Unexpected CCJ - Recovery of Debt letter from DCBL

Car1980

Well done. 

The whole system is absolutely ridiculous though. Probably cost the taxpayer £1000+ from start to finish so that a poxy little company could get their hands on sixty bloody quid.

Coupon-mad

They then went on to award a total of  £60 plus the court fee for this hearing (£27) - saying that the Defendant had already said in his argument today that, had he received the PCN at the time, he would probably have paid the £60. 

Actually that's a result!

Your son argued well about the C not bothering to do a soft trace AND to correct the Judge by pointing to the DLUHC's IA to prove that it costs a tiny amount.

The Judge was WRONG to refuse a lay rep. Your son had a legal right to it!

fair2everyone

Thanks, as always, to everyone on here who gave their time to offer advice. 

Just out of interest, had my son been able to get “costs reserved” at the set-aside hearing, does the fact that the Claimant won the follow up hearing mean those reserved costs couldn’t be applied to them anyway? 

LDast

As a matter of fact, if you have the desire and will to fight on, you could have grounds for appeal.

According to the Lay Representatives (Rights of Audience) Order 1999, any person may act as a lay representative in small claims proceedings, as long as the defendant (your son) was present, and it was not after judgment or during an appeal​. If the judge refused you the right of audience without valid reasons under this order, you could argue that the judge misapplied the law by not recognising your statutory right to act as a lay representative.

Practice Direction 27A explicitly supports the right of a lay representative to present a case in a small claims hearing​. If the judge instead limited you to the role of a McKenzie Friend without just cause, the judge has incorrectly interpreted this provision, thereby infringing on your right of audience.

The denial of your right to represent your son as a lay representative has resulted in procedural unfairness, particularly if it impaired your ability to effectively present his case or led to an adverse outcome. If the judge’s decision prevented you from fully assisting your son in defending his case, this could be grounds for arguing that the hearing was not conducted fairly.

The appeal would be based on the argument that the judge erred in law by misinterpreting the Lay Representatives (Rights of Audience) Order 1999 and Practice Direction 27A. However, you would also need to demonstrate that this misapplication of the law likely had a material impact on the outcome of the case, leading to an unjust decision.

If you believe the judge’s refusal to allow you to act as a lay representative directly affected the fairness of the proceedings or the outcome, you may have solid grounds to appeal the decision.

Coupon-mad

fair2everyone said:

Thanks, as always, to everyone on here who gave their time to offer advice. 

Just out of interest, had my son been able to get “costs reserved” at the set-aside hearing, does the fact that the Claimant won the follow up hearing mean those reserved costs couldn’t be applied to them anyway? 

Nope.  In fact he could have argued for those costs if they had been reserved. Trouble was, the first Judge shut the door on them.