Phase 1: CCJ Removed. Phase 2: Claim Discontinued. Phase 3: Costs.

Coupon-mad

Did you search and find (either here or by Google searches) all the other threads as I suggested?

Like I said, we know this Vets4Pets place and the signs were not always there.  You will need the evidence later.

Harvez63

I'm being patient. Today they marks the end of the 14 days giving to respond but I've just noticed the below in their automatic response;

Complaint / Data Requests

If you have raised a complaint, we will respond within 8 weeks in accordance with our published Complaints Procedure, which is available on our website. If the matter is in relation to your data subject rights, please complete our data protection questions below and we will respond within the statutory timescales.

Is the above something I should be concerned about rather then expecting a response by close of play today?

Coupon-mad

No, your case was unusual (in that you told the PPC of your move years ago) and 14 days was certainly reasonable.  Also with CCJ set asides you have an obligation to act promptly - the court expects it and the success of a set aside application partly depends upon promptness - so you really can't wait.

Harvez63

Thank you for your continued support

They never replied and the 14 days are up. What are my next steps? 

Johnersh

Having given the claimants solicitors opportunity to respond, you should now lodge an application to the court to have judgment set aside and seek your costs.

An application to set aside requires you to act promptly, so it may not be sensible to wait much longer in the forlorn hope that a response will be forthcoming. 

Coupon-mad

In my first reply to you on page one I gave you links to four posters whose recent threads show how to file a N244 and how to word the documents to accompany it, and the case law (Boxwood, etc.) and other evidence (of house move, and in your case, proof that you told the Claimant) to append to your application too.

Harvez63

I'll jump onto that this afternoon then. Thank you.

I'm sure there will be bits I'll need to post on here for you to check 

Did everyone expect them to reply or is this the sort of professionalism I should expect from these 'firms'

The_Slithy_Tove

Harvez63 said:

Did everyone expect them to reply or is this the sort of professionalism I should expect from these 'firms'

There was always a slim chance that your letter would have been read by someone who comprehended its actual meaning, rather than just put it down as another whinger, moaning about their CCJ. Seems it's probably gone into the "Moaning Minny/ignore" pile. They know that most people who complain won't actually put in the legwork to take it further, so threats of them footing increasing costs is a risk they are happy to take.

In short, it's largely expected. So you need to press on with the set-aside.

Harvez63

I write this in fear of being totally wrong, but here goes?

This comes at a time my house starts major renovations, whilst I secure probably more work then I can handle, after a quiet patch needed to keep my finances a float. Horrible little cretins! 

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 8th April 2022.  I am aware that the Claimant is Premier Park LTD, and that the assumed claim is in respect of an unpaid Parking Charge Notice from 28th December 2017.

1.3. The claim form was not served at my current address and thus I was not aware of the Default Judgment until 12th of July 2022 following a check of my credit report.

1.4. The address on the claim is xxx. I moved from this address to my current address of xxx on 5th November 2019. The house where this charge was applied was owned by me (the defendant) up till 5th November 2019.

1.5 I notified the claimant of my change of address on 4th November 2019 via email, to which they responded acknowledgment of the address change on 6th November 2019.

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 despite being clearly notified.

1.7.1 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.

1.7.2 Under CPR 13.2 The court must set aside a judgment entered under part 12 if judgment was wrongly entered.  Given that CPR 6.9 (3) was not met, CPR 13.2 applies and the CCJ should be set aside.

1.7.3 The defendant was 'there to be found' for the sake of a 29pence bulk Experian trace or similar very inexpensive and immediate credit reference agency address check. If the defendant had used the original address details they had for me (current address) instead of doing a trace, I would have been notified of this judgement and could have taken action to prevent it.

1.8 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.  The Defendant has no details of this claim, 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 (current address)

1.9 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.

1.10 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.

 

--------------------------------------

WITNESS STATEMENT

I am xxx and I am the defendant in this matter.  This is my supporting statement to my application dated xxxx requesting to:

 

a.         Set aside the default judgment dated 08th April 2022 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.

-----------------

DRAFT ORDER

UPON reading the defendant’s application dated (date when I will send an email with n244)

It is ordered that:

1. The judgment (case number) dated 08/11/2022 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 totalling £275 on an indemnity basis

Le_Kirk

Is that date correct?  Is it perhaps 08/11/2021 or 2020?