CCJ served at wrong address - SORN vehicle

parkingpains1

Hi @Coupon-mad

The ticket was received in 2017 at my place of work (private carpark, where the business I work for has 3 spaces. The carpark is shared with some residential properties). I was parked in one of the spaces allocated to my work, but didn't have my permit in the car. The car was registered to my husband (who now has the CCJ). 

It's a long time ago now, but we must have received some PCN reminders, which we ignored as I was advised by my boss that everyone always ignores them and nothing happens (obviously the incorrect advice!). The car was then written off during a crash and we moved house to a new address. We must have been traced to the new address as we also received maybe one or two PCN reminders there, again, we ignored these, but didn't hear much else.

We then moved house again and didn't hear anything more, until finding last year that the CCJ had been served at our old address months after we had moved out. 

@Le_Kirk I think I mean preparing for the hearing and underlying defence (we've already submitted our Witness Statement and draft order, for the CCJ with the N244) - thanks for directing me to the other threads.

Thanks both.

Coupon-mad

Easy enough then.  Same as similar ones. Search the forum for de facto authorised place of work permit defence.

(or a shorter combo of those words till you see a decent and recent defence). Always change 'Best Match' to 'newest'.

parkingpains1

Hi @Coupon-mad

Ok, great. I think actually I have quite a good argument for defence of the original ticket as my workplace owns the building and the leasehold of the space I was parked in is referenced in the deeds for the building. Would you agree?

To be honest, I'm getting a bit confused about next steps - the hearing is a week on Wednesday, from reading other threads I believe I either need to draft a defence to take with me, or send one in beforehand (either option would be fine?)? Is it too late to send something in now, as it's 8 days until the hearing? I have looked at the Newbies hearing tips thread, where it mentions submitting your WS and evidence, I was under the assumption that I had filed my witness statement and evidence with the N244 form, but now I'm worried! Is this something different?

Do you think it's worth adding the info about the parking space and deeds to the witness statement and resending it ahead of the hearing? Or is it all about the CCJ?

Sorry for all the questions...

As always, thanks in advance for your help.

Coupon-mad

I think actually I have quite a good argument for defence of the original ticket as my workplace owns the building and the leasehold of the space I was parked in is referenced in the deeds for the building. Would you agree?

Yes... but why on earth is your employer firm letting a "scam" PPC operate a car park business in the workplace's owned bays, which means the scammer is hawking the spaces out to all-comers for £100 per day under 'contract'?

The employer doesn't need to engage with any permit scheme.  It is not operating in their interests.

This little scheme will always target their staff and legit visitors and this "scam" regime is the last thing a workplace needs.  The employer firm should tell the PPC to butt out of their OWNED bays, and that the PPC doesn't have the leaseholder's authority to be there, and are trespassing.

Anyway, in fact, this hearing is all about the CCJ being set aside really so you don't need to send in a defence yet.  But it is recommended to have it "in your back pocket", so to speak, in case the Judge asks about and wants to consider your prospects of defending the PCN claim after the CCJ is set aside.

parkingpains1

@Coupon-mad Thanks, I've passed this info on to them. I think the "agreement" with the PPC was inherited from the previous owner, but never mentioned in any of the sales info/deeds. 

Ok, sounds like we just need to get together a bullet point of our notes for the hearing. 

My husband is very worried that we're not going to get the set aside if we go to the hearing, and wondering if we should accept offer from DCBL. Do you think there's a chance this might be the case?

Thanks

Boat_to_Bolivia

Accept an offer? Pay the scammers? No one on here is going to advise you to do that!

Coupon-mad

We never see set aside applications refused!

DO NOT FOLD. DO NOT BLINK.

I can recall ONE case (ever) where the Judge wrongly thought a DVLA address was good for service of a claim form, forever!  Clearly wrong.

To be well prepped, read some replies from recent years by @henrik777 where he explains the two levels of decision-making with CPR 13.2 (mandatory set aside) and CPR 13.3 (discretionary set aside).  

That way, the Defendant will be able to say that either the court MUST set aside the CCJ (due to the claim being improperly served and the breach of the mandatory Code of Practice clause which requires AOS members to carry out a 'soft trace' to check the address before litigation) OR in the alternative there are at least 'very good reasons' why this CCJ should be set aside.

If your Judge starts to say that a PPC only has to use the DVLA address which holds good forever (ludicrous!) put the Judge right by saying that the DVLA do not hold it out as a service address and the CoP (and indeed the Rules for Litigation) requires an address check if there is 'reason to believe' the address held might not be the current address for the Defendant.

The C failed to do this prior to filing a claim and should pay the costs of this application.

parkingpains1

Hi @Coupon-mad

Thanks for the above. 

Just reading back through this thread and saw that a while ago you said: 

Yes - the 4 months dead argument applies to you.  That's far better.  I hope you read to the end of @Brokenchief 's thread and saw you also need to file & serve (the week before the hearing) your costs assessment and a 'skeleton argument' (copy his) to support the '4 months dead' point, with 5 attachments that Brokenchief kindly linked copies of for everyone else to use.

Is it a good idea to submit the costs assessment and Skeleton Argument from Brokenchief's thread today along with the linked PDFs? The hearing is on Wednesday, are we too late with this?
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6351901/getting-ccj-set-aside-for-parking-ticket-even-if-ai-didnt-let-dvla-know/p2

----

I have also made the following notes for the hearing, a couple of questions in bold if you don't mind having a look. I'm not expecting to get the chance to say much of this and just wanted to have the notes as a reminder for myself, but is there anything crucial you feel I've missed?

Point 1 - We acted quickly as soon as we were aware of the CCJ:

The integrity and law-abiding intention of the Defendant should be taken into consideration on the basis that;

- I discovered a CCJ was lodged onto my credit file on the 24 August 2022.

- On 24 August 2022 I contacted the Northampton County Court to obtain relevant information relating to this default judgment. I was informed that Northampton County Court had limited information and that the CCJ had been filed by UK Parking Control Ltd (represented by Direct Collection Baliffs Limited), who I also contacted on 24 August 2022.

- On 8 September 2022 I submitted a subject access request to UK Parking Control Ltd via email.

- On 13 September 2022 I made a written request to UK Parking Control Ltd (Claimant) and Direct Collection Bailiffs Limited (Solicitors) inviting them to consent to set aside the judgment due to the reasons in paragraph 1.3. I informed them that if there was no agreement by 20 September 2022 I would be filing a N244 set aside application.

- The Claimant (UK Parking Control Limited) turned down my request.

- On 23 September I submitted my case in order to set-aside this judgment and fairly present my case.

Point 2 - The claim went to an old address, and thus was never served to us: 

The Claimant obtained a Default Judgment against me as the Defendant on 30 December 2021. 

The claim form was served at my previous address and I thus was not aware of the Default Judgment until 24 August 2022 following a check of my Experian credit report.

The address on the claim is XX. I moved to my current address at XX on the 22nd January 2021. In support of this I have previously provided a scanned copy of my mortgage agreement, alongside council tax and utility bills as Annex A to my Witness Statement

I never had any notification of the claim but was advised in a phone call to Direct Collection Bailiffs Limited (representing UK Parking Control) on 24 August 2022 that their claim relates to a parking charge in 2017 at my wife’s workplace XX.

~

Question: SHOULD I INCLUDE THIS AS PART OF THE ABOVE ARGUMENT?:

DCBL have since submitted a draft order to the court (10/3/23) stating the following, which is evidence of agreement with the above:

Despite the allegations raised by the Defendant, it is confirmed that an address verification trace was conducted via a leading credit reference agency before the Claim was issued. This obtained the Defendant’s current/last known address, and therefore the Claim was issued there in compliance with CPR 6.9. Despite the correct service, the Claimant is agreeable to setting Judgment aside as it is more than likely that the Defendant did not receive the Claim Form and therefore they were unable to respond. Please see a Draft Order enclosed.

~

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

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.

The Defendant was 'there to be found' for the sake of a 29 pence bulk Experian trace or similar very inexpensive and immediate credit reference agency address check. I would then have been notified of this judgment and could have taken action to prevent it. 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.

In case of reference to a PPC only using the DVLA: 

The DVLA do not hold it out as a service address and the CoP (and indeed the Rules for Litigation) requires an address check if there is 'reason to believe' the address held might not be the current address for the Defendant. The BPA CoP and DLUHC new statutory CoP both say checks must be done.

DVLA car registered addresses are NOT provided as a definitive address for service of court claims and indeed are often not the right address, for all sorts of reasons.  The DVLA address data is only provided so the PPC can invite the keeper to name the driver and serve a notice by post.

That's it.  The only data purpose. To serve a court claim is a step further and a whole new data use; and there must be more checks, if the claimant has 'reason to believe' the person can't be reached at that address (e.g. from time that has passed and/or silence to pre-action letters).

Question: Should we mention here that they had used their one and only DVLA trace to find us at Address 1, but still managed to trace us to Address 2 (where the CCJ was served), but not to address 3 where we had been living for 9 months when the CCJ was served? DVLA KADOE rules?

Point 3 - The claim is a dead claim (supported by Skeleton Argument from Brokenchief)

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 XX.

Point 4 - Defence of original PCN claim

PCN from parking spaces with a leasehold to my employer. (working on detail of this today - have deeds of building which highlights it as a space with leasehold agreement to the owner of the building)

Point 5 - Costs

Ask the Judge at the end to order to be refunded, OR in the alternative, to reserve your costs as you are concerned this Claimant will just run away and discontinue once the CCJ is set aside, leaving you out of pocket by £255 and the loss of leave/salary and travel/parking costs for attending the set aside hearing. Ask that in that event, your costs will then be ordered to be refunded if you alert the Judge.

Thank you as always.

Coupon-mad

The BPA CoP and DLUHC new statutory CoP both say checks must be done.

This is a strong point but only if you have already attached the relevant CoP page with that clause (twenty-something) to your bundle.  Have you?  The Judge won't know what the CoP says unless you put it into evidence.

Brokenchief appended the CoP page to his skeleton argument (plus the 4 case transcripts that say the claim is 'dead for want of service') which he filed & served the week before the hearing.

I think you must make it clear at the hearing - first thing you say - that you DO NOT accept their draft order because it says (wrongly) 'no order as to costs' which allows the Claimant to run away and discontinue, which these parking firms do in order to avoid set aside costs.

They had their chance to 'consent' six months ago when you were preparing your application.  They refused, despite knowing they were in breach of the CoP and it was their fault they had not traced the correct address.

Therefore the £275 is their liability to refund to you.

parkingpains1

Hi @Coupon-mad - I haven't sent anything in yet, I was going to do it this afternoon - I was going to send the skeleton argument (copied from Brokenchief - can I just do a direct copy?) and these links attached as PDFs, which include the BPA CoP? (although I noticed that Brokenchief mentioned that they had to deliver them printed to the court, which I don't think we'll have time to do ahead of Wednesday): 

https://www.keepandshare.com/doc15/25449/boxwood-pdf-447k?da=y
https://www.keepandshare.com/doc15/25450/bpa-pdf-871k?da=y
https://www.keepandshare.com/doc15/25451/croke-pdf-304k?da=y
https://www.keepandshare.com/doc15/25452/pipenbrock-pdf-383k?da=y
https://www.keepandshare.com/doc15/25453/vinos-pdf-209k?da=y

I was going to use similar wording for the email to what you suggested for Brokenchief: 
In support of the argument that the claim should also be dismissed for want of service, and that it cannot now be resurrected by any court, the Claimant hereby appends a skeleton argument to assist the court, plus the BPA Code of Practice and three case law authorities including one from 2022.