Advice regarding unknown CCJs on credit file

moaya

Hello, 

I just wanted to get advice regarding two CCJs on my credit file. By the time I had realised they were on there it was past the 30 days in which I was able to settle. Long story short it appears they had been sent to an old address. I am worried as it had affected my credit score and my mortgage is up for renewal shortly and if I am unable to get a decent rate then I am at risk of losing my house. 

I am not sure where to start but this is a summary of where I am at the moment. A few months back I had noticed my credit score had declined but made nothing of it as I had made a few applications and had high balance to credit limit ratio at the time. When it continued to decrease further I decided to check again carefully which is when I found that I had a CCJ dated 19th of May 2022. After finding this out it has been a real struggle to get more information about this CCJ as I was waiting for long periods of time in queue on the telephone. I eventually managed to get information regarding the claimants and their solicitors. They were DCB Legal acting on behalf of CP Plus Limited t/a Groupnexus. They also state that on 27th of May 2022 and 14th of June 2022 they were made aware by current occupiers of my address that they are receiving letters for a person no longer living at the address. The occupiers told them that they had been marking the letters as return to sender and when this did not stop the letters coming they opened them to get a contact number.  

I recently sent out emails to register complaints against the County Court Business Centre and DCB Legal. I also put in subject access requests (SAR) to see what information that they held in relation to my case. The CCBC replied back and I found it be wholly unacceptable and irresponsible. They said that on 27th of June 2022 they informed the claimants solicitor and they did not receive an updated address. They did not elaborate further on what happened after that. The CCBC did not acknowledge my request for a SAR. DBC Legal responded with further details of the claims. They have informed it was relation to a MOTO Ferrybridge motorway station parking charge notice issued on February 2020 and they were instructed on 2nd of March 2022 by CP Plus Limited t/a Groupnexus. To my horror they also provide me information of another CCJ which has not yet appeared on my credit file yet. This relates to a MOTO Trowell motorway station parking charge notice dated March 2021 and were instructed on 4th of October 2022. How could the CCBC allow these claims to proceed when they had been advised I no longer lived at that address. 

DBC Legal also claimed that when they take a case on that they do a 'trace' which confirmed that this was the correct address for myself. This cannot be true as if they had done their checks they would have known what my current address was at the time of filing the claim. I have requested proof that they undertook this 'trace' and I am waiting to hear back from them regarding this. 

Beyond complaining to them directly and escalating to the solicitors regulatory body and my local MP is there anything I could be doing? Any help or advice would be appreciated. I am very worried about ultimately losing my home over a allegedly overstaying at a motorway services. Thanks.

sourcrates

Best posting on the parking forum for detailed advice, but sending court paperwork to an old address is a trick used in order to obtain a CCJ by default.

No amount of complaining will make any difference now judgement has been granted, you should look to have them set aside, see if you meet the criteria for this, in the meantime I will ask the forum team to move this to a more appropriate board for you.

macman

The paperwork would have been issued to the name and address held by the DVLA as the registered keeper of your vehicle.  When you moved, did you forget to update the address with the DVLA? If so, they have done nothing wrong. 
A lot of people change their driving licence address when they move, but fail to get the V5C updated as well. They are not linked.
Stop worrying about your credit score: it's a fictitious number that lenders can't even see, so ignore it. What matters is your credit history.

phillw

moaya said:

How could the CCBC allow these claims to proceed when they had been advised I no longer lived at that address. 

Imagine the claims couldn't proceed if letters were returned "not at this address" and there was no other address available.

Not a single CCJ would ever be granted again. 

moaya

Thank you @sourcrates

macman said:

Stop worrying about your credit score: it's a fictitious number that lenders can't even see, so ignore it. What matters is your credit history.

Thats reassuring but what worries me more is that I have to declare any CCJs for work professional indemnity insurance. If I get refused this then I won't be able to continue my work as a health care professional. I know DCB legal are lying about checking my address as the vehicle was sold in May 2021 and they say they were instructed in 2022.

 phillw said:

moaya said:

How could the CCBC allow these claims to proceed when they had been advised I no longer lived at that address. 

Imagine the claims couldn't proceed if letters were returned "not at this address" and there was no other address available.

Not a single CCJ would ever be granted again. 

As opposed to now when these claims are made in bulk with no real checks done and normal people pay the price, even losing their homes or jobs. I am not classed as vulnerable but I am afraid to imagine what they go through with these sorts of cowboy tactics.

I would appreciate any further advice

B789

Read, re-read and read again the Newbies thread to begin to get an understanding of where you are in this process. You can probably recover from your predicament but you must help yourself if you want the regulars to help you.

First of all, please answer the question already asked... what was the address on your V5C at the time of the parking events? You say you sold the car before the claim but that is irrelevant. What matters is the address on the V5C at the time of the PCN issue. There is a lot going for you because someone returned letters marked as not living at that address. That alone should have triggered the PPC or the lawyers to do a soft search which, if you'd updated your address with banks, utility companies, electoral roll etc. would have easily evidenced you as there to be found.

What you need to do will be to get the CCJs set aside. If the claims were improperly served, they must be set aside. There is a chance you can also get the claims dismissed because of the time elapsed since the incorrect service.

What is critical is that you get this process started immediately as the courts do not look kindly on anyone not doing something about this as soon as possible after finding out about it. Get your timeline of events organised so they can be followed accurately. You SAR the PPC for all the details. If the lawyers are trying to hide something, you SAR them too. You need to see exactly what they have on you and when they corresponded. All this will add to your timeline.

There is a possibility that when the CCJs are set aside that the judge will ignore the "4 months dead" option and order that the PCNs are re-served to the correct address and the clock then resets for defending the claims.

Once the CCJs are cancelled, they are expunged from your credit file and there remains no record of them. You will have to pay to get them set aside but if your reasons for the set aside are valid, you can claim the fee back. Your statement to the court in the set aside order will have to explain how the solicitors or PPC were at fault for not doing a simple soft search to establish a current address for service of the claim. If it was over a year after the original PCN to the time of the CCC, then they cannot use the excuse that they served a valid address if they didn't do a soft search for an up to date address.

Mouse007

Now you are in the correct forum you are in the right place to get proper help. Not my area but I've seen lots of these set aside problems resolved here. As mentioned above read the Newbies and scroll downto the bit HAVE YOU FOUND OUT ABOUT A CCJ in the second post. Then search the forum for set aside, change results to newest first.

Coupon-mad

macman said:

The paperwork would have been issued to the name and address held by the DVLA as the registered keeper of your vehicle.  When you moved, did you forget to update the address with the DVLA? If so, they have done nothing wrong. 

That isn't true.

Please pass all parking CCJ cases to this parking fines board, as @sourcrates does, and please don't answer these queries saying things like the above, which is incorrect for parking cases. 

Because the DVLA car reg address is notoriously unreliable, and is not vouched nor intended by the DVLA to be a valid 'service address' for court papers, the BPA CoP requires an address check (a soft trace) before sending a LBC.

They clearly didn't.  It is mandatory.  That's a breach of the CoP and in breach of the Civil Procedure Rules.

Luckily the case has now been moved to the right forum to get these two CCJs set aside.  Easy as taking candy from a baby.

phillw said:

moaya said:

How could the CCBC allow these claims to proceed when they had been advised I no longer lived at that address. 

Imagine the claims couldn't proceed if letters were returned "not at this address" and there was no other address available.

Not a single CCJ would ever be granted again. 

On the contrary.

Claims should not have proceeded at all in this case, if the Claimant parking scammer, or their useless debt crawler, or DCBLegal, were receiving the letters returned.  Which is what the OP says the new occupiers did.

That tells the Claimant the address is not the proper address for service.  It seems likely that they knew that at pre-action stage, so of course there should have been no CCJs.

And AIUI, the CCBC had the claim form and/or the Notice of CCJ by default returned in June marked 'not known at this address'.

And the OP tells us that the CCBC informed the rogue, money-grabbing roboclaim 'legal' firm, who apparently did nothing, sat on their hands and just waited for this victim to discover what they KNEW from the CCBC was an improper CCJ.

Then the rogue roboclaim 'legal' repeated this conduct in October.  This is appalling conduct, as is filing two separate and near-duplicate facts claims.

This abuse of the court process (two claims rather than one) is estopped, if the Claimant was the same firm both times - see Henderson v Henderson (1843) 3 Hare 100, 67 ER 313; a decision of the English Court of Chancery which confirmed that a party may not raise any claim in subsequent litigation which they ought properly to have raised in a previous action.

Notwithstanding the above, there is a simple step that parking claimants must take (a bulk soft trace that takes minutes and costs from 28 pence) to check an address. It is stark staring obvious to us that they didn't.

The parking firm and solicitor are absolutely to blame and will likely be held liable this year for refunding this scam victim the 2 x £275 fees to set these CCJs aside.

Then the Claimant will discontinue both claims.

The OP will pay nothing in the end if they play these right as per the CCJ set aside advice in the NEWBIES thread.