Unexpected CCJ - Recovery of Debt letter from DCBL

Coupon-mad

I would.

You already know the Judge might ask about the V5C and how to answer that. This is not a scary question. The V5C is irrelevant by the time a case reaches reminder and pre-action stage because the parking firm or DRA/bulk legal cannot ask the DVLA a second time.

Even if he'd updated it the week after the PCN, they'd never know because they don't see the DVLA data change over time.

Hence why all 3 Codes of Practice - and the CPRs - require other steps to be taken to check the address if there is 'reason to believe' the Defendant no longer resides there.

fair2everyone

My son sent the SWS to both the Doncaster court and Elms Legal Ltd, as the solicitors. Elms have responded with a reply saying “they don’t accept service via email, therefore all documents need to be sent by post”. I think I’ve seen this on other posts but I’m away at the moment so it will be difficult to find this quickly. Can you advise please, does he need to do this? The Claimant is Excel Parking and presumably the court will send copies of his SWS to them? Will Excel send the documents on to Elms anyway? Is it not the PPC’s job really to ensure their solicitor has the relevant info. I feel like my son has been “helpful” by sending to the solicitors- he’s had no instruction to do so (just advice from on here). The hearing is 28th February (remote) hearing and he’s had no direct instructions from the court as yet, other than the date and time of the hearing. Any thoughts appreciated. 

Coupon-mad

Can he pop a copy in the post to Elms, 1st class?  It is only a SWS and some exhibits, so doable.

Do not send signed-for.  Just 1st class, but:

DO take it to a PO Counter and he asks for (and MUST keep safe) the free CERTIFICATE OF POSTING.

fair2everyone

Thanks. He did that and has now received a copy of an email sent by Elms and copied to my son.   Apologies to ask questions before searching the forum but I’m away at the moment and it’s difficult for me to search. I’m sure I have read threads where this has happened, does 3. No order as to costs mean if he signs this he wouldn’t get any costs i.e. would lose his £275 N244 fee and would still owe the £277 charge they are claiming. Also, we’re not sure what exactly 2. means - could this result in costing him even more. 

Coupon-mad

fair2everyone said:

Thanks. He did that and has now received a copy of an email sent by Elms and copied to my son.   Apologies to ask questions before searching the forum but I’m away at the moment and it’s difficult for me to search.

I’m sure I have read threads where this has happened, does 3. No order as to costs mean if he signs this he wouldn’t get any costs i.e. would lose his £275 N244 fee and would still owe the £277 charge they are claiming. Also, we’re not sure what exactly 2. means - could this result in costing him even more. 

Not again.

IMHO this disingenuous pattern:

'is the hearing (that the Defendant paid £275 for, and they've never seen this fake 'Consent Order' before) going ahead, or not?'

... misleads courts and could be taken to be the work of a vexatious litigant.

They've already been warned not to mislead the court, by CiLex.

This is NOT ACCEPTABLE and the Defendant must jump on it tomorrow!

I'll go find the other case like this that includes the CiLex email provided by @bridgefixer (you should pm that poster and the Defendant should complain, evidencing that this is not the first time and Elms have been warned in 2023).

EDIT:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6488857/ccj-from-pcn-help-with-conset-order-received-please/p4

There you go.

Send a pm to both @Khayman and @bridgefixer and do what @Johnersh - a solicitor - suggested there.

This needs A JOINT complaint with your evidence and the Cilex emails provided by bridgefixer.  He'll tell you who to email.  The same investigator needs to see them all.

THIS IS URGENT.

The Defendant must also 'reply all' to that disingenuous rubbish IMMEDIATELY and send the local court the proof from bridgefixer and Khayman that this is a pattern of unreasonable conduct, that bears all the hallmarks of an attempt to mislead courts.

Coupon-mad

fair2everyone said:

Thanks. He did that and has now received a copy of an email sent by Elms and copied to my son.   Apologies to ask questions before searching the forum but I’m away at the moment and it’s difficult for me to search. I’m sure I have read threads where this has happened, does 3. No order as to costs mean if he signs this he wouldn’t get any costs i.e. would lose his £275 N244 fee and would still owe the £277 charge they are claiming. Also, we’re not sure what exactly 2. means - could this result in costing him even more. 

PLEASE TELL US HE HAS OBJECTED TO THAT BY QUICKLY REPLYING/EMAILING THE COURT AND COPYING IN ELMS?

@Khayman says you haven't pm'd them yet?

fair2everyone

Sorry - yes he has. I’ve been away and just got home so will reply in more detail later. But yes, he emailed the court and has received a response which I will post asap. Thanks. 

Castle

fair2everyone said:

Sorry - yes he has. I’ve been away and just got home so will reply in more detail later. But yes, he emailed the court and has received a response which I will post asap. Thanks. 

And has he copied in Elms as well?

fair2everyone

Yes he did

Coupon-mad

fair2everyone said:

Sorry - yes he has. I’ve been away and just got home so will reply in more detail later. But yes, he emailed the court and has received a response which I will post asap. Thanks. 

Yes please.

And do make a joint CiLex complaint next week - joint with @Khayman - with the evidence from your cases and what CiLex sent to bridgefixer.