CCJ Removal

cctps88

Hi all,

Two years ago, I received a CCJ without my knowledge for overstaying by fifteen minutes in a private car park (it was a KFC and hadn't seen a sign saying there were any limits on parking). The original fine had been sent to a previous address and the first I knew of it was when it appeared on my credit file.

I requested details and was simply sent a text-only message detailing when it was awarded and how much I needed to pay. I wanted it dealt with, so just paid it.

In hindsight, I don't think this was fair. If I'd known about the fine, I'd have paid it. I've read that this could be grounds for having the CCJ removed, but how would I go about doing this?

waamo

This thread tells you exactly what to do https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6017606/ccj-from-anpr-camera-at-kfc#latest

Coupon-mad

All parking ticket CCJs are likely to be agreed to be set aside by Judges if the person acts promptly when they are discovered.

These are different from bog standard 'debt' CCJs and Judges are not stupid, they know about parking firms. 

Here is one just moved to the right forum, where we deal with these all the time and win them all the time:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/78011746/#Comment_78011746

I hope the regulars on this board will see the difference and that people are told to post on the parking tickets forum board every time. Almost 100% likely to be set aside and usually with the £255 court fee paid back by the parking firm, and almost always with the original PCN claim blown out of the water too.

sourcrates

Moved to appropriate forum.

nosferatu1001

Did you pay it within the one month to get it removed from your credit file?

Coupon-mad

I've just spotted that this OP knew about this 18 months ago, so has not acted promptly, and is unlikely to get this set aside unless the PPC consents:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6017606/ccj-from-anpr-camera-at-kfc

Ask them under what terms they will consent to set aside the CCJ.  NOT BY PHONE.

ninjaef

I work in Legal for a major airline. I get to converse with many colleagues sharing a passion for law. Clearly I am not a practicing professional for the courts, but what I do know from empirical lived experience is that the courts and system are well aware of parking fines and companies that issue them. Like all companies, there are "good" and "less so good" examples. Technology plays a huge part as they tend not to implement the law but rather the business objectives of the issuer. The law is also peppered with keywords such as "reasonable" , "fair" , "consideration" etc. 

A general consensus might often be found in the notion that if one exerts effort beyond a "reasonable minimum expectation" and has not intentionally sought to evade or disregard statute, then a strong defence can be presented for a successful win. 

In this subject instance, the "defendant" can reasonably claim they were not served with the correct paperwork in the prescribed format and procedure (to their address). However, the fact that (s)he was aware some 18months ago and has not taken further action in defence of the claim , is material and unlikely to curry much favour. I think a judge would have been rather sympathetic to these nuisance parking fine firms, but not in this case given 18+ months has resulted in no attempt to resolve the matter. Personally, if it were me, I would have looked favourably on a defence around incorrect serving of the fine, but now I would view the defendant as trying to "get one over" on the firm.

Oh, and don't forget - law makes no adjustment for ignorance. "I didn't see" , "I didn't know" , "there didn't appear to be" ... all well tried and tested now so not much use - mostly.

Just a personal view and you're welcome to a different one.

Coupon-mad

I agree - as I observed, this OP has let that boat sail due to sitting on their hands for 18 months and can only hope that the PPC will consent to set it aside, and that the court will rubber stamp their application and not view it as credit cleansing.

nosferatu1001

CPR13.2 does not require acting promptly, but the OP has not furnished any useful dates at all. None. So we dont even know if they have an extant CCJ or not.

KeithP

nosferatu1001 said:

CPR13.2 does not require acting promptly, but the OP has not furnished any useful dates at all. None. So we dont even know if they have an extant CCJ or not.

This is not the OP's first thread about this.

These are from June 2019...
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6017794/ccj-from-anpr-camera-at-kfc
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6017606/ccj-from-anpr-camera-at-kfc

henrik777

nosferatu1001 said:

CPR13.2 does not require acting promptly, but the OP has not furnished any useful dates at all. None. So we dont even know if they have an extant CCJ or not.

Exactly, the judge has no choice if they accept incorrect service (or more accurately, no service)