Unexpected CCJ - Recovery of Debt letter from DCBL

fair2everyone

The email he sent to the court and copied to ELMS was as follows:

Dear Sir/Madam

 

With reference to the email below, which was sent to the court and copied to myself (xxx) on xxxx, I wish to inform the court that the attachment labelled XXXXXXXX - Consent Order is NOT a Consent Order.

 

The terms in that attachment have not been discussed or agreed by me. I am very concerned that the text of the email referring to a Consent Order and asking the question whether the hearing is still effective or not, may mislead the court into thinking that I have wholly agreed to those terms, which I have not.

 

Please could the court note that it is still my intention to attend the remote hearing on Wednesday 28 February at XXXXpm and request it to remain effective, regardless of the email sent by ELMS Legal Limited.

 

ELMS Legal Limited, the Claimant's solicitors, have been sent a copy of this email.

 

Please could you confirm receipt of this email and confirm that the hearing listed for 28 February 2024 is still effective and, if possible, ensure that this email is placed with the file for the hearing on 28 February 2024 at XXXXpm for the judge to see.

The response from the court (arrived Friday am) was:

Good Morning

 

I refer to the above matter and to your email below.

The consent order filed by the Claimant’s solicitor is a draft order and has been placed on the court file for the judge’s attention at the hearing on 28 February 2024.

You should still attend that hearing.

 

Kind regards

Coupon-mad

Good.

When you make your joint complaint to Cilex with Khayman next week, DON'T include that because it shows your court was not fooled.  The point of the CiLex complaint is that courts are likely to be misled.

fair2everyone

At the moment, I'm struggling to get him to agree to make a complaint to CiLex about ELMS - I can see the need to do that but he has so much going on and just wants to get the hearing out of the way.  I will keep discussing it all with him.  Now I'm home again I can spend more time understanding all of the details of what @bridgefixer and @Khayman have been through and hope to persuade him to join them in a complaint. He does appreciate all the advice he is getting via me from this forum (as do I). @Khayman, I will pm you in the next few days.

fair2everyone

Coupon-mad said:

Good.

When you make your joint complaint to Cilex with Khayman next week, DON'T include that because it shows your court was not fooled.  The point of the CiLex complaint is that courts are likely to be misled.

I presume any complaint would have to be by my son - not me (even on his behalf)?

Coupon-mad

Yes but Khayman could do it if he wants to be the lead complainant.  Easy stuff.

Nellymoser

Having no experience of a court claim for a pcn I find myself completely aghast 😲 reading these threads which reveal some truly shocking practices from the private parking industry.

Hope you manage to persuade your son to complain to CiLex about Elms Legal, sure he wouldn't want others to be treated as he's been.

I realise it's a very stressful time but if I could ask you both at sometime to support the action below. Nothing too taxing needed just a signature.

So many people don't receive 1st and/or 2nd pcn but the £170 payment due letter often manages to drop through letter boxes.
PPCs always claim discounted rate/full rate pcns/court claim letters were sent though they offer no evidence to prove this.
Since they CHOOSE NOT to provide evidence of their posting we must continue to press gov to ensure they do and see it included in the new Parking CoP.

Please sign/share @jmccabe petition closes 22nd june 2024.
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/652355
Require communications from Private Parking companies to be traceable/trackable
Thank you. Good luck for the hearing hope it's a win.

fair2everyone

My son's hearing was yesterday - a remote hearing by video call - the hearing lasted all of 5 minutes with the judge saying "This will be the fastest ever hearing". He then read out the following Order:

1. The judgment dated xxx be set aside
2. The claim allocated to the small claims track
3. No order as to costs

He asked the Elms rep if he agreed, he said "Yes Sir", then he asked my son do you agree - my son froze and because he heard the words "set-aside", said "Yes Sir" without really understanding what the rest of it meant.  And that was it, hearing over.

We are both so deflated and he is devastated that he's let me down in some way!!  I wish now I had looked into putting myself forward as Lay representative but all too late now.

So, 2 questions please - is "2. The claim allocated to small claims track" the same as going back to the stage where he would have received a Letter Before Claim and does he just wait now for a letter/email telling him the next step?

And, is 3. No order as to costs, the same as the judge saying "sorry, you don't get your £275 back"?

So, although we're happy the judgment set originally has been set aside, it looks like it will have cost him £275 + ??? I assume he will still be told he owes the £277 he was told he owed in the original LBC (which of course he never received)

Coupon-mad

assume he will still be told he owes the £277 

No he won't.  The claim carries on but he doesn't pay it unless he loses at a second hearing.  Sounds like you need to lay rep if it goes to a hearing but they will probably discontinue now, unless they see him as a victim to pursue.

"And, is 3. No order as to costs, the same as the judge saying "sorry, you don't get your £275 back"?"

Yes - I am so very sorry to hear that.

The Judge was fooled by the fake Consent Order.  Your son clearly DIDN'T agree and should have said "no".  Ouch.  That was the most expensive word "yes" he's ever uttered and I am so angry that this happened to him. 

All the more reason for your son to do a joint complaint with @Khayman to CiLex and he can recount what happened, and that he was railroaded by a fake Consent Order that he'd never signed but the Judge lapped up.

That's cost him £275.

PLEASE PLEASE get angry and do that CiLex complaint jointly with @Khayman

Please stop this happening to more people. 

fair2everyone

I am angry and will talk to my son about this again.  

I am still a little unclear what happens next - when you say the claim carries on, is this second hearing the small claims track and is that at the same court (Doncaster - remote hearings only)?  Does he need to do anything immediately or does he wait for a letter/email from the court to say what happens next and when?

Coupon-mad

He waits for directions from the court.  But as I said, they may well give up and discontinue now.