Bailiff Knocked on the door yesterday

JacksSon

* driving licence is dated with 18.06.2021 (1 year and 3months before ccj)
* transunion shows 30 June 2021 (1 year 2 months and few days before ccj)
* awaiting for Experian (beforehand i can say that i have changed my electoral address on 29 September 2021 which i guess Experian is taking the information about residency)

(just a reminder that i have moved to this address on 1st of June 2021, CCJ on 20th October 2022)

JacksSon

Coupon-mad said:

In your opinion, if i can prove that DCBLegal / DCBL lied to the Court about address (few times), how much financial damage i could claim from them?
thx

Coupon-mad

I don't think you can prove that they 'lied'.  They are saying they did soft traces and sent letters to various addresses.  Sadly I don't even think the SRA will be interested.

And I'm not legally qualified to advise about damages.  I don't see a case for damages anyway but it's not my forte and above my (zero - retired ordinary lady) pay grade!

JacksSon

Coupon-mad said:

I don't think you can prove that they 'lied'.  They are saying they did soft traces and sent letters to various addresses.  Sadly I don't even think the SRA will be interested.

And I'm not legally qualified to advise about damages.  I don't see a case for damages anyway but it's not my forte and above my (zero - retired ordinary lady) pay grade!

thank you for your reply. I think i can provide proof (i might be wrong), will see. As for SRA, before you have mentioned them, i didn't even knew they exist, so not much rely on them. If they do, it will be just a bonus

YankeeBrit

The SRA is not likely to be of much use to you. They will only act when large sums of money are involved with solicitors breaking the law with regard to handling other people's money. Anything else, such as this complaint will be fobbed off.

JacksSon

YankeeBrit said:

The SRA is not likely to be of much use to you. They will only act when large sums of money are involved with solicitors breaking the law with regard to handling other people's money. Anything else, such as this complaint will be fobbed off.

I agree, and to be honest i thought about it before asking them to step in. Knowing this, will wait for response, take it (even if it will be of no use) and go further to Ombudsman. Meanwhile, i'll be looking for legal advice on damages. 
It won't hurt if  i try, wouldn't it?

Le_Kirk

JacksSon said:

* driving licence is dated with 18.06.2021 (1 year and 3months before ccj)
* transunion shows 30 June 2021 (1 year 2 months and few days before ccj)
* awaiting for Experian (beforehand i can say that i have changed my electoral address on 29 September 2021 which i guess Experian is taking the information about residency)

(just a reminder that i have moved to this address on 1st of June 2021, CCJ on 20th October 2022)

A more important point for you to find out is when you changed your address with DVLA on your V5C - logbook!

JacksSon

Le_Kirk said:

JacksSon said:

* driving licence is dated with 18.06.2021 (1 year and 3months before ccj)
* transunion shows 30 June 2021 (1 year 2 months and few days before ccj)
* awaiting for Experian (beforehand i can say that i have changed my electoral address on 29 September 2021 which i guess Experian is taking the information about residency)

(just a reminder that i have moved to this address on 1st of June 2021, CCJ on 20th October 2022)

A more important point for you to find out is when you changed your address with DVLA on your V5C - logbook!

Good point, agree and : 25.07.2021 (again plenty of time > over a year before hearing). Apologise for delay - been abroad 

As mentioned before, dcbltd found my actual address a year later (after i've moved in). I guess it doesn't matter how, it matters that they did.
I was chatting with them (dcbltd, by phone and emails) about a different pcn that is not related to current CCJ (same time they were sending paper letters to, using actual address) 3 months prior the court hearing.

Now DCBL (in the latest letter) has confirmed that are instructed by dcbltd which again shows a CLEAR picture that dcbltd/dcbl were holding the address but still used old one for communication (when sending court papers...) - from my perspective: Obvious misleading the Court
Nah, i might be wrong, this is just how i see it

JacksSon

Good Morning to all, so a bit of update:
1. The Court (Judge) was not satisfied with Claimant and their statement that their application was served correctly, therefore the case is Set aside and be rescheduled for another hearing. YAY.
The claimant is to return the monies (as from what i understood only what i have paid to bailiff without my court fees. Need to doublecheck that). The hearing took less than 7 min. Nice and easy. Not to many questions. Also Claimant was not present but they sent a letter earlier saying that will not attend ( so we knew about it).

2. SRA responded some time earlier. They said that can't do anything about their DCB's mess-up. Nnow i'm preparing to write a letter to Ombudsman as planned.

Now i have to submit a defense. 

Le_Kirk

Well done on getting the set-aside, let's hope the judgment (paper copy) comes through quickly so that you can see if you have to claim back your set-aside fee or if the judge told the PPC to pay it.