Unexpected CCJ

verdomde

Thanks, is it this, will post them here so find-able together
It's the judgment of Deputy Master Marsh in Croke & Anor v National Westminster Bank Plc & Ors [2022] EWHC 1367 (Ch) where the claimant was one day late in properly serving the Particulars of Claim to the Defendant. The claimant’s application for relief from sanctions was refused.

65.  "The defendants were entitled to know within the four month period specified in the CPR whether a claim had been made against them and to be able to understand that claim. [...] Unless an extension of time is granted, the claim will cease to have any validity and will be struck out."


boxwood
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/TCC/2021/947.html


M AND S 
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2000/B526.html 

BPA code of practice

https://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/Documents/AOS/AOS_Code_of_Practice_January_2020_v8(2).pdf

verdomde

FYI, heres the pics from the parking notice, via SAR

Do I need to show in this witness statement that I have a chance of winning against the PCN? I think not?

Coupon-mad

verdomde said:

Do I need to show in this witness statement that I have a chance of winning against the PCN? I think not?

Not in this WS - but you should 'know your defence points' (have some notes) in case the Judge doesn't 100% buy the '4 months dead' primary argument to dismiss the claim entirely, and wants to explore CPR 13.3 (discretionary set aside position) and satisfy him or herself that you have 'good prospects' of defending the claim after CCJ set aside.

Thanks for posting Croke, Boxwood and M&S together in one post.  It will help others!  Of course you have to provide the whole transcripts as PDFs (not links) for the Judge.

Your aim is:

- CCJ set aside
- £275 ordered against the Claimant
- whole claim dismissed as not served. 

Try hard to get the hat-trick!

verdomde

Just realised i didnt blank my registration number in the photo, could you please remove the pics from your post?

Coupon-mad

Consider it done (because I did!).

verdomde

"The CCBC is just a clearing centre - not a court - and it gets farmed out to your local court."

Does that mean I can just keep them in the WS?

KeithP

verdomde said:

The CCBC is just a clearing centre - not a court - and it gets farmed out to your local court.

Does that mean I can just keep them in the WS?

Can you perhaps rephrase that question?
Sorry, I cannot work out what you are asking.

verdomde

Apologies, I have County Court Business Center as the name of court on my n244, and at the top of my witness statement, just checking that is correct. Coupon Mad said 
"The CCBC is just a clearing centre - not a court - and it gets farmed out to your local court."

verdomde

County Court Business Centre                                                                                   Claim Number  

                                                                                                                                        CCJ REF

                                                                                                                                                Date

                                                                                                                                        TODAY

                                                                                                                                                Defendant

                                                                                                                                        ADDRESS AN NO.

                                                                                                                                                Claimant

                                                                                                                                                UK Parking Control

                                                                                                                                        WITNESS STATEMENT

1.            I am ME and I am the Defendant against whom this claim is made.  The facts are true to the best of my belief and my account has been prepared based upon my own knowledge.

2.            This is my supporting statement to my application dated TODAY requesting to:

a.            Set aside the default judgment dated CCJ DATE 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

3.            I was the registered keeper of the vehicle at the time of the alleged parking event.

4.            I understand that the Claimant obtained a Default Judgement against me as the Defendant on CCJ DATE. I am aware that the Claimant UK Parking Control, and that the assumed claim is in respect of an unpaid Parking Charge Notice.

5.            The claim form was served to a previous address and I thus was not aware of the Default Judgement until DAY AFTER CCJ DATE following a notification from a phone application that tracks my credit score.

6.            The address on the claim is OLD ADDRESS. I moved to a new address on 2.5 YRS AGO and moved again to my current address on LAST YEAR. I updated the electoral register both times, in DATES.  In support of this I also provide various communications/bills.

7.            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;

Sequence of Recent Events:

8.            On the DAY AFTER CCJ DATE I discovered a CCJ was lodged onto my credit file late

9.            On 2 DAYS LATER, after seeking help online, I contacted the County Court Business Centre to obtain relevant information relating to this default judgement.

10.          Between 2 DAYS LATER AND NOW, despite being abroad, I submitted SAR requests to the Solicitors, the debt collectors, and the UK Parking Control. Only UK Parking Control have responded, and I now am compiling my submission to set-aside this judgement and fairly present my case in spite of not having received all relevant information.

11.          I believe the Claimant has behaved unreasonably in pursuing a claim against me without ensuring they held my correct contact details at the time of the claim. I have been informed in a phone call to QDR that they used the DVLA address at the time of claim.  This is not enough to rely on as a service address and later, for a court claim.

12.          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 at which I no longer reside. The claimant did not take reasonable steps to ascertain the address of my current residence despite having some 18 months to establish an address. This has led to the claim being incorrectly served to an old address and an irregular judgement.

13.          Under CPR 13.2 the court must set aside a judgment entered under part 12 if judgment was wrongly entered.

14.          The defendant was 'there to be found' for the sake of a 29pence bulk trace or any inexpensive and immediate credit reference agency address check. I would have been notified of this judgement and could have taken action to prevent it.

15.          The BPA Approved Operator Code of Practice - Version 7, January 2018 states that 'Before serving a Letter Before Claim and prior to issue of proceedings, Operators must, if no responses have been received to the NTD/NTK/reminder letters, take reasonable endeavours to ensure that the person being written to is the correct party.’  This vaguely-worded requirement is better explained by the Government in the new Code of Practice which is currently temporarily delayed but says ‘If a driver, keeper or hire company does not respond to a notice of parking charge or subsequent correspondence, or a parking charge has not been paid in full, reasonable endeavours - including contacting credit reference agencies to undertake a ‘soft trace’ - must be undertaken by the parking operator and/or its appointed debt recovery agent to establish the correct correspondence details of the driver, keeper or hire company before commencing enforcement action. Where a new address is discovered the notice of parking charge should be re-issued at the original rate but with a further 28 days from service for a response (payment or appeal).’

16.          On that basis, I believe the Claimant has not adhered to Civil Procedural Rules (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 and use the address of my current residence. This has led to the claim being incorrectly served to an old address and an irregular judgment.

17.          A failure to carry out proper checks to establish the right address for service before filing a claim not only breaches the CPRs but also the pre-action protocol for debt claims and the British Parking Association Code of Practice.  The Claimant acted wholly unreasonably by negligently or deliberately disregarding all rules and caused the claim to be improperly served.  They failed to serve it at all. CPR 6.9 (3) was not met, CPR 13.2 applies, and the CCJ should be set aside.

18.          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.

19.           There are several authorities for this, including the judgment in Boxwood [2021] EWHC 947 (TCC) (please see attached Boxwood.pdf), which is a reminder of the strictness of the requirements of CPR 7.6 and how difficult it is to use other parts of the Civil Procedure Rules to rectify a failure to serve the claim form within the requisite period: “A claimant is not entitled to rely on the wide, general powers under CPR 3.10 or CPR 3.9 to circumvent the specific conditions set out in CPR 7.6(3) for extending the period for service of a claim form.

21.          In Vinos v Marks & Spencer plc [2001] 3 All ER 784 (please see attached vinos.pdf) the Court of Appeal considered whether any extension of time should be granted under CPR 7.6 in circumstances where the defendant had been notified of the issue of a claim form but the claim form had not been served within four months as required by CPR 7.5 and the application was made after expiry of that period. The court refused to grant relief on the basis that it did not have power to do so.

22.          In judgment of Deputy Master Marsh in Croke & Anor v National Westminster Bank Plc & Ors [2022] EWHC 1367 (Ch)  (please see attached croke.pdf) the claimant was one day late in properly serving the Particulars of Claim to the Defendant and the claimant’s application for relief from sanctions was refused. In section 65 of the transcript of the trial (which is attached) Deputy Master Marsh stated “The defendants were entitled to know within the four month period specified in the CPR whether a claim had been made against them and to be able to understand that claim. [...] Unless an extension of time is granted, the claim will cease to have any validity and will be struck out." 

23.          Britannia Parking Group Ltd are a part of the British Parking Association (BPA). Under the BPA’s Approved Operator Code of Practice (please see attached BPA.pdf), it is stated in section 24.1 “Before serving a Letter Before Claim and prior to the issue of proceedings, Operators must, if no responses have been received to the NTD/NTK/reminder letters, take reasonable endeavours to ensure that the contact details for the person you are writing to are correct.”.

22.          I have no details of this claim, 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 me with the information required under the pre-action protocol for debt claims, issued this time to the correct address, which is CURRENT ADDRESS.

23.          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.

24.       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.

25.          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.

26.          In the alternative, CPR 13.3 applies and there are very good reasons to set aside this exaggerated claim, which includes a disproportionate and indeed, false 'debt recovery' sum.  In fact, no debt recovery occurred nor cost the claimant any money whatsoever, in addition to £100 parking charge.  The Government has described the false fixed 'fee' as 'designed to extort money from motorists' in the new statutory Code of Practice this February and has banned it. The Defendant has good prospects of defending a claim, if served with one, but has seen no evidence, basis nor particulars of claim and the Claimant should be required to file afresh, if they believe they have a cause of action.

27.          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 £275 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

 

WILL PRINT, SIGN, SCAN

 

ME

TODAY

verdomde

County Court Business Centre                                                                                   Claim Number  

                                                                                                                                        CCJ

                                                                                                                                                Date

                                                                                                                                        TODAY

                                                                                                                                                Defendant

                                                                                                                                        ADDRESS AND NO

                                                                                                                                                Claimant

                                                                                                                                                UK Parking Control

 

DRAFT ORDER

 

UPON reading the defendant’s application dated TODAY

IT IS ORDERED that:

 
1. The default judgment (J6HM02V1) dated 22/06/2022 be set aside. 

2. The claim struck out as the claim form having not been served within 4 months of issue

3. The Claimant do pay the Defendants costs of this application of £275 on an indemnity basis

 

 

ME

TODAY