Unexpected CCJ - Recovery of Debt letter from DCBL

fair2everyone

I'll change that, thanks.  Most acronyms have been explained - does PCN need expanding or is it accepted as is?

fair2everyone

Hopefully, final version of first paragraphs of Defence - hope it all reads ok:

The facts known to the Defendant:

2. The facts in this defence come from the Defendant's own knowledge and honest belief. Conversely, the Claimant sets out a cut-and-paste incoherent and sparse statement of case. The POC appear to be in breach of CPR 16.4, 16PD3 and 16PD7, and fail to "state all facts necessary for the purpose of formulating a complete cause of action". The Defendant is unable, on the basis of the POC, to understand with certainty what case, allegation(s) and what heads of cost are being pursued, making it difficult to respond. However, the vehicle is recognised and it is admitted that the Defendant was the registered keeper and driver.

3. The Defendant did use the car park at the Berkeley Centre to shop at Tesco. He did not purchase a parking ticket as he did not believe one was necessary. He was shocked when he finally found out he had been sent a PCN as he did not think he had overstayed the allowed free time.

4. The Defendant was unable to respond to the POC as he first became aware of it on receipt of a letter from a Debt Collector, informing him of a Default CCJ. The Defendant did not receive any letters regarding this incident as they were all sent to an old address, and once he had determined what the POC were, had to pay £275 to set aside this wrongly served, unfair CCJ.

Clear course of the Claimant's unreasonable conduct in this litigation:

5. During the process of the set-aside mentioned above, the Defendant received (via a SAR) a copy of a letter to the Solicitor representing the Claimant from the Civil National Business Centre stating that the original claim had been un-served and instructing the Solicitor to ensure the address of the Defendant was correct and if not, to re-serve the claim. This letter was received by the Claimant’s Solicitor on 28 November 2023, at which point, all parties would be aware of the Defendant’s correct address, as the letter from the Debt Collector was dated 16 November 2023. Preventing the need for the Defendant to pay a £275 fee for the set-aside hearing and spend many hours of time on preparing for this.

6. Three weeks before the set-aside hearing, the Claimant’s Solicitor sent an email to the court attaching what they called a ‘Consent Form’ and asking the court whether the allocated hearing would still go ahead or not. The Defendant believes this was done with the intention to mislead the court into vacating the hearing the Defendant had been forced to pay for. The Defendant is aware that the Claimant’s Solicitor has done this very thing previously, which did result in hearings being vacated. This was reported to their regulator CILEx Regulation Limited in 2023, whose response was that they would warn the Solicitor in the future to take all reasonable steps to avoid any risk of the court being misled, including unintentionally.

Coupon-mad

Put "or not" in inverted commas.

Remove this:

"He did not purchase a parking ticket as he did not believe one was necessary."

What's his deadline?

fair2everyone

Thursday 28th 4pm. Need to email court and email (plus post) to Excel tomorrow morning 

Coupon-mad

OK; and did he (as I suggested earlier) now do a quick first person WS to use to attach the exhibits he also wants the judge to see?

Don't reply telling us that the Order only asks for 'the defence'. We know.  Standard stuff at this point.

But his defence relies on exhibits that need appending to something to put them under the nose of the Judge.  A WS as well as a defence is recommended after a CCJ set aside.

fair2everyone

Well I am replying as above. I was following the 12 steps which I thought said the WS comes when you have a hearing date and that there was the DQ to receive first. I’m sorry and upset I’ve got this wrong I thought you just meant when he does his WS it should be added at that point. Can the WS and exhibits go separately?

fair2everyone

So, if I crack on with that today (and tonight) - how much of the defence needs exhibits?  Obviously the signs, the letters, the emails - also the paras from DLUHC IA - what about all the XvY cases mentioned - those too? 

fair2everyone

And do the para numbers/page numbers continue from the defence or is it treated as a separate document?

Coupon-mad

fair2everyone said:

Well I am replying as above. I was following the 12 steps which I thought said the WS comes when you have a hearing date and that there was the DQ to receive first.

Not in a case after a CCJ set aside.

There will be no DQ and almost certainly no request for a WS either, because the case is already in the hands of your local Judge.  The CNBC is not involved at all, only the local court.

"Can the WS and exhibits go separately?"

I'd say YES, so don't panic. It is always a separate document.

He could wait to see what the local Judge orders in April, on receipt of his defence.  Just to say that Order might not ask for a WS bundle but he should do one anyway - to use as a vehicle to introduce exhibits mentioned in his defence! But the WS could wait a bit.

fair2everyone

Okay, I’ll try not to panic 😊. I’ll see what I can get done before Thursday. Just out of interest, will the Judge have sight of the previous WS and exhibits from the set-aside? Just wondering how far back to go/how much to repeat.