CEL claim - stages after CCJ set aside

CliveTreeHorn

Doing final preparations before the hearing on Tuesday.

I havent heard anything from CEL at all, will I find to it advance if they are attending or not, or just find out on the day?

I have received two letters from their debt collector though, which I am taking to the hearing as evidence that I was there to be found. One is dated prior to my application which helps make that point. 

Coupon-mad

That's a very good point.

Don't forget to ask for your costs to be refunded by CEL.

Or (worst case if the Judge won't grant your costs on the day) ask the Judge instead to reserve the £275 and your attendance costs and to please specifically include in the Order that these costs must be paid by the Claimant to you, in the event of them discontinuing the claim after the CCJ is set aside.

Be ready for one possible trick, which has fooled a Judge before:

We've seen CEL send the court a draft Order (sometimes without copying in the Defendant) made to look like a CONSENT ORDER.  With your name on.   Stating that CEL consents to the CCJ set aside with 'no order as to costs'. 

They do this to swerve your costs and to make more credulous rookie Judges think this is a nice convenient way to resolve the case in 5 minutes and get it off their list and the Judge hardly lets the Defendant speak and just rubber-stamps it, thinking the pseudo 'Consent Order' is a good thing.

People have been caught out by that.

Be ready just in case. Object to it!  Point out you know nothing about that, did not sign it (so it isn't a Consent Order) and they didn't copy you in so they are in breach of the CPRs.  Not only that, this is YOUR HEARING that YOU have paid £275 for, and from the outset it's clear that you require your costs back and should never have to shoulder that costs burden, given the fact that the evidence demonstrates CEL have breached the BPA Code of Practice and the CPRs by not taking reasonable steps to check the address before litigation.

A DVLA address is an unreliable (often out of date) car address database and IS NOT provided as an address for service of court papers to a person. And you changed it in 2022 anyway!  The delay in litigation and notorious unreliability of DVLA car addresses is why BPA CoP requires pre-litigation CRA address 'soft traces' (as do the Government in the new CoP).

One last thing...vital please. 

THIS:

have you seen/done this Inquiry which closes in a week?  A favour PLEASE if you want this litigation incentivised model to be stopped:

https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/102/justice-committee/news/198166/new-inquiry-justice-committee-launches-new-inquiry-on-the-work-of-the-county-court-amid-capacity-and-resource-concerns/

I've been posting a lot about it on threads to encourage victims to tell the Justice Committee that consumers need a bespoke 'parking pre-action protocol' designed to keep cases out of court.  

Please do it this weekend or after your hearing.  The Inquiry closes next Friday. They extended the deadline by a week:
https://committees.parliament.uk/work/7972/work-of-the-county-court/

Really relevant because the reason there are delays in the work of the county court is because up to a THIRD of all claims under £1000 are parking.

Your paperwork will be great evidence. This is about showing how parking firms abuse the court service and cause CCJs.

There should be a bespoke private parking protocol to resolve cases without court,  and which forbids PPCs from using old addresses.

I think if enough people say the above sort of stuff, this Justice Committee will go and talk to the DLUHC guys I'm dealing with, and hopefully recommend a new pre-action protocol to stop CCJs.

This inquiry is currently accepting evidence

"The committee wants to hear your views. We welcome submissions from anyone with answers to the questions in the call for evidence. You can submit evidence until Friday 22 December 2023."

...Sorry if you've already done it! I lose track!

CliveTreeHorn

Thanks for the information C-M, most helpful as always!

Ive realised I haven't included the POC as an appendix, will the judge have access to it or should I print a copy of just in case?

Coupon-mad

The Judge will have it. 

CliveTreeHorn

Just checked my spam emails and found two emails from CEL !!

The first dated 14th December was a pdf letter advising the following:

We refer to your application to set aside Judgment which has been forwarded to us by the Civil

National Business Centre.

We note your grounds for setting aside Judgment, which state that you had moved address before the

violation occurred. We were provided with your registered address by the DVLA following the date of

violation. As you may be aware, it is an offence (punishable with a fine up to £1000) to fail to promptly

notify the DVLA of a change of address.

As you do not deny being the registered keeper at the time of the violation and because you have not

shown any grounds in your application that you have any reasonable prospects of defending the claim,

it is our position that your application to set aside judgment will be refused. Even if the application is

granted, it is our intention to proceed with the claim against you.

However, bearing in mind this process can take time and will incur unnecessary costs for both parties,

we will consent to setting aside judgment (to support your application) and to discontinue the claim

against you, if you agree to pay the original £60.00 parking charge plus the administration costs and

fees we have incurred in trying to recover payment of the PCN, limited to £35.00, making a total of

£95.00. Each party will bear its own costs of this application. Upon receiving payment, we will provide

you with a draft Order confirming the above, to file with the Court in support of your application.

Payment can be made via our website; www.ce-service.co.uk, or alternatively via our automated

payment line (0115 822 5020). Please be advised that if this offer is not accepted by Sunday 17

December 2023, we reserve the right to show this letter to the judge on the issue of who should pay the

costs of your application.

The 2nd email, dated 3:30pm todays stated the following:

We refer to the above and the hearing for the Application to set aside the Judgment, scheduled to take place on 19/12/2023.

The Claimant hereby gives notice that we will not be attending the scheduled hearing. We kindly request that the following point be taken into consideration at the hearing:

• We have read the Defendant’s reasons for making the application and in keeping with the overriding objective (CPR 1.1), we sent an offer advising that we would agree to the removal of the Judgment and dismissal of the Claim on a no order for costs basis (see attached offer) if the Defendant settled the Judgment debt at a reduced sum. Unfortunately, the Defendant has not responded to this offer.
• The Defendant clearly failed to promptly update their change of address with the DVLA pursuant to the statutory requirements of the Road Vehicles (Licensing and Registration) Regulations Part IV (18.1) which states that: “If the registered keeper of a vehicle changes his name or his address, he shall forthwith notify the new name or address to the Secretary of State and, except where the registration document has been lost, stolen or destroyed, shall deliver the registration document to him.”. In most cases, the Claimant will undertake further address checks if necessary to ensure that the Claim is issued to the last known address for service pursuant to CPR 6.9.

If the Judge believes it appropriate, the Claimant agrees to the removal of the Judgment and for the Claim to be restored on a no order for costs basis, as the application was of the Defendant’s own making. In the alternative, if the judge believes it appropriate to restore the Claim, the Claimant would also agree to the Claim being settled in the sum of £95 so as to avoid more Court time being wasted and costs being incurred by the parties.

CliveTreeHorn

I am hugely relieved that they are not attending. 

The letter seems to be in there usual content that I have read in other threads. 

The fact that they are already agreeing to removal of the CCJ is a boost, however I do not want to settle for this, i want my costs back!

In most cases, the Claimant will undertake further address checks if necessary - i thought this was the most interesting line, as it is merely generic and not specific to my case. They clearly haven't as I was there to be found.

CliveTreeHorn

Got the CCJ removed !

Judge was tough though. Was very critical of my address not being updated with the DVLA. 

She has ordered CEL to provide a details of the alleged offence within 14 days of the court order. If they do not comply the case will be struck out.

If they do I have a further 14 days to provide a defence. 

It's not over but I've achieved the main objective.

MASSIVE thanks to everyone on hear for your help and support! Particularly @Coupon-mad ! 

Do you think, in your experience, that CEL will peruse this? 

JerryJ64

Getting the set aside is only a partial victory. Are you sure the judge said that CEL have to provide details of the alleged "offence"? I am sure that she did not say the word "offence".

It sounds more like the judge has instructed CEL to provide clearer particulars of claim. Were you advised to submit a defence and WS to the improved PoC? If so, you need to fully understand what is going on as it sounds like CEL have been thrown a lifeline and are likely to continue with the claim, subject to their providing clearer PoC.

CliveTreeHorn

Yes sorry @JerryJ64 the judge said the order was for CEL to provide a more detailed POC. I am then to submit a defence. She didn't mention WS.

She asked me why I didn't accept CEL's offer and I said I am still unaware of what the alleged offence is, as the POC is defective and have received no documentation from CEL. I did bring up the CEL Vs Chan case, however the judge did not want to discuss it. 

Looks like this will rumble on then, but my defence is weakened. 

JerryJ64

Of course the CEL v Chan was not your only defence point. It was just an argument to get the claim thrown out because the claimant did not follow the CPRs and PDs. Unfortunately, your judge was not "persuaded" by that appeal judgment, as was her right.

You must follow all deadlines set by the judges order. Once you receive the amended PoC, you will have to submit a defence as per the defence template but without the preliminary matter of CEL v Chan bit. Normally, after the defence is acknowledged, you will be assigned a hearing date and you will have to submit a WS some time before that date, usually no less than 14 days before or whatever the court orders.