Parking Eye unknown CCJ set aside help

Coupon-mad

Good point, well made.

frew198

Thanks again for the advice 

The full email is below . Would you recommend I change anything on my WS based on this or leave as it is currently 

Thank you for your recent correspondence.

 

The Claimant can confirm that we issued 4 items of correspondence to the address held by the DVLA for the Registered Keeper of the vehicle. Upon receiving no response to this correspondence, the Claimant contacted a Credit Reference Agency on 27th March 2019, in an effort to obtain an alternative address for service, however the address which was returned was the same as had been provided by the DVLA in the first instance.

 

When issuing the Claim Form using the MCOL service, ParkingEye used the Defendant’s last known address, as required by CPR 6.9, before the Claim Form was served by the court.

 

ParkingEye maintain the requirements of CPR 6 have been complied with and that the Claim Form was deemed served upon the Defendant pursuant to CPR 6.14. It is notable that the Defendant would also have been served with a copy of the Default Judgment from the court at the same address.

 

With respect to the amount requested by the Claimant, we would highlight that this amounts to the £197 of the Judgment amount, along with an additional £70 costs incurred by the Claimant when referring the matter to a debt recovery agency in an effort to recover the outstanding amount of the Judgment.

Coupon-mad

the Claimant contacted a Credit Reference Agency on 27th March 2019, in an effort to obtain an alternative address for service, however the address which was returned was the same as had been provided by the DVLA in the first instance.

Add a sentence pointing out the Claimant has shown no evidence of this or whether alternative addresses were apparent from that search and the Claimant merely chose the DVLA address again.  Add @henrik777's argument which makes a lot of sense.

along with an additional £70 costs incurred by the Claimant when referring the matter to a debt recovery agency in an effort to recover the outstanding amount of the Judgment.

Add a sentence pointing out that these firms (e.g. DCBRecovery) operate on a no-recovery-no-fee basis so even if the CCJ was referred to them, there was no cost paid by the Claimant and there is no evidence to contradict this norm.

henrik777

the Claimant contacted a Credit Reference Agency on 27th March 2019, in an effort to obtain an alternative address for service

What i would do,

1. Get as many free credit reports as i could to compare.

2. Ask them which one they used.

3. Check voters roll and other places they could easily check.

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

The claimant freely admits that they had "reason to believe"

(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’).

Is it reasonable to check 1 CRA when you have suspicion ?

(4) Where, having taken the reasonable steps required by paragraph (3), the claimant –

(a) ascertains the defendant’s current address, the claim form must be served at that address; or

(b) is unable to ascertain the defendant’s current address, the claimant must consider whether there is –

(i) an alternative place where; or

(ii) an alternative method by which,

service may be effected.

(a) negates (b) but if it doesn't the (b) is mandatory.

http://www.civillitigationbrief.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Nuur-v-Sajid-2018-CLCC-on-appeal-to-HHJ-Roberts.pdf

I would submit that the claimant took no serious steps to find you. 1 cursory glance at a CRA report (and the accuracy/authenticity of the statement and report remains to be seen)

frew198

Thanks @henrik777 really useful 

I actually recieved the below from parking eye just . This looks like progress in a consented set aside although in order to act promptly I had already paid for the contested set aside . 

Thank you for your recent correspondence.

 

In order for the Claimant to consider consenting to the Judgment being set aside on the basis that both parties bear their own costs, we would require evidence that you were a patron on site on the date of the parking event and therefore entitled to park on site.

 

We would therefore kindly request that you provide any relevant evidence to the Claimant at the earliest convenience so that we may review the same.

Coupon-mad

If you have already expended £255 I would not agree to anything that involves you bearing your own costs.  One of the main things (second behind the need to get the CCJ wiped) is the hope that the Judge will order your £255 to be repaid by ParkingEye.

lostCCJ

nosferatu1001 said:

WS - I
Defence - defendant
Always
And absolutely adduce (include) in your WS the BPA Code of Practice, that parking eye are required to follow, according to the supreme court, which requires them to trace the address. Adduce as well the email from parking eye showing they knew they hadnt had any contact, thereofre they knew this clause of the cop had been triggered and their incompetence has cost you time and money

Hey Nosferatu,  This is interesting - what is the case that we'd need to list (I'm in a similar place)! B

Coupon-mad

Surely you are not wondering which was the (only) Supreme Court ParkingEye case...?

Google tells you and this is the case they all try to hang their hats on.

Uptown_Boy

And don't ask any further questions on this thread - start your own (if you haven't already).

One case, one person, one thread. That's the way we work here. (With very rare exceptions).

D_P_Dance

Also, before you ask any more questions please do some basic research, google is good.