Judgement for Claimant (in default) received.

Juliansnemesis

@Coupon-mad @KeithP @Fruitcake and any others who can help. 

Good Morning all,

I have just received one of these. The letter states that I now have to pay £207 for the PCN and court costs. This is a separate PCN to the others I'm currently dealing with and have posted about.

I have not received any previous court letters in relation to this claim. I am sure of this but obviously cannot prove it.

The last correspondence I had in relation to this PCN was a letter of claim from QDR Solicitors in October 2022 which I responded to via email. 

I have spoken with someone at the CCBC who advised that I can submit a form N244 to request the judge set the ruling aside. It appears that to do this it will cost me £275. 

My questions are:

Is the N244 the only recourse available to me now? 

Will that mean a court date in person or does the judge just review my evidence?

If it is found in my favour can I reclaim the £275 or is that lost money?

I don't have a huge pot of money to fight and potentially pay out all these claims.

If I take this one on the chin and pay will that adversely affect the other claims I'm fighting as UKPC can show I've paid a fine even though it was in default? 

I have been preparing my WS for one of my other claims and so could adapt and submit that with the form N244.

Once again thanks for your continued help and advice. 

JN

Le_Kirk

You know where the NEWBIE sticky is, you have been around for a while now, read all about set-asides and read a few threads by other posters about set-asides.  Speak to CCBC again and ask WHEN and to WHERE they posted your N1 claim form and WHO are the claimants. Does CCBC have your correct address for service (somebody does as you received the judgment)?  Is your V5C up-to-date with your correct address, don't assume - check.

Juliansnemesis

@Le_Kirk

Yep I'll get on to it. Sorry should have done that first. 

V5C is definitely up to date. This letter is dated 24th Jan 23. I'm wondering if the N1 was sent during the postal strikes just before Christmas as that would be around 30 days. 

Thanks. 

Coupon-mad

Read the threads by @Sasanova and @Lukeapple63 which are exactly like yours - there appears to be an entirely missing batch of CCBC post and they deserve formal complaints as well as a deluge of set asides.

This is unjust.  Get it set aside.

Fruitcake

... and get your MP involved. Questions should be asked in the house why so many victims are being given CCJs following a judgment in default due to what appears to be an endemic problem with the court system.

Contact the secretary of state for the MoJ and ask the same question. People's lives are being ruined due a problems with a government system.
While you are at it, ask why emails etcetera sent to for example the CCBC outside normal working hours are going missing/not being received/acknowledged, and defendants are being given CCJs for failing to respond to court mandated deadlines when in fact it is the court system itself that is the problem.

63realfan

Fruitcake - amazing point. I’ll do that too for mine 

Coupon-mad

I think someone should tip off the press.

Might not be their fault, but the pattern emerging shows that CCBC have not served a batch of December claims that still remain unserved.

MPs and newspapers should be asking for answers.

Juliansnemesis

@Coupon-mad @Le_Kirk @Fruitcake @KeithP @Sasanova @Lukeapple63

Hi all,

Ok so I have been through the newbies thread and clicked on all the links and had a good read. I'll be honest it has melted my brain a little bit. I have read @Sasanova 's thread, found the draft order and WS on there and adapted them being close in circumstance to my case. I am going to post my Draft Order and WS in following threads. Thank you in advance for reading them.

I will email QDR Solicitors to inform them and also ask if they agree to have it set aside therefore only costing me £100. Unless someone advised otherwise. 

Thanks

Juliansnemesis

Draft Order:

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

It is ordered that;

1. The judgment for claimant dated XXXXXX 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).

Should it be deemed the case is to be struck out:

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

1. the Defendant responded at pre-action stage to point out that the claimant's duty was to combine all similar parking charges into a single claim, and 

2. by filing claims XXXXXXXX, XXXXXXXX and XXXXXXXX first, in isolation,  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 in the above claims) was extinguished; 

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

Should it be deemed the claim needs to be defended:

1. Unless the Claimant serves a copy of the Claim Form on the Defendant by 4pm on XXXXXX the claim will be struck out without further order. 

2. If the Claimant serves the claim form as directed in paragraph 3 the Defendant shall file and serve a defence by 4pm XXXXXX 

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

4. Should the court reserve costs in the case as an alternative to paragraph 2, such costs of this application will become payable if the claimant discontinues it's claim.

Juliansnemesis

WS:

1. I, XXXXXXXX am the defendant in this matter. This is my supporting Statement to my application dated XX/XX/XX requesting to: 

1. Set aside the default judgement dated XX/XX/XX. 

2. Order for original claim 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).

2. I understand that the claimant obtained a default judgement against me as the Defendant on XX/XX/XX. I am aware that the claimant is UK Parking Control Ltd, and the claim is in respect of unpaid Parking Charge Notices. I submit that the claim should be set aside and ultimately dismissed as follows:

Claim and response pack never received. Unaware of this claim.

1. The claim and response pack was never received and I was totally unaware of the claim until the arrival of the letter of Judgement for Claimant (in default) from the County Court Business Centre (CCBC) on the XX/XX/XX.

2. The last communication I received from the Claimant was a Letter of Claim dated 10/10/2022 via QDR Solicitors. I responded to them by email on XX/XX/XX. It is clearly evident at this stage that I was replying and would never have ignored a claim had I known about it. (Copy of email attached) 

3. The missing claim pack has still not turned up to date, thus it remains unserved.

4. Further to this I am currently dealing with several other claims by the same claimant for separate PCN’s relating to the same vehicle, at the same car park where the PCN has been issued under exactly the same circumstances. These claims are XXXXXXXX, XXXXXXXX and XXXXXXXX. All of which I have responded to promptly at each stage further highlighting that I would not have ignored this claim had I received it.

5. 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, upon receiving this Judgement for Claimant (In Default) l:

1. Acted promptly by immediately  contacting the CCBC on XX/XX/XX raising my concern in relation to the Default judgement. I was advised then by a court administrator by the name of XXXXX that I could apply to have this Judgement set aside. XXXXX then emailed me the N244 Forms. 

2. Contacted the CCBC again on XX/XX/XX and spoke with a court administrator by the name of XXXX. XXXXX informed me that the Claim and Response Pack was issued on the 12th December 2022. 

3. Strongly believe that the claim did not reach me as a result of the Postal Strikes that took place on the 11th, 14th, 15th, 23rd and 24th of December 2022. I asked XXXXX if the CCBC had received calls from other people facing the same issue to which she stated they had. 

6. I submit that the CCJ should be dismissed or at least set aside under CPR 13.2 and CPR 13.3. I was in no position to acknowledge service or submit a defence statement as the claim form was not served and therefore I had no knowledge of the claim.

7. I am prepared to swear on oath that the claim was not served and that is still the position to date.

Cause of action estoppel

1. It is my strong belief that the Claimant is purposefully abusing the court process to their own ends by submitting multiple claims for same circumstance PCN’s all of which they would have been aware of. I believe they do this to bombard any defendant such as myself with multiple claim forms to have to acknowledge service of, submit defence statements, witness statements and prepare cases for, in the hope that defendants, who mostly have no knowledge of civil law, will give up or that claims will ‘slip through the net’.

2. This further claim should never have been filed as it is a clear case of “cause of action estoppel”. And I ask that the courts dismiss this further claim as such. I have already pointed this out to the claimant previously in a Subject Access Request email dated XX/XX/XX. (Copy supplied) 

3. Cases relative to this are:

1. Arnold V National Westminster Bank PLC [1991] 3 ALL ER 41. The court noted that ‘....cause of action estoppel applies where a cause of action in a second action is identical to a cause of action in the first, the latter having been between the same parties, or their privies and involving the same subject matter’. This case involves the same Claimant and Defendant, The same vehicle, The same Car Park and the same manner in which the PCN was issued.

2. In Henderson v Henderson [1843]67 ER 313 The court noted the following…’when a matter becomes subject to litigation, i) the parties are required to advance their whole case, ii) 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, but were not owing to negligence, inadvertence or error

4. By filing the first claim and failing to advance the whole case at that time, any cause of action was immediately extinguished for any other similar fact Parking Charges against me. The courts may estop a second claim where the cause of action is substantially the same. 

I can robustly defend this claim.

1. Should the court not dismiss this claim I ask that it be set aside as I am confident I can robustly defend the original Parking Charge Notice. I deny contravening the parking conditions set out in the Car Park that resulted in the PCN being issued. I am already defending several similar fact claims issued by this claimant as listed above. One of these cases (XXXXXXXX) I have had successfully discontinued at the defence statement stage. 

2. I enclose a copy of my defence pdf that succeeded in achieving discontinuance in claim XXXXXXXX. This shows that I have a very good chance of successfully defending this same fact claim, should the court not in fact strike it out. Please note that this defence statement is essentially the same for each claim lodged by the claimant.

3. 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.

B789

Juliansnemesis said:

I will email QDR Solicitors to inform them and also ask if they agree to have it set aside therefore only costing me £100. Unless someone advised otherwise. 

You can... however, if they agree (set aside with consent) they will almost certainly expect you to pay their costs. So, you'd still pay for their costs and your £100.

If you are sure that the CCJ was issued due to a problem out of your control then you should probably pay £275 for a set aside without consent and claim it back from the claimant because it was not your fault that the CCJ was issued incorrectly.

I defer to the experts who will clarify my point with a much better explanation.