CCJ from QDR on behalf of UK Parking Control

NAMER

Further to a flurry of Default CCJ's filed amidst the Royal Mail industrial action, I have found myself with a Default CCJ served to a previous address earlier this month.
I have summarised some of the info. from a previous thread;

In an ongoing dispute with UK Parking Control Ltd.  Without going into all the details, here is where I am now.

Last year I was preparing for a court date (after filing a claim form and claim pack etc ) at Northampton Court courtesy of ZZPS on behalf of UK Parking.  The final date and proceedings tailed off, and honestly, it didn't occur that there was radio silence.
QDR continued to pursue me for the debt (£160 fine) it seems.   Fast forward to 20th Jan, I pick up my mail from my previous address to find a default CCJ awarded for (£160 fine+£107 fees etc) issued on the 10th Jan, (lucky to have received it within the 30 days, small mercy).  I have not received a claim form nor a claim pack from QDR, yet they filed for and were granted a CCJ.  
At some point thereafter late September 2022, I started getting new chasing letters from QDR Solicitors, instructed by ZZPS on behalf of UK Parking, all of which were sent to a previous address.  In my mind, I was still expecting a court date for this dispute and believed this was still ongoing.

Thanks to insight from @Coupon-mad
I am filing for the CCJ to be set aside, my Default Order & Witness Statement are below for reference and if possible any advice and scrutiny.

NAMER

Draft Order

Upon reading the defendant's application dated......

It is ordered that,

1.       The judgment for claimant dated......be set aside as the claim form was never received at the defendant’s address. 

2.       The Claimant to pay the Defendant's cost of this application £275 in addition £180 for time in preparation (12 hours as litigant in person at a rate of £15 per hour).

3.       The claim is hereby struck out,  under the doctrine of cause of action estoppel,  it being noted by this court that:

¡) the Defendant responded to a previous action from The Claimant for the same parking charges, and;

¡¡) by filing this previous claim,  this legally represented Claimant will know that any right to file a similar claim later (for matters where the cause of action is substantially the same and which could and should have been advanced);

¡¡¡) when a matter becomes subject to litigation, the parties are required to advance their whole case. The Claimant failed to do so and on this premise,  the courts will not allow a second near-duplicate claim to continue.

Witness Statement

CLAIM No: XX

BETWEEN:

UK Parking Control Limited (Claimant)

-- and --

XX (Defendant)

I (XXX) am the defendant in this matter. This is my supporting Statement to my application dated 23/01/23 requesting to:

1.       Set aside the default judgment dated 10/01/2023, as it was not properly served at my current address. 

2.       Order for this claim no: XXXXX to be dismissed. 

3.       Order for the claimant to pay the defendant £275 as reimbursement for the set aside fee, in addition £180 for time in preparation (12 hours as a litigant in person at a rate of £15 per hour).

1.       I understand that the Claimant obtained a default judgment against me as the Defendant on 10/01/2023.

I am aware that the claimant is UK Parking Control Ltd, and that the assumed claims in respect of unpaid Parking Charge Notices.

1.       The claim form was not served at my current address and I thus was not aware of the Default judgment up until the arrival of the letter of judgment from the County Court Business Centre on the 18/01/2023 sent to my previous address.

2.       The missing claim dated 7/12/22 has still not been received at my previous address, due to possible Royal Mail industrial action, thus it remains unserved.

3.       The address on the claim is XXXX.  I have not lived here since December, 2015.  I moved to my current address on 28th March 2021. In support of this, I can provide a copy of credit card statements, and electoral roll record, if required.

1. 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;
2. I discovered a Default CCJ was granted on the 20th January, 2023.
3. On the 20th & 23rd January 2023, I contacted the County Court Business Centre to obtain relevant information relating to this default judgment.
4. On the 23rd January, 2023 I submitted my case in order to set-aside this judgment and fairly present my case.  
5. I believe The Claimant has behaved unreasonably in pursuing a claim against me without ensuring they held the correct contact details for me at the time of the claim.
6. 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 the Defendant no longer resides. The claimant did not take reasonable steps to ascertain the address of my current residence.   This has led to the claim being incorrectly served to an old address and an irregular judgment.
7. 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.
8.  I (The Defendant) was 'there to be found' for the sake of an 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.
9. Furthermore, The Claimant has already filed proceedings for this dispute to Northampton County Court, which I have robustly defended and to my knowledge was awaiting a hearing.
10. This claim should never have been filed as is a case of “cause of action estoppel “as mentioned The Claimant had already filed a claim.
11. I also submit in Henderson v Henderson [1843]67 ER 313 

¡) when a matter becomes subject to litigation,  the parties are required to advance their whole case;

¡¡) the Court will not permit the same parties to reopen the same subject of litigation regarding matters which should have been advanced in the earlier litigation.

Should both claims relate to the same VRM, the claimant filing the first claim and failing to advance the whole case,  any cause of action was immediately extinguished for any other similar fact Parking Charges against the Defendant . The courts may estop a second claim where the cause of action is substantially the same. The Defendant invites the court to dismiss the second claim under the grounds of cause of action estoppel. 

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.

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 set aside fee of £275 and costs for time £180 from The Claimant should this request be successful.

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 XXX

Date 23/01/23

Coupon-mad

You need to cite the old claim number and attach proof of it (the claim form) as well as proof of your address change.

Was the old claim served to the old address?  Was there even an actual claim a year ago, because you say 'courtesy of ZZPS'?  They are not solicitors and can't file claims.

Are you absolutely sure that BOTH particulars of claim (POC) are about the exact same PCN numbers?  Show us both POC.

NAMER

Hi @Coupon-mad
I am in search of the older claim form but as yet can't find it, which I realise is a key element of my appeal.  Is there any way of searching for the claim with CCBC?
I have a proof of address to attach.
The old claim was also served to my old address, (I have moved twice since living at this address) I responded accordingly to the claim form and progressed toward a court date and hearing.
From speaking with CCBC, a claim form was sent 7/12/22, but due to the disruption of Royal Mail Industrial action, this has not been served.
Since receiving the CCJ, I have gone over all elements continuously and begun second-guessing myself.  I am sure that this is for the same claim, I have no other PCN actions against me.

The POC for the current claim and the CCJ for reference is as follows;

THE CLAIMANTS CLAIM IS FOR AN OUTSTANDING PARKING CHARGE ISSUED TO VEHICLE XXXX WHEN PARKED AT XXXXXXXXX. THE SITE IS MANAGED BY THE CLAIMANT. THE DEFENDANT IS THE KEEPER OF OR THE DRIVER NAMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SCHEDULE 4 OF PROTECTION OF FREEDOM ACT 2012 OF THE VEHICLE. VEHICLES PARKING AT THE SITE ARE SUBJECT TO THE PARKING RESTRICTIONS AND TERMS AND CONDITIONS WHICH ARE SET OUT ON SIGNS AT THE SITE AND FORM PART OF A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE DRIVER OF THE VEHICLE AND THE CLAIMANT.ON 12 12 2018, THE VEHICLE WAS PARKED AT THE SITE IN BREACH OF THE CONTRACT, THE CONTRAVENTION BEING REGISTERED USERS ONLY. BY ENTERING THIS CONTRACT THE DEFENDANT AGREED THAT THEY WOULD BE LIABLE FOR £90.00 PARKING CHARGES, PLUS ADDITIONAL CONTRACTUAL CHARGES INCURED BY THE CLAIMANT FOR THE COLLECTION OF THE DEBT PURSUANT TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS.

Coupon-mad

Is there any way of searching for the claim with CCBC?

Nope - but phone the CCBC and ask for a copy of the POC from that claim to be emailed straight to you, because you have received what looks like a duplicate claim and urgently need to compare dates/details of the POC.

They might take over an hour to answer.

Interesting that new POC doesn't give the PCN number, merely a date.  How unusual.

It also says 'the Defendant agreed' which is an assumption.  Normally these POC say 'the driver agreed' which is the correct wording.

Something of a dog's dinner!