CCJ served at wrong address - letter from DCBL Bailiffs to even older address 1 month after default

Coupon-mad

Ignore it.

k2122

So oddly I've just received my notice of hearing - which is on the 28th this month. I've sent over my draft defence yesterday so presume this was already in the post.

Coupon-mad

Good, hopefully before 28th, the Government will publish the draft Impact Assessment which might include some info or wording you can signpost the Judge to, if there is any doubt that the CCJ should be set aside and your defence has merit.

B789

k2122 said:

So oddly I've just received my notice of hearing - which is on the 28th this month. I've sent over my draft defence yesterday so presume this was already in the post.

I hope you mean your draft WS???

k2122

Oh I already sent my witness statement alongside the original N244 application months ago. The court ordered me to provide a draft defence at the end of last month by the 13th, which I sent to them and the claimant on Monday

Coupon-mad

Yes you are on track and it was a draft defence. Judge wants it for the set aside hearing.

k2122

So ELMS have just now sent in their draft "consent" order: 

• The judgement be set aside
• Claim to be allocated to small claims track
• No order as to costs

k2122

I've already in my witness statement asked the court to disregard this should it happen. Do you think I should respond to this reiterating that?

Coupon-mad

No, do not play email tennis.
Judges don't like it.

instead, raise your objection orally to that as a 'preliminary matter' immediately at the start of the hearing, to stop the Judge thinking this is an easy case to deal with in 5 minutes flat.

Get in first, just after the introductions.

Tell the Judge that VCS had their chance to consent BEFORE you were forced to spend £275 and they refused to do so (if true?) and point out that this is a common trick used by Elms Legal that has the effect of making it look like a signed Consent Order exists in the case when it is absolutely NO SUCH THING and you certainly want your costs.

That is a vehicle used by them that has in some cases mislead courts.  To be disregarded.  It is no more than a draft and is not the document it appears to be at first glance.  It is misleading in the extreme and no professional legal firm should be calling their own self-serving draft (designed PURELY to wriggle their client out of liability for the applicant's costs) a 'CONSENT' Order. 

k2122

Great thank you for that advice, I'll make sure to raise it early!