County Court Judgment

63realfan

@Coupon-mad

Hope you're well and ready for Christmas. 

I've just had a thought in regards of the backwards and forwards arguing with CCBC about getting the costs refunded for N244. I'm not as bothered as I was as I almost felt I was not going to win against them so almost just accepted I won't get the refund however I will do one final appeal to their next appeal stage process of which I've had a thought; 

The Judge did not accept the order for C to pay back costs (n244 application and admin fees) - It wasn't actually the C's fault as it was the postal strikes that caused this which was CCBC's fault along with Royal Mail, so I totally get the judge not ordering C to repay back costs. 

The second order was to have the CCBC issue a fresh claim of which I could defend promptly with 14 days along with refund of the N244 application. - The judge ignored this one and obviously gave me a better option of just having the CCJ put aside and did say that the C shouldn't have to pay back costs. I was so overwhelmed that the judge put the CCJ aside that I did not have time to request from the judge that CCBC pay back the N244 fee that caused me to be put of pocket. 

Surely the fact that the judgement put was put aside and the C wasn't in the wrong for costs, the CCBC should be the ones at fault and should pay back costs, proven by the court that the CCJ was caused by postal strikes and that the claim was not served be that at all. 

I did highlight something I had from the Applications and Orders Manager - ''Due to the above, I do not feel it is appropriate to offer a refund of the court application fee of £275 and looking at the District Judges Order there was no direction for a refund to be given''. 

Is it worth seeking some type of order from the court I had the case put aside at or is this not possible? It is a stressful chase but I felt robbed by CCBC. Not only 5 months of stress at the start of the year and time wasted but the fact I had to pay to have it all sorted when it was proven I was not in the wrong and neither was the Claimant yet CCBC are not putting their hands up. Is there a way to challenge CCBC via the courts? I'm prepping one last complaint to them to push this forward as this one is going to their head office. 

What's seriously worrying was that the manager also said this 

''Please let me explain how the claim came to be issued to you.  Parking Eye upload their claims electronically onto the court system in bulk.  This means the court is unaware of individual cases nor when they will be issued.  The claim pack is sent out to the defendant from our bulk-issuing centre which is not in Northampton again electronically using the address that the claimant provides as details of the claim.  It is unfortunate that the claimants issued your claim around the time of the postal strikes but under the Civil Procedure Rules there was nothing to legally stop them doing so''

Even when I gave the reply you helped me with, I just got back a load of garbage from the manager of the manager saying that CCBC aren't at fault here. Especially with staff at CCBC saying that they were aware of strikes that may be causing people a delay in receiving their claim form, or not at all. 

How do you think I should press forward with this? I'll post all the correspondence so far - 

I write this email as a direct complaint to have the £275 N244 set aside fee refunded. 

 

My reasons for this are because the CCBC have caused me a £275 court fee lose due to the CCBC’s failure to properly set up a policy to protect parties affected by the well known and planned postal strikes that happened in December 2022 of which my meant the CCJ sent by the CCBC was never served at my home address due to postal strikes. There are others that have caused this and the set aside has already been honoured by deputy Judge Davies of Aldershot Civil Court that the CCJ be put aside on evidence that it was not properly served. 

 

I have evidence by way of a phone recording which I have attached below that reveals CCBC staff were in fact aware of the postal strikes but took no action to chase up applicants such as myself in response to the claim never being served which subsequently caused a CCJ to be lodged against my credit file wrongly and the inconvenience and time of preparing evidence to show that this was never served for the N244 application which caused a great deal of stress for me amongst my busy work schedule and of which stress amounting to a degree that had an effect on my mental health and well-being. 

 

I feel I deserve compensation for the impact this has had on myself and costs I’ve had to pay for something that wasn’t my fault along with having to take time off work to attend the set aside hearing of which could have been avoided knowing that clearly the claims weren’t served at all in a time that CCBC knew of the postal strikes yet did nothing about it. I request compensation for CCBC’s unacceptable handling of this & unprofessional nature and as a minimum to have the £275 set aside fee reimbursed. 

 

Please see the recorded calls as evidence below. 

 

Thank you, 

 THEIR RESPONSE

Thank you for your recent complaint received on 2 May 2023.

 

I am the Applications & Orders Manager  at the County Court Business Centre (CCBC) and I am writing in response to your complaint.

 

Firstly i am sorry this has happened to you and that you have had cause to complain.

 

Please let me explain how the claim came to be issued to you.  Parking Eye upload their claims electronically onto the court system in bulk.  This means the court is unaware of individual cases nor when they will be issued.  The claim pack is sent out to the defendant from our bulk-issuing centre which is not in Northampton again electronically using the address that the claimant provides as details of the claim.  It is unfortunate that the claimants issued your claim around the time of the postal strikes but under the Civil Procedure Rules there was nothing to legally stop them doing so.

 

Claim number XXXXXXX was electronically issued on 9 December 2022 which gave a Date of Service of the 14 December 2022 giving you 14 days from that date to file a response to the claim.  As no response was received the claimant was then able to requested Judgment by Default against you.

 

You then contacted the court and the fee of £275 was paid to process your N244 application and then transfer out to the relevant local court for a hearing.  This was done in a timely manner and i can see from the case that the Judge found in your favour and the Judgment was set aside.

 

Due to the above, i do not feel it is appropriate to offer a refund of the court application fee of £275.  The case is still currently with Aldershot and Farnham County Court at this time and looking at the District Judge's Order there was no direction for a refund to be given.

 

I trust this answers your query.

 

 MY NEXT RESPONSE

 

I write this complaint as a direct response to the previous email received from XXXX to be put towards the attention of XXXXXX,

 

The CCBC is an executive agency of the Ministry of Justice responsible for handling civil claims and cases. It would appear that it is breaching the Civil Procedure Rules and Practice Direction Part 6 - Service of Documents. Specifically, the CCBC is in breach of CPR 6.3(1)(a) by failing to use first-class post, document exchange, or other service that provides for delivery on the next business day.

 

Practice Direction Part 6 provides the guidelines for the service of documents in civil proceedings. According to this rule, first-class post or document exchange service that guarantees delivery on the next business day should be used, unless there is a good reason to use an alternative method.

 

The fact that your system is 'automated' is no excuse; in fact my case (and the many other Defendants with similar stories) exposes the failure of your system to comply with your public duty to take reasonable steps to ensure service of a claim is properly effected in a timely manner.

 

You had good reason to use an alternative method during Royal Mail postal strikes.  This was a time when you knew that it was not just unlikely but provably impossible for court claims that week, to be served in time (if at all).

 

You knew you were feeding claims into a black hole that week.

 

This is yet another example of the CCBC favouring the rights of Claimants (even scam parking firms and thug bulk litigators with zero merit to their case, who use the courts as a cheap method of false debt recovery) over the rights of consumer Defendants.

 

You also know from receiving many complaints (several of which I have seen posted online) that a significant number of these claims from that week in December were never delivered.

 

Yet it appears no investigation has taken place and no affected Defendant has been contacted, let alone compensated. Has the CCBC done ANYTHING to report this known failure to your Senior Management Team? Is anyone investigating how widespread this failure was?  Is anyone taking responsibility?

 

If the CCBC is not complying with CPR 6.3(1)(a) by using an appropriate method of service which provides for delivery on the next business day, can it be sanctioned by, and does it have to report its failure to the MoJ?

 

If not, how do I report this failure and escalate my complaint?

 

THEIR RESPONSE

Thank you for your letter of 13 May 2023 about your complaint. I'm sorry to hear you're not happy with the first letter we sent.

 

I can see you are concerned that we did not send out your claim response pack in line with CPR and that the postal strikes should have been taken into account when calculating response times. Having  reviewed all the details, I have not found that we have breached any rules. Claims issued via the County Court Business Centre (CCBC) come under CPR Part 7, practice direction 7B 1.3 which confirm that claim packs are served by the Court rather than by the Claimant to which you have referred. We allow 5 days from the date of issue before the claim is deemed to be served.

 

I am afraid that we hold no jurisdiction over the Royal Mail and the service they provide. If you are unhappy with their service, I would advise that you contact them directly. I will not be considering your claim for compensation. 

 

 

What happens next

 

From looking at your case file I can see that the claimant has now discontinued the claim. The hearing date should therefore be cancelled by XXXXXXX County Court, but you may want to contact them if you haven't had an update.

 

 

If you're unhappy with my response

 

If you're unhappy with the way I've handled your complaint at this review stage, you can ask our Customer Investigations Team to reconsider it. Just write to them at this address with details of why you're not happy:

 

This is where I'm at, next stop investigations team. Notice how the last complaint, looks all template and rushed? She doesn't even answer 2 of my complaint questions and also states this ''which confirm that claim packs are served by the Court rather than by the Claimant to which you have referred.'' In all my complaints, I've never mentioned the Claimant serving any packs, have I missed something?

Appreciate any responses and appreciate this is a long one. I Just so want to beat them for what is owed! 

63realfan

Hi all, appreciate the previous message was long winded. Totally stuck with the response situation and it's a stressful situation still for the sake of reclaiming £275 back. I'm going to sit this one off and focus on getting my friends CCJ removed and letting rest. I don't want to but also don't want to move into 2024 carrying the weight of this argument trying to recover costs with CCBC. Thank you all for your help this year. @Coupon-mad @Le_Kirk @KeithP @Boat_to_Bolivia @B789 and everyone else not mentioned. You've been amazing and all heroes in my eyes. I thank you for your time and the stress you've taken away from me. Scary to think when I first found out about a CCJ I knew nothing about and lonely. Originally asked for help from a facebook page and got told to just accept then kicked out. So glad I found you guys and owe you all for your time! On to beating my friend's CCJ this year and getting another win!

Coupon-mad

63realfan said:

Hi all, appreciate the previous message was long winded. Totally stuck with the response situation and it's a stressful situation still for the sake of reclaiming £275 back. I'm going to sit this one off and focus on getting my friends CCJ removed and letting rest. I don't want to but also don't want to move into 2024 carrying the weight of this argument trying to recover costs with CCBC. Thank you all for your help this year. @Coupon-mad @Le_Kirk @KeithP @Boat_to_Bolivia @B789 and everyone else not mentioned. You've been amazing and all heroes in my eyes. I thank you for your time and the stress you've taken away from me. Scary to think when I first found out about a CCJ I knew nothing about and lonely. Originally asked for help from a facebook page and got told to just accept then kicked out. So glad I found you guys and owe you all for your time! On to beating my friend's CCJ this year and getting another win!

We get that.

Have you and your friend provided your evidence (of what the CCBC system and parking bulk litigators did to you, between them) to this current Inquiry?

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/80375249/#Comment_80375249

"The Committee invites evidence on:

• What the current level of delay in the County Court is

• The ways in which the County Court engages with litigants in person, and how this could be improved

• The causes of action giving rise to claims in the County Court

• What future reforms to the County Court should be considered."

Please tell them that private parking firms and their bulk litigators are the main problem as far as small claims delays are concerned, as they dominate court lists.

Parking claim numbers are rising exponentially and will make up about a third of all small claims by the end of 2023 (going by the 2022 figures that the MoJ divulged in the DLUHC's recent Parking Code of Practice draft Impact Assessment).

The Committee should recommend that private parking cases be removed from the small claims system, instead using a new 'parking pre-action protocol' (requiring use of ADR instead of inflated debt demands and bulk litigators who want court).

Tell the Committee about your claim and CCJ and point out that any competent bespoke ADR would have cancelled the PCNs if there had been any effort by the parking firm to engage with a proper pre-action protocol designed to keep parking cases out of court.

Please tell the Committee that the private parking legislative framework needs to be removed from the county court altogether.

Also ask if they think it's justice that you had to pay an exorbitant £275 fee due to the CCBC's error/oversight that they deny even happened, despite the fact you know of SEVERAL cases exactly like it.

How is this justice for consumer defendants?

Please add your voices.  You and your friend.

Interested parties have until 17 January to make a submission to the committee.