Potentially one year worth of PCNs (WON First round, second round about to start)

Coupon-mad

But I did make an enquiry/appeal and when filling in the form, they asked for my current address. So technically they had my new address. 

Not 'technically'.

As a matter of FACT they had your address.

Read a good ten recent CCJ set aside threads from THIS SUMMER/AUTUMN only. Then show us your planned WS and Draft Order.

Baylex

@Coupon-mad thanks for the help. Working through the WS and Draft Order, but got a quick question. Should I start my Sequence Of Recent Events from the point where I found out about my CCJ on my credit file? Or should I start with all details from the beginning where I tried to appeal it several times, spoke to the property managers that work on behalf of the landowner to remove the PCNs, the fact that I contacted Gladstones and they were aware of my new address but still decided to send my old address to the Court?
I've found a few examples of WS but most of them only include details from when people found out about their CCJs.

Thanks again!

Coupon-mad

I think you should include a sub-headed section at the start about the PCN and your efforts to resolve it.

Then another sub-heading:

Gladstones had my correct address but failed to use it for the claim

(explain and attach evidence as an exhibit)


THEN a section about the new CEL v Chan appeal case (search the forum!) and attach that transcript

THEN move on to the CCJ being discovered.

Show us what this looks like.

In your N244 you are asking for an Order to:

(a). Set aside the CCJ

(b). Strike out the claim, as per CEL v Chan (appeal) 

(c).  The Defendant recovers from the Claimant the N244 fee of £275 (and the Defendant's costs for attending a hearing, in the event that the Allocating Judge does not make an immediate Order granting (a) and (b) without a hearing, due to the abusive POC and the Claimant's representatives' wholly unreasonable conduct, of reverting to a known old address for this litigation).

Baylex

So this is what I have. It will look very amateur, as this is the first time doing anything like this, but hopefully it explains things well and it serves the purpose. Also, the numbers on the paragraphs are not properly formatted. Ignore that for now. Some dates have to be figured out too.
CEL v Chan I think I found the transcript, and what I've put there hopefully also serves the purpose, as I have no clue what I'm meant to find in regards to Chan.
Regarding the Draft Order I am a bit lost, ngl... 

WITNESS STATEMENT OF DEFENDANT

1. I am xxxx of xxxxx, and I am the Defendant against whom this claim is made. 

1. This is my supporting statement to my application dated xx October 2023 requesting to:

1. Set aside the default judgment dated 14 September 2023 as it was not properly served at my current address.

1. Order for the original claim to be dismissed.

1. Order for the Claimant to pay the Defendant £275 as reimbursement for the set aside fee.

DEFAULT JUDGMENT

1. I was the registered keeper of the vehicle at the time of the alleged event.

1. I understand that the Claimant obtained a Default Judgment against me as the Defendant on 14 September 2023. I am aware that the Claimant is Gladstones Solicitors and that the assumed claim is in respect of unpaid Parking Charge Notices.

1. The claim form was not served at my current address, and I was therefore unaware of the Default County Court Judgment until I realised that this was added to my credit file on the 19 September 2023

1. The address on the claim is xxxxx. I moved to my current address xxxxx on 25 August 2021. In support of this, I can provide evidence that I registered my current address with the electoral register on 1 December 2021. I can also provide evidence of utility bill payments to my current address from September 2021.

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;

 

SEQUENCE OF RECENT EVENTS

1. On XX November 2022, I received a letter from UK CPM regarding a PCN. This PCN showed my vehicle parked on my allocated bay without my permit displayed. Upon realising this, I checked my vehicle and the permit had fallen down to the footwell of the vehicle.

1. On 2 November 2022, I changed the registered address of my vehicle so that there wouldn’t be any more missing letters.

1. On 10 November 2022, I appealed the PCN received explaining the situation and what happened with the permit. This appeal was rejected.

1. On 23 December 2022, I decided to appeal with the Independent Appeals Service that also rejected my appeal.

1. On 17 January 2023, I received a letter from Gladstones Solicitors Limited requesting payment for the PCN. On this same day I filled out a Pre-Action Protocol form from their website. This proves the fact that I acknowledged the letters and that they knew about my correct address.

1. I have requested a Subject Access Request from UK CPM, on 24 January 2023. Received the report on 6 February 2023. This contained a total of 17 PCNs, during the period where my permit had fallen from my vehicle’s windscreen. On the same day, I filled an enquiry form on the Gladstones Solicitors Limited website, with an appeal and proof of tenancy agreement and a layout of the parking area showing that the specific parking bay belongs to the flat I’m renting.

1. On 11 April 2023, I contacted the property managers of the building where I am currently living in to try and contact UK CPM to remove these PCNs. Assuming that UK CPM was hired by the property managers that work for the landowner, to enforce rules in the parking area, removing these PCNs should have been feasible. This request was rejected by UK CPM and advised that I had to contact the Gladstones Solicitors Limited to discuss the case further.

1. On 25 April 2023, I received a reply in relation to the enquiry form done on 24 January 2023. The response was that the appeal was rejected and that I owed a total of £1020.

1. Recent persuasive Appeal judgment in Civil Enforcement Limited v Chan (Ref. E7GM9W44, attached) would indicate the PoC fails to comply with Civil Procedure Rule 16.4 and Practice Directions Part 16.  In the cited case HHJ Murch held that 'the particulars of the claim as filed and served did not set out the conduct which amounted to the breach in reliance upon which the claimant would be able to bring a claim for breach of contract'.  The Defendant asserts that this Claim is based upon an agreement by conduct.  The Defendant asserts that the Claimant has failed to specify how Contract terms have been breached by the conduct of the Defendant in the PoC. 

1. I first discovered there was a default County Court Judgment against me when I received a report from the credit file company that I use. This update was on 19 September 2023.

1. On 19 September 2023, I contacted the County Court Business Centre to obtain relevant information relating to this default judgment. I also requested for my address to be updated on the file, as it seemed that the Claim Pack and the Letter of Judgment were sent to my previous address. I was then told how I could set aside this County Court Judgment.

1. On XX October 2023 I submitted my case in order to set-aside this judgment and fairly present my case.

1. I believe the Claimant has behaved unreasonably in pursuing a claim against me without ensuring they held my correct contact details at the time of the claim. I was therefore denied the opportunity to defend the claim.

1. The Claimant, Gladstones Solicitors Limited, had my correct address but failed to use it for the claim.

1. 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 that the Defendant no longer resides. The Claimant did not take reasonable steps to ascertain the address of my current residence despite having some 10 months to establish an address. This has led to the claim being incorrectly served to an old address and an irregular judgment. 

1. Under CPR 13.2 The court must set aside a judgment entered under part xx 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. 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. 

1. 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 xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

1. 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.

1. Furthermore, former 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. 

1. 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.”

1. In the alternative, CPR 13.3 applies and there are very good reasons to set aside this exaggerated claim, which includes a disproportionate and indeed, false 'debt recovery' sum. The Defendant has good prospects of defending a claim, if served with one, but has seen no evidence, basis nor particulars of claim and the Claimant should be required to file afresh, if they believe they have a cause of action. 

1. 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.

 

Statement of Truth

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.

 

DRAFT ORDER

CLAIM No: XXX

BETWEEN:

Gladstones Solicitors Limited (Claimant)

-- and --

XXX (Defendant)

______________________________________________

DRAFT ORDER

______________________________________________

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

1. The default judgment dated on 14 September 2023 be set aside.

2. Costs to be reserved.

3. Unless the Claimant serves a copy of the claim form on the Defendant by 4pm on XX/XX/23 paragraph 1.2 shall cease to have effect and the Claimant shall pay the Defendant's costs summarily assessed at £275 and the claim shall be struck out.

4. Should the Claimant discontinue the Claim after the CCJ is set aside, paragraph 1.2 shall cease to have effect and the Claimant shall pay the Defendant's costs summarily assessed at £275

5. All enforcement be put on hold pending the outcome of the application.

Coupon-mad

I am aware that the Claimant is Gladstones Solicitors

No it isn't. That's the C's solicitors.  So your heading on your draft Order is wrong, too.

Your wording about the Chan case isn't the latest wording. Use the  version seen in the final WS by @_blueberry_ tonight.

To this (below) you must state whether it went to the right address or not.  Which letters went to address A, and which went to address B:

On 17 January 2023, I received a letter from Gladstones Solicitors Limited requesting payment for the PCN. 

And to this, add that Gladstones had traced your correct address because a letter dated xx/xx/xx arrived to address B and you responded to that, confirming the correct address on their Portal.  Inexplicably. they then reverted to address A.

"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. "

Finally your Draft Order doesn't match the 3 things I advised you to say that you want an Order to say.

Bin it and put the three things I said.


P.S. just noticed my post count tonight sounds like a dance step '123,123' so I will retire to bed with a smile!  

 

Baylex

Alright let's have another go at this.

No it isn't. That's the C's solicitors.  So your heading on your draft Order is wrong, too.

It seems the claimant is UK CPM, but Gladstones acts on their behalf seeking legal actions against the defendant? Is this correct?

Your wording about the Chan case isn't the latest wording. Use the  version seen in the final WS by @_blueberry_ tonight.

Updated it on point 16 hopefully this will be the correct one.

To this (below) you must state whether it went to the right address or not.  Which letters went to address A, and which went to address B:

Updated on para 12. However, letters sent to my previous address were possibly all the PCNs and other bits that I don't even know. I do mention that I never received a Claim Pack and a Letter of Judgment on para 18, would this be enough?

And to this, add that Gladstones had traced your correct address because a letter dated xx/xx/xx arrived to address B and you responded to that, confirming the correct address on their Portal.  Inexplicably. they then reverted to address A.
"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. "

These were redone on para 12 and para 21 & 22.

Finally your Draft Order doesn't match the 3 things I advised you to say that you want an Order to say.

Bin it and put the three things I said.

Draft Order redone too, included the 3 bits you mentioned earlier. Apologies for having missed this.

Hopefully this gets me a bit closer to the goal.

WITNESS STATEMENT OF DEFENDANT

1. I am xxxx of xxxxx, and I am the Defendant against whom this claim is made. 

2. This is my supporting statement to my application dated xx October 2023 requesting to:

   1. Set aside the default judgment dated 14 September 2023 as it was not properly served at my current address.

   2. Order for the original claim to be dismissed.

   3. Order for the Claimant to pay the Defendant £275 as reimbursement for the set aside fee.

DEFAULT JUDGMENT

3. I was the registered keeper of the vehicle at the time of the alleged event.

4. I understand that the Claimant obtained a Default Judgment against me as the Defendant on 14 September 2023. I am aware that the Claimant is UK CPM and that the assumed claim is in respect of unpaid Parking Charge Notices.

5. The claim form was not served at my current address, and I was therefore unaware of the Default County Court Judgment until I realised that this was added to my credit file on the 19 September 2023

6. The address on the claim is xxxxx. I moved to my current address xxxxx on 25 August 2021. In support of this, I can provide evidence that I registered my current address with the electoral register on 1 December 2021. I can also provide evidence of utility bill payments to my current address from September 2021.

7. 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;

SEQUENCE OF RECENT EVENTS

8. On 2 November 2022, I changed the registered address of my vehicle.

9. On 26 November 2022, I received a letter at my current address from UK CPM regarding a PCN. This PCN showed my vehicle parked on my allocated bay without my permit displayed. Upon realising this, I checked my vehicle and the permit had fallen down to the footwell of the vehicle.

10. On 10 December 2022, I appealed the PCN received explaining the situation and what happened with the permit. This appeal was rejected.

11. On 23 December 2022, I decided to appeal with the Independent Appeals Service that also rejected my appeal.

12. On 17 January 2023, I received a letter at my current address from Gladstones Solicitors Limited requesting payment for the PCN. This proves that Gladstones Solicitors traced my current address and I responded to that by filling out a Pre-Action Protocol form on their website, as well as an enquiry form attempting to appeal. Both forms require me to input my current address. However, inexplicably Gladstones Solicitors reverted to my previous address, without having updated my current address on their systems.

13. I have requested a Subject Access Request from UK CPM, on 24 January 2023. Received the report on 6 February 2023. This contained a total of 17 PCNs, during the period where my permit had fallen from my vehicle’s windscreen. On the same day, I filled an enquiry form on the Gladstones Solicitors Limited website, with an appeal and proof of tenancy agreement and a layout of the parking area showing that the specific parking bay belongs to the flat I’m renting.

14. On 11 April 2023, I contacted the property managers of the building where I am currently living in to try and contact UK CPM to remove these PCNs. Assuming that UK CPM was hired by the property managers that work for the landowner, to enforce rules in the parking area, removing these PCNs should have been feasible. This request was rejected by UK CPM and advised that I had to contact the Gladstones Solicitors Limited to discuss the case further.

15. On 25 April 2023, I received a reply in relation to the enquiry form done on 24 January 2023. The response was that the appeal was rejected and that I owed a total of £1020.

16. A recent persuasive appeal judgmentinCivil Enforcement Limited v Chan(Ref. E7GM9W44)would indicate the POC fails to comply with Civil Procedure Rule 16.4 and Practice Direction Part16. On the 15th August 2023, in the cited case, HHJ Murch held that the particulars of the claim as filed and served did not set out the conduct which amounted to the breach in reliance upon which the claimant would be able to bring a claim for breach of contract'. The same is true in this case and in view of the Chan judgment, the Court should strike out the claim, using its powers pursuant to CPR 3.4 (Exhibit xx-01).

17. I first discovered there was a default County Court Judgment against me when I received a report from the credit file company that I use. This update was on 19 September 2023.

18. On 19 September 2023, I contacted the County Court Business Centre to obtain relevant information relating to this default judgment. I also requested for my address to be updated on the file, as it seemed that the Claim Pack and the Letter of Judgment were sent to my previous address. I was then told how I could set aside this County Court Judgment.

19. On XX October 2023 I submitted my case in order to set-aside this judgment and fairly present my case.

20. I believe the Claimant has behaved unreasonably in pursuing a claim against me without ensuring they held my correct contact details at the time of the claim. I was therefore denied the opportunity to defend the claim.

21. The Claimant, Gladstones Solicitors Limited, had my correct address but failed to use it for the claim.

22. As per paragraph 12, 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. 

23. 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 that the Defendant no longer resides. The Claimant did not take reasonable steps to ascertain the address of my current residence despite having some 10 months to establish an address. This has led to the claim being incorrectly served to an old address and an irregular judgment. 

24. Under CPR 13.2 The court must set aside a judgment entered under part xx 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.

25. 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 xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

26. 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.

27. Furthermore, former 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. 

28. 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.”

29. In the alternative, CPR 13.3 applies and there are very good reasons to set aside this exaggerated claim, which includes a disproportionate and indeed, false 'debt recovery' sum. The Defendant has good prospects of defending a claim, if served with one, but has seen no evidence, basis nor particulars of claim and the Claimant should be required to file afresh, if they believe they have a cause of action. 

30. 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.

Statement of Truth

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.

DRAFT ORDER

CLAIM No: XXX

BETWEEN:

UK CPM (Claimant)

-- and --

XXX (Defendant)

______________________________________________

DRAFT ORDER

______________________________________________

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

1. The County Court Judgment dated on 14 September 2023 be set aside.

2. Strike out the claim, as per CEL v CHAN (appeal)

3. The Defendant recovers from the Claimant the N244 fee of £275 (and the Defendant's costs for attending a hearing, in the event that the Allocating Judge does not make an immediate Order granting (a) and (b) without a hearing, due to the abusive POC and the Claimant's representatives' wholly unreasonable conduct, of reverting to a known old address for this litigation).

Coupon-mad

Your draft Order and the start of your WS and the words you put in the N244 box about the Order you are seeking, should all match.

I think move the Chan paragraph up to replace para 7 which says nothing useful. 

1505grandad

"UK CPM (Claimant)"

Suggestion  -  as this is a legal document the full name of any entities should  be stated.

Also  -  "Judgment"  -  this word is stated sometimes with capital "J" and sometimes lower case  -  perhaps be consistent.

Baylex

1505grandad said:

"UK CPM (Claimant)"

Suggestion  -  as this is a legal document the full name of any entities should  be stated.

Also  -  "Judgment"  -  this word is stated sometimes with capital "J" and sometimes lower case  -  perhaps be consistent.

So, in this case just use "UK Car Park Management (Claimant)?
On the "Judgment", yes I see what you mean. I've changed the word to be in lower case, but left "County Court Judgment" in upper case, does it have to be upper case or it can also be lower case?

Coupon-mad said:

Your draft Order and the start of your WS and the words you put in the N244 box about the Order you are seeking, should all match.

I think move the Chan paragraph up to replace para 7 which says nothing useful. 

So if I understood correctly, what is currently in my Draft Order, has to be the same as in my para 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3?

Chan paragraph moved to paragraph 7, replacing what was there.


This is definitely a bit overwhelming for someone with no experience in this field... 

Umkomaas

So, in this case just use "UK Car Park Management (Claimant)?
On the "Judgment", yes I see what you mean. I've changed the word to be in lower case, but left "County Court Judgment" in upper case, does it have to be upper case or it can also be lower case?

Leave that one in uppercase.