad

Shubsta said:

henrik777 said:

If it's set aside then it goes back to the defence stage. Doesn't matter that they paid. But i would ask for my money back in the draft order.

Should I in that case keep the parts that coupon-mad has crossed off the order. For the parking eye ticket I have a defence for the original fine, for BW legal I don’t. 

Yes, I bow to henrik's greater knowledge. 

In that case, due to henrik's advice you should leave them in and ask for the sum paid to be refunded so that the Defendant by the Claimant so that the merits of the claim, and the defence, can be heard.

How can you not have a defence to the other claim (and BTW it is not a claim from BW Legal, they are not the claimant).  We have a thread called 'template defence' (for all non-ParkingEye cases) so why doesn't that suit, if you just add the facts you know, to it?

henrik777

Coupon-mad said:

Shubsta said:

henrik777 said:

If it's set aside then it goes back to the defence stage. Doesn't matter that they paid. But i would ask for my money back in the draft order.

Should I in that case keep the parts that coupon-mad has crossed off the order. For the parking eye ticket I have a defence for the original fine, for BW legal I don’t. 

Yes, I bow to henrik's greater knowledge. 

In that case, due to henrik's advice you should leave them in and ask for the sum paid to be refunded so that the Defendant by the Claimant so that the merits of the claim, and the defence, can be heard.

How can you not have a defence to the other claim (and BTW it is not a claim from BW Legal, they are not the claimant).  We have a thread called 'template defence' (for all non-ParkingEye cases) so why doesn't that suit, if you just add the facts you know, to it?

I assumed you just were just busy and going too quick, TBH.

But unless the claim is set aside then struck out it goes to defence stage. It would be a dangerous strategy to say "Please set aside even though i paid, don't worry i won't be defending" as they'd then basically say yeah i just want a clean credit record which might irk a few judges.

Shubsta

Coupon-mad said:

Shubsta said:

henrik777 said:

If it's set aside then it goes back to the defence stage. Doesn't matter that they paid. But i would ask for my money back in the draft order.

Should I in that case keep the parts that coupon-mad has crossed off the order. For the parking eye ticket I have a defence for the original fine, for BW legal I don’t. 

Yes, I bow to henrik's greater knowledge. 

In that case, due to henrik's advice you should leave them in and ask for the sum paid to be refunded so that the Defendant by the Claimant so that the merits of the claim, and the defence, can be heard.

How can you not have a defence to the other claim (and BTW it is not a claim from BW Legal, they are not the claimant).  We have a thread called 'template defence' (for all non-ParkingEye cases) so why doesn't that suit, if you just add the facts you know, to it?

henrik777 said:

Coupon-mad said:

Shubsta said:

henrik777 said:

If it's set aside then it goes back to the defence stage. Doesn't matter that they paid. But i would ask for my money back in the draft order.

Should I in that case keep the parts that coupon-mad has crossed off the order. For the parking eye ticket I have a defence for the original fine, for BW legal I don’t. 

Yes, I bow to henrik's greater knowledge. 

In that case, due to henrik's advice you should leave them in and ask for the sum paid to be refunded so that the Defendant by the Claimant so that the merits of the claim, and the defence, can be heard.

How can you not have a defence to the other claim (and BTW it is not a claim from BW Legal, they are not the claimant).  We have a thread called 'template defence' (for all non-ParkingEye cases) so why doesn't that suit, if you just add the facts you know, to it?

I assumed you just were just busy and going too quick, TBH.

But unless the claim is set aside then struck out it goes to defence stage. It would be a dangerous strategy to say "Please set aside even though i paid, don't worry i won't be defending" as they'd then basically say yeah i just want a clean credit record which might irk a few judges.

Many thanks Henrik and Coupon, both your input is invaluable (or worth 2k according to some solicitors).

I will confirm the details of the Britannia fine from BW Legal but in all honesty It was a few years back and I cannot remember so I don't actually know what my defence is. For ParkingEye luckily I'm not a frequent flier to the casino so I remember going there. 

Would it not be common place for people who are oblivious to the procedures to be in my position where they had panicked and just paid? In which case would it be an issue applying for a set aside for the CCJ whilst not having a defence for the original fine as I likely have with the Britannia / BW Legal fine?

Coupon-mad

I will confirm the details of the Britannia fine from BW Legal but in all honesty It was a few years back and I cannot remember so I don't actually know what my defence is.

That's why you email the DPO at Britannia, for a SAR.  Many Britannia cases are fatally flawed by the signs and NTK not being in the same name as the landowner authority (read some Britannia threads).  But do the SAR to Britannia right now!

henrik777

Shubsta said:

Coupon-mad said:

Shubsta said:

henrik777 said:

If it's set aside then it goes back to the defence stage. Doesn't matter that they paid. But i would ask for my money back in the draft order.

Should I in that case keep the parts that coupon-mad has crossed off the order. For the parking eye ticket I have a defence for the original fine, for BW legal I don’t. 

Yes, I bow to henrik's greater knowledge. 

In that case, due to henrik's advice you should leave them in and ask for the sum paid to be refunded so that the Defendant by the Claimant so that the merits of the claim, and the defence, can be heard.

How can you not have a defence to the other claim (and BTW it is not a claim from BW Legal, they are not the claimant).  We have a thread called 'template defence' (for all non-ParkingEye cases) so why doesn't that suit, if you just add the facts you know, to it?

henrik777 said:

Coupon-mad said:

Shubsta said:

henrik777 said:

If it's set aside then it goes back to the defence stage. Doesn't matter that they paid. But i would ask for my money back in the draft order.

Should I in that case keep the parts that coupon-mad has crossed off the order. For the parking eye ticket I have a defence for the original fine, for BW legal I don’t. 

Yes, I bow to henrik's greater knowledge. 

In that case, due to henrik's advice you should leave them in and ask for the sum paid to be refunded so that the Defendant by the Claimant so that the merits of the claim, and the defence, can be heard.

How can you not have a defence to the other claim (and BTW it is not a claim from BW Legal, they are not the claimant).  We have a thread called 'template defence' (for all non-ParkingEye cases) so why doesn't that suit, if you just add the facts you know, to it?

I assumed you just were just busy and going too quick, TBH.

But unless the claim is set aside then struck out it goes to defence stage. It would be a dangerous strategy to say "Please set aside even though i paid, don't worry i won't be defending" as they'd then basically say yeah i just want a clean credit record which might irk a few judges.

Many thanks Henrik and Coupon, both your input is invaluable (or worth 2k according to some solicitors).

I will confirm the details of the Britannia fine from BW Legal but in all honesty It was a few years back and I cannot remember so I don't actually know what my defence is. For ParkingEye luckily I'm not a frequent flier to the casino so I remember going there. 

Would it not be common place for people who are oblivious to the procedures to be in my position where they had panicked and just paid? In which case would it be an issue applying for a set aside for the CCJ whilst not having a defence for the original fine as I likely have with the Britannia / BW Legal fine?

The thing is this, you are supposed to defend the particulars of claim and the evidence offered by the claimant. The particulars of claim are supposed to make the case so anyone who reads them can understand the claim

It's an absolute stain on the judiciary that people feel they cannot defend their cases as they do not understand the very basis of the claim. The parking companies and consumer debt lot get away with absolute garbage because too many judges do not have an open mind on these matters. If particulars of claim are no more the bog roll, they should be flushed down the pan. This behaviour really should not be encouraged by them.

Shubsta

Coupon-mad said:henrik777 said

The thing is this, you are supposed to defend the particulars of claim and the evidence offered by the claimant. The particulars of claim are supposed to make the case so anyone who reads them can understand the claim

It's an absolute stain on the judiciary that people feel they cannot defend their cases as they do not understand the very basis of the claim. The parking companies and consumer debt lot get away with absolute garbage because too many judges do not have an open mind on these matters. If particulars of claim are no more the bog roll, they should be flushed down the pan. This behaviour really should not be encouraged by them.

That's why you email the DPO at Britannia, for a SAR.  Many Britannia cases are fatally flawed by the signs and NTK not being in the same name as the landowner authority (read some Britannia threads).  But do the SAR to Britannia right now!

So I have emailed ParkingEye and BW Legal twice in order to consent also requesting the reason they object to consenting to a set aside. They were pretty speedy with their intial reply but appears they are ignoring me now although I will give them more time. But I am wary I need to act promptly so I am keen to get the process started for set aside (without consent from what its looking like) - do you feel I have given enough time for them to give consent? 

I have also sent a SAR to Britannia but I understand this may take up to 30 days. I have asked for it as a matter of urgency. I will also write to Grovesnor Casino complaining about all of this requesting they contact ParkingEye themselves.

Many Thanks for all your help! If theres anything else I should be doing / shoudn't be doing please let me know. 

Coupon-mad

I think don't wait more than 2 weeks, in which case you'd have to crack on with £255 x 2, contested set aside applications.