Very confused, not sure whats going on with a CCJ

Johnersh

OK, so faced with a conflict of addresses, C gambled and plumped for the wrong one. 

Unless the o/p said specifically "please direct all future correspondence to this address" he will presumably want to argue that it fails to meet the criteria of a usual residential address cpr 6.9(2) nor is it the registered address of the vehicle keeper.

If the address named on the claim form is one the defendant has *never* lived at eg. An investment property, then there is case law that this is not good service. 

teknotel

I am hoping to send the N244 today, I have filled in the form here is my draft order and witness statement, can someone let me know if this seems ok:

Witness Statement

I am XXX and I am the defendant in this matter. This is my supporting statement to my application dated 1 December 2021 requesting to:

a. Set aside the default judgment dated 6th April 2021 as it was not properly served at my current address.

b. Order for the original claim to be dismissed.

c. Order for the claimant to pay the defendant £275 as reimbursement for the set aside fee.

DEFAULT JUDGMENT

1.1. I was the registered keeper of the vehicle at the time of the alleged offence.

1.2. I understand that the Claimant obtained a Default Judgement against me as the Defendant on 6th April 2021. I am aware that the Claimant is One Parking Solution Ltd., I had no knowledge of the allegation until I requested a subject access request from One Parking Solution Ltd which was recieved on the 12th of November 2021.  

1.3. The claim form was not served at my vehicles registered address, the address for me on the electoral roll or the email address I appealed from  and I thus was not aware of the Default Judgement until 18th October 2021 following a letter from DCBL, a debt recovery agency who did not give any details of either their client or the alleged contravention.

The address on the claim is 169 xxx. This is a property I own but do not live at, my address at the time was Flat 10 xxx which as mentioned previously was the vehicles registered address and my electoral roll address.

1.4. In addition to the above, it should be highlighted that the integrity and law-abiding intention of the Defendant should be taken into consideration on the basis that;

1.4.1 I discovered a CCJ was lodged onto my credit file on the 18th October 2021.

1.4.2 On 18th of October I contacted the County Court Business Centre to obtain relevant information relating to this default judgement; Schedule (X).

1.4.3 A subject access request was received on the 12th of November from One Parking Solution Ltd.

1.4.4 I contacted legal advisories and solicitors for the two weeks to find out my position and whether I needed legal representation.

1.4.5 I asked One Parking Solution Ltd for consent to set aside the Default Judgement on the 26th of November 2021 which was refused.

1.4.6 On the 1st of December October 2021 I have wilfully submitted my case in order to set-aside this judgement and fairly present my case.

1.5. I believe the Claimant has behaved unreasonably in pursuing a claim against me without ensuring they held the Defendant’s correct contact details at the time of the claim.

1.6. 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, as I have no idea what the original alleged contravention is about I have no idea how long they have had to ascertain this information. This has led to the claim being incorrectly served to an old address and an irregular judgement.

1.7. 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."

The Minister added "It cannot be right that people who are unaware of debts can see their lives and finances ruined by county court judgments. That in the digital age, we must ensure companies pursuing unpaid debts make every reasonable effort to contact individuals, rather than simply relying on a letter to an old address.” Furtherance to points raised in 1.3 above.

1.8. Considering the above I was unable to defend this claim. I believe that the Default Judgement against me was issued incorrectly and thus should be set aside and I ask the Court to kindly consider the reimbursement of the fee of £275 from the claimant should this request be successful.

teknotel

DRAFT ORDER

IN THE COUNTY COURT AT ONE PARKING LIMITED (Claimant)
And xxx (Defendant)

District Judge

 

UPON reading the Defendant's application dated 1st of December 2021 and the annexed witness statement of xxx dated 1st of December 2021 IT IS ORDERED that:

 

1.      The default judgment dated 6th April 2021 be set aside.

2.      Costs to be reserved.

3.      Unless the Claimant serves a copy of the Claim Form on the Defendant by 4 pm on [DD/MM/YYYY] paragraph 2 shall cease to have effect and the Claimant shall pay the Defendant's costs summarily assessed at £275 and the claim shall be struck out.

4.      If the Claimant serves the claim form as directed in paragraph 3 the Defendant shall file and serve a defence by 4pm on [DD/MM/YYYY].

5.      Should the Claimant discontinue the Claim after the CCJ is set aside, paragraph 2 shall cease to have effect and the Claimant shall pay the Defendant's costs summarily assessed at £275 plus the Defendant's costs for attending the hearing.

6.      That all enforcement be put on hold pending the outcome of the application.

1505grandad

"1.2. I understand that the Claimant obtained a Default Judgement against me as the Defendant on 6th April 2021. I am aware that the Claimant is One Parking Solution Ltd.,...."

Is the claimant not CEL?

"DEFAULT JUDGMENT"  -  is the correct spelling of Judgment in this context, however you have others with an incorrect middle "e"

Coupon-mad

 CEL or OPS?  It is OPS in this case, I think.

Your WS contradicts itself.  Near the top you say you knew nothing about the allegation but then you mention you appealed (so one or other is untrue).

You are missing the new point posted by @Johnersh In other current set aside threads, that if the claim was defectively served over 4 months ago then the claim is dead.

This significantly changes the Draft Order and WS.  Search the forum for Boxwood or just read the CCJ set aside thread I replied on directly before this one...

teknotel

Coupon-mad said:

 CEL or OPS?  It is OPS in this case, I think.

Your WS contradicts itself.  Near the top you say you knew nothing about the allegation but then you mention you appealed (so one or other is untrue).

You are missing the new point posted by @Johnersh In other current set aside threads, that if the claim was defectively served over 4 months ago then the claim is dead.

This significantly changes the Draft Order and WS.  Search the forum for Boxwood or just read the CCJ set aside thread I replied on directly before this one...

I initially did know nothing until I did the SAR, I then found out I had appealed it lol.

I will check this out thanks!

teknotel

Ok how is this one?

WITNESS STATEMENT

I am NAME, and I am the defendant in this matter. This is my supporting statement to my application dated ** December 2021 requesting to:

a. Set aside the default judgment dated ** April 2021 as it was not properly served at my current address.

b. Order for the original claim to be dismissed.

c. Order for the claimant to pay the defendant £255 as reimbursement for the set aside fee.

DEFAULT JUDGMENT

1.1. I was the registered keeper of the vehicle at the time of the alleged offence.

1.2. I understand that the Claimant obtained a Default Judgment against me as the Defendant on ** April 2021. I am aware that the Claimant is One Parking Solution Ltd, and that the assumed claim is in respect of unpaid Parking Charge Notices from the 10th June 2021 at the Essex Place Car Park, Brighton, Sussex. I contest this charge for the reasons outlined in the attached draft defence.

1.3. The claim form was not served at my current address, and I thus was not aware of the Default Judgment until 19th October 2021 following a letter from a debt collector working on behalf of One Parking Solution.

1.4 The address on the claim is ADDRESS. I moved out of this property April 2017. I still own this property and rented it as short let accomodation at the time. I then moved into a rented property, which was my previous address at ADDRESS until the 2nd February 2020, when I moved into my current address at ADDRESS. In support of this I can provide a copy of my tenancy agreement for ADDRESS which was where my vehicle was registered and where I where I would reside on the electoral roll at this time; Schedule A attached.

1.5 In addition to the above, it should be highlighted that the integrity and law-abiding intention of the Defendant should be taken into consideration on the basis that;

1.5.1 I discovered a CCJ was lodged onto my credit file on the 19th October 2021.

1.5.2 On 19th October 2021 I contacted the County Court Business Centre via phone to obtain relevant information relating to this default judgment.

1.5.3 On the 12th of November I received the information about the alleged charge after submitting a subject access request with One Parking Solution Ltd.

1.5.4 I learned within the subject access request data that I had appealed the charge on the 25th of July 2019 and the reply and all subsequent communications had been sent to the wrong address as noted in 1.4.

1.5.4 On ** December 2021 I have submitted my case in order to set-aside this judgment and fairly present my case.

1.6 I believe the Claimant has behaved unreasonably in pursuing a claim against me without ensuring they held the Defendant’s correct contact details at the time of the claim. The defendant 'there to be found' for the sake of a 29 pence bulk Experian trace or similar very inexpensive and immediate CRA address check or vehicle check with the DVLA, but despite having an in-house legal team headed by a barrister, this Claimant took no steps whatsoever to check the address. 

1.7 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 some 20 months to establish an address. This has led to the claim being incorrectly served to an old address and an irregular judgment.

1.8 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."

The Minister added "It cannot be right that people who are unaware of debts can see their lives and finances ruined by county court judgments. That in the digital age, we must ensure companies pursuing unpaid debts make every reasonable effort to contact individuals, rather than simply relying on a letter to an old address.” Furtherance to points raised in 1.3 above.

1.9 Given that more than 4 months has passed from issue of proceedings and service of the claim was defective (i.e. it was never served) the Defendant submits that this particular claim is dead and the period for service cannot be extended by this application process.

 2.0 The Defendant has no details of this claim, nor the 'parking charge' that it presumably relates to, therefore, if the Claimant believes there is a cause of action then the correct procedure would be to file a claim afresh and to the right address, after furnishing the Defendant with the information required under the pre-action protocol for debt claims, issued this time to the correct address for service for this Defendant, which is (address and postcode).

2.1 Considering the above I was unable to defend this claim. I believe that the Default Judgment against me was issued incorrectly and thus should be set aside and I ask the Court to kindly consider the reimbursement of the fee of £255 from the claimant should this request be successful.

Statement of Truth

I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.

Signed: ________________________________

teknotel

It mentions a draft defence, do I need this to be submitted as well?

Johnersh

The test for set aside is cpr 13. Your statement does not address which element of that rule is met. That is the basis for the application and where I would start for my application.

10 minutes on Google can find you helpful cases that may assist too. You can do worse than read g articles on this site. I do, regularly. 
https://www.civillitigationbrief.com/2018/07/28/service-of-the-claim-form-defendants-last-known-address-claimants-reason-to-believe-a-few-points-to-watch/ 

Coupon-mad

 £255

Nope, you will be paying £275. It went up in recent weeks.