CCJ vs CP Plus Ltd (DCBL) Applying for Set-Aside

Coupon-mad

Yep it's DJ Iyer (with an 'eye' phonetically).

Include your email where you gave DCB Legal your correct address ONLY IF that was your current address! Not otherwise. Remove it.

Draft Order needs the word THAT: 

IT IS ORDERED THAT

Help with Fees you just ring up the fees line and ask about it, once you have emailed your application(s).

NahkoMed

Coupon-mad said:

Yep it's DJ Iyer (with an 'eye' phonetically).

Include your email where you gave DCB Legal your correct address ONLY IF that was your current address! Not otherwise. Remove it.

Draft Order needs the word THAT: 

IT IS ORDERED THAT

Help with Fees you just ring up the fees line and ask about it, once you have emailed your application(s).

Very helpful, thanks, will amend.

With regard to help with fees a I was actually asking (unclearly!) what do do about asking for costs if I haven't paid any!

NahkoMed

Another quick (and maybe stupid) question... How do I sign the documents that need signing if it's electronic? Is typing it ok as in the N244?

ChirpyChicken

save your document as a pdf then use this https://www.sejda.com/sign-pdf
i use that to sign all documents electronically , easy and free

NahkoMed

ChirpyChicken said:

save your document as a pdf then use this https://www.sejda.com/sign-pdf
i use that to sign all documents electronically , easy and free

Really helpful, thanks!

NahkoMed

I'm really struggling to find the text for Vehicle Control Services Limited v Carr (Ref. CA-2024-001179) either here by searching the forum or elsewhere. Does anyone have a link for it or a search term that I can use here to bring it up?

1505grandad

Here you are:-

NahkoMed

1505grandad said:

Here you are:-

Brilliant, thank you so much!

NahkoMed

Ok, I've just understood something that's made me panic a bit and I'm wondering if I actually need to change my approach at the last minute. Perhaps one of you can reassure or explain to me what my options are?

I've been reading the CPR in more detail and come to understand that where an address for service has been given by the defendant (even if, as in my case it was given a really long time ago, they've ignored the PAP etc), it actually may NOT be incumbent on the claimant to take "reasonable steps" to ensure correct service to a current address as all the standard templates here suggest, because CPR 6.8. rather than 6.9 applies in that case. Have I understood that right?

If that's the case, whilst I can see that I maybe have a chance of convincing the judge along the lines taken in VCSL vs CARR, that "this defendant has never had an opportunity to advance his valid defence irrespective of whether service was property effected at his former address. That is related to but different from the point that he cannot be blamed for failure to respond to the claim form because he never received it.", due process and the overriding objective etc, that's significantly more tenuous than if they were acting without, as it were, instruction. If so, this is gut wrenching for me and my family!

By applying like this, on the grounds that service was defective, what hope have I got of getting a set aside, if any? Would it not make more sense to take another line like "Service may TECHNICALLY have been valid, but in actual fact I never saw the claim form, was not aware etc (because of claimant's unreasonable conduct) so due process, overriding objective etc should prevail..." I'm really hoping someone out there has some hope to offer me, or can tell me to calm down! At the very least it feels like I should tone down some of the stuff in my witness statement about a breach of BPA guidelines, "reasonable steps" (CPR 6.9) or emphasise due process more somehow etc... Any suggestions, or reassurance, up to and including a slap in the face to stop me flapping, very gratefully received. Thanks in advance.

Coupon-mad

No. Do not change tack.

How long ago did you reply to the LBC giving your old address?

Did you use our template LBC reply that says the address for the time being is only good for service if they don't 'faff about' and delay the claim?

How many months between:

- you replying with address a, then

- you moving to address b, then

- the C filing a claim?