Help with a CCJ Set Aside please?

Le_Kirk

The Defendant asserts that the Claimant has acted unreasonable unreasonably on the basis that:-

This from the unnumbered section between paragraph 6 & 7.

c. The claim should have been Ordered to be struck out on the basis that 4 months had passed from issue of proceedings.

b. As Driver. The Claimant has no evidence, despite stating to the judge that there 9 additional photos, that the Defendant was driver.

This bit does not make sense, did you mean "in their 9 additional" or "there were 9 additional."  You need to make it clear for the judge.

Mars28

Good spot, thanks.

the claimant’s advocate told the judge they had 9 photos to choose from, but have not provided any of them (except the one on the NTK) in the SARs. I’ve since confirmed they don’t have any in a follow up SAR. Will tidy the sentence up though, thanks

Mars28

Been working on my Defence - particularly trying to make sure I don't get my Defence and WS mixed up. Can I check I'm not about to make some big mistakes please?

1) Noting that evidence goes into WS which I have another 2 weeks to submit - should I save my SAR evidence until my WS? (it backs up the fact that C did not do a trace, contrary to their WS used for the first hearing.

2) All my evidence of me not being the driver is going to go in my WS - correct?

3) The details of why I believe the C has acted unreasonably will be moved to my WS. I'll just state I am asking for at least standard costs, but also for a finding of unreasonable conduct by the C. Good idea?

I'm basically trying to make sure the C has less opportunity to make counter arguments.

Thanks for your advice as always.

Mars28

Getting closer to my WS deadline, so I'd appreciate any thoughts on it please?

https://www.dropbox.com/s/txr3wqobgzlqf2z/Witness%20Statement.pdf?dl=0

I'm particularly interest in what you think about para 15 as I'm annoyed that as the C told the court they conducted a trace, but has subsequently informed me that they didn't actually do it. If they hadn't lied to the court, then this would have been completely struck out and costs awarded after the first hearing. I really want to get my costs!

1505grandad

SoT states "defence".

A heads-up  -  "Judgment" in this context does not include a middle "e"   -  Google CCJ and see any docs you have concerning this.

Mars28

Ahh good spots, thanks. Will get that changed

Le_Kirk

Your paragraph 10 just stops and offers no information about where and what you were doing!
Paragraph 12 does not need proof and prove; just "the claimant is put to strict proof that I was the driver."
Paragraph 15 is clumsy and I would say "judge's decision not to throw out......"  You might want to add the relevant words from CPR 6.9(3), POFA and the BPA COP.

Mars28

Thanks Le-Kirk. Para 10 was poorly redacted, I'm sorry. I do have a full paragraph explains who I am and what I was doing.

Ack para 12 - updated now.

I'm working on para 15 now, thanks for your advice. I think I'll have a better version soon based on what you'd said, thanks.

Mars28

On your advice, I've tried to make para 15 clearer - I've also broken it into 5 smaller paras. Thanks for all your help, sorry to be such a pain. I'm just really worried that the C is just going to walk away with nothing but a shrug of the shoulders.

15.          The Claimant misled the Court during the Set-Aside Hearing on DATE. The Claimant stated in their witness statement 1, and verbally to the court, that a ‘trace’ was conducted in accordance with CPR 6.9(3). Subsequently, the Claimant has confirmed this was not true. (Exhibit 3 and Exhibit 4)

16.          The Claimant’s false statement to the Court influenced the judge’s decision to not to throw out the claim against me under CPR 13.2, as the Judge believed CPR 6.9 (3) was met, when in fact it was not.

17.          Respectfully, this has caused an irregular judgment as the Judge was unaware that CPR 13.1 applied. If the Claimant hadn’t falsely informed the Court that a trace was conducted, respectfully, the entire claim would have been Ordered struck out on that basis, along with a finding of unreasonable behavior on behalf of the Claimant, as they had failed to abide by Civil Procedure Rule 6.9(3), the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (paras 4, 7 and 9), the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims, and the British Parking Association’s Code of Practice. (See paragraphs 20 to 27 of this Witness Statement for additional detail)

18          This necessitated the requirement for a second hearing, incurring additional costs for myself and the Court.

19.          I submit to the Court that the Claimant has misled the Court, causing an irregular judgment and therefore requiring further unnecessary additional time and energy to be spent on defending and hearing this claim.

Coupon-mad

Para 19 is repetition; not needed.

Do you mean13.2 here (and remove one of the two 'respectfully' in this paragraph:

17.          Respectfully, this has caused an irregular judgment as the Judge was unaware that CPR 13.1 applied.