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

Baylex

Alright this is what I have so far @Coupon-mad

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. 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).

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 Car Park Management 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. A recent persuasive appeal judgment in Civil Enforcement Limited v Chan (Ref. E7GM9W44) would indicate the POC fails to comply with Civil Procedure Rule 16.4 and Practice Direction Part 16. On 15 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).

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 Car Park Management 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 Car Park Management, 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 Car Park Management to remove these PCNs. Assuming that UK Car Park Management 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 Car Park Management 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. 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.

17. 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.

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

19. 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.

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

21. 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. 

22. 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. 

23. 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.

24. 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

25. 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.

26. 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. 

27. 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.”

28. 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. 

29. 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 Car Park Management (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

I don't understand the middle bit that suggests ALL the 2022 UKCPM letters and appeal stuff went to your current address, yet you then say Gs traced your current address in 2023?

Yet they reverted to a different address for the claim, how come? It reads as if you still rent the flat and haven't moved?

And these must all be Exhibits:

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.

Baylex

Coupon-mad said:

I don't understand the middle bit that suggests ALL the 2022 UKCPM letters and appeal stuff went to your current address, yet you then say Gs traced your current address in 2023?

Yet they reverted to a different address for the claim, how come? It reads as if you still rent the flat and haven't moved?

And these must all be Exhibits:

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.

I can see why it's confusing. So the PCN that I received from UKCPM was after I changed the address on my vehicle, so that one arrived at my actual address. But before that, they sent many other PCNs to my previous address. At that point I was unaware of the quantity of PCNs. I appealed the PCN I received at my current address. Eventually when I got a letter from Gladstones, this was not for that same PCN I received at my current address. But instead, it was for the other much older PCNs sent to my previous address.
Eventually I requested the SAR and realised the sheer amount of PCNs.

Let me see if I can make this make a bit more sense. Also, added Exhibit references for each document that I can present.

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. 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).

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 Car Park Management 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 (Exhibit xx-01). In support of this, I can provide evidence that I registered my current address with the electoral register on 1 December 2021 (Exhibit xx-02). I can also provide evidence of utility bill payments to my current address from September 2021 (Exhibit xx-03).

7. A recent persuasive appeal judgment in Civil Enforcement Limited v Chan (Ref. E7GM9W44) would indicate the POC fails to comply with Civil Procedure Rule 16.4 and Practice Direction Part 16. On 15 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-04).

SEQUENCE OF RECENT EVENTS

8. On 2 November 2022, I changed the registered address of my vehicle from my old address [address] to my current address [address] (Exhibit xx-05).

9. On 26 November 2022, I received a letter at my current address from UK Car Park Management 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 on 26 November 2022,  explaining the situation and what happened with the permit. This appeal was rejected (Exhibit xx-06).

11. On 23 December 2022, I decided to appeal the same PCN with the Independent Appeals Service that also rejected my appeal (Exhibit xx-07).

12. On 17 January 2023, I received a letter at my current address from Gladstones Solicitors Limited requesting payment for a different and much older PCN. I responded to that letter by filling out a Pre-Action Protocol form (Exhibit xx-08) on their website, as well as an enquiry form attempting to appeal (Exhibit xx-09). Both forms require me to input my current address).

13. I have requested a Subject Access Request from UK Car Park Management, on 24 January 2023, to understand how many PCNs were given to me before I realised what was happening.. Received the report on 6 February 2023. This contained a total of 17 PCNs for the period where my permit had fallen from my vehicle’s windscreen.

14. On 6 February 2023, I filled an enquiry form (Exhibit xx-10) 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.

15. On 11 April 2023, I contacted the property managers of the building (Exhibit xx-11) where I am currently living in to try and contact UK Car Park Management to remove these 17 PCNs. Assuming that UK Car Park Management 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 Car Park Management and advised that I had to contact the Gladstones Solicitors Limited to discuss the case further.

16. 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.

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, by telephone, 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 asked why the County Court Business Centre sent the letters to my previous address and was told that this was the address that Gladstones Solicitors had provided for the case.

19. As per paragraph 12, I contacted Gladstones through their website by filling out a Pre-Action Protocol form (Exhibit xx-08) and an enquiry form (Exhibit xx-09), which both required me to input my current address, after I received their letter on 17 January 2023. This proves that Gladstones Solicitors traced my current address successfully. However, inexplicably Gladstones Solicitors reverted to my previous address, without having updated my current address on their systems.

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

21. 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.

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

23. 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. 

24. 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. 

25. 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.

26. 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

27. 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.

28. 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. 

29. 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.”

30. 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. 

31. 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 Car Park Management (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).

Castle

Check Para 22-wrong claimant.

Baylex

Castle said:

Check Para 22-wrong claimant.

Thanks for pointing it out!! My brain is made into soup at this point. 

Instead of saying this:
The Claimant, Gladstones Solicitors Limited, had my correct address but failed to use it for the claim.

What I want to say is:
Gladstones Solicitors Limited, on behalf of the Claimant UK Car Park Management, had my current address but failed to use it for the claim.

Would this be correct?

Coupon-mad

You could add the 'four months dead' argument as a second reason to dismiss the claim and make them start afresh (as seen this year/last year, in CCJ set aside cases by @Jack5656 etc).

That is clearer.  

I'd add here:

16. 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.  This is denied and they knew my position and where I could be reached.

17. Gladstones and the Claimant were on notice that I dispute liability for any sum at all, for solid reasons including (but not limited to) a lack of contractual agreement with this Claimant, an unfairly inflated (unserved) claim and the fact that my tenancy agreement imposes no obligation to display a permit.  I only displayed it merely as a courtesy, and to show other residents that the car belonged to a bona fide tenant. Indeed I have a right to park, load and unload as part of normal daily life at the premises.  Further, the Claimant knew the car was registered for a permit and could even see it through the side window, had they carried out any due diligence.

18.  Instead they rushed to secretly 'fine' me behind my back, day after day, sending letters to an old address (DVLA car reg addresses are known to be unreliable and are never supplied by the DVLA as a confirmed address for service). Indeed the Claimants issued these 'permits' and thus they knew all along which address the car and permit were connected to but they failed to use that address and just relied on the old DVLA one, which breaches their Code of Practice.  It was obviously the wrong address because they received no response, until finally they sent a single PCN to the right address and I responded immediately.  At no point did the parking operator bother to affix even one PCN openly on the car, which is a fairer way to alert a driver and which is required under the new incoming DLUHC statutory Code of Practice, in order to comply with the 'timeliness & prominence of consumer notices' requirement in the Consumer Rights Act 2015.

19.  To compound all of this sharp practice, Gladstones knew my current address and knew I was responding and disputing the matter, but they (negligently or deliberately) reverted back to the old address for the court claim.  What other reason could a roboclaim bulk litigator have for such rogue conduct, except to set out to get a CCJ by default then pass it to their in-house new bailiff arm 'Empira' and layer on yet more costs, in the hope I would panic and pay thousands.  This conduct cannot be supported by the courts.

20.  To be clear, if Gladstones attempt to produce a draft Consent Order during this process, for the avoidance of doubt, I respectfully ask the learned Judge to note that I DO NOT CONSENT to Gladstones' terms, because they will want to get away with this fee-free.  I certainly require my costs to be refunded by the Claimant, who deliberately or negligently caused the CCJ.

 

Baylex

@Coupon-mad I will have to buy you a few pints in order to repay this huge help you are giving me!

You definitely seem to know my case better than I do LOL

All these paragraphs you wrote above, should I replace them with the ones I have with the same numbers? Or should I add them from paragraph 16? 

Coupon-mad

Add them, don't replace stuff.

And I don't drink pints.  I'm a lady.  White wine spritzer please! 🤩

63realfan

Baylex said:

@Coupon-mad I will have to buy you a few pints in order to repay this huge help you are giving me!

You definitely seem to know my case better than I do LOL

All these paragraphs you wrote above, should I replace them with the ones I have with the same numbers? Or should I add them from paragraph 16? 

I owe CM and the others an priceless thanks to everything they've helped me with. I would say help like this is too good to be true but in this situation these guys are really good people. Not all heroes wear capes! 

Herzlos

On point 5 I'd add a statement that Gladstones was given your correct address on blah date. You want to reinforce that Gladstones knowingly sent it to the wrong address and not leave any room for doubt that maybe it was a genuine mistake.