CEL CCJ Set Aside - Support Please!

henrik777

1.4. Above entails, as per Civil Procedure Rules 6.9 (3,4), that proceedings were not validly served because the Claimant was incorrect in assuming that this was my last known address and did not take reasonable steps to ascertain my current address

(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’).

They can assume an address obtained via DVLA is valid. It doesn't take much imagination to realise it would be unlikely to be a good address forever. Therefore the argument  boils down to this,

Is the lack of response and length of delay between DVLA access and service " reason to believe" ?

The longer the gap, the more unanswered mail, the easier it should be to argue.

redredelise

That's really useful. I will edit WS accordingly to make sure this point is made clear.
Having got the info back from CEL from SAR, I can see there were several letters that were not answered.
There was a good 11 months between claim form being sent and the CCJ.

redredelise

Other than points raised so far, does the rest of the WS sound okay?

redredelise

Particularly around my defence of keeper liability and CEL POFA compliance?

Coupon-mad

Research I have undertaken states that the Claimant does not include ‘Protection of Freedoms Act 2012’ wording on the Parking Charge Notices they issue.

They didn't but they changed that a couple of years ago.  You are probably right, if it was an old PCN.

redredelise

Coupon-mad said:

Research I have undertaken states that the Claimant does not include ‘Protection of Freedoms Act 2012’ wording on the Parking Charge Notices they issue.

They didn't but they changed that a couple of years ago.  You are probably right, if it was an old PCN.

PCN was August 2018 and I have a copy of it now thanks to a SAR from CEL.

But even seeing it I'm still not sure it complies with POFA or not.

That section of the WS was taken from another posted on the forum. Now I have seen the PCN I'll need to change the wording on it, but I need to be sure about CEL compliance with POFA if I'm going to use that in my defence.

I've tried searching this a lot but still can't get a definitive answer.
Is it worth me posting a redacted copy of the PCN?

Interestingly, I discovered through the SAR that there was another PCN from later that year in December 2018. The PCN for that had details on the back regarding POFA/how to pay etc. The PCN from August 2018 (which has the CCJ) did not show any other such details. I wonder if this means that by December 2018 CEL had sorted out their wording to comply, but previous to this their NtK PCNs didn't have anything written on the back?

Coupon-mad

Sounds about right.  Yes, show us both sides of this one...

redredelise

This is the PCN which now has the CCJ on it - from August 2018.
The SAR came as a single PDF with multiple pages. 
This PCN page was followed by a page with a closer image of the vehicle, then another letter (sent on a separate occasion to demand payment).
There was no page showing the reverse side of this PCN.

KeithP

If you want help in deciding whether or not that PCN is POFA compliant, then please show us that PCN again with all dates showing.

By you saying "There was no page showing the reverse side of this PCN", it looks like they have withheld information when responding to your SAR.

redredelise

Below is the PCN from December 2018 (and has no CCJ on it).

This has a page following it in the PDF, which must be the reverse side, giving additional details....



Next page below...