Unpaid CCJ £400!! - Was in the right and had no communication of court hearing!

Coupon-mad

Yes that's good.

You still need a skelly to attach Chan, to see if Worthing Court will run with it and strike the claim out.

Blazedsin

Ok thanks - Completely new to all of this, so questions:

• Where should I look to help build the skeleton argument?
• What Does CEL vs Chan mean?
• Once I have made the argument should I email it to the same email address to support the original bundle?
• Do we respond to the DCB Legal email asking for the evidence within 14 days?
• Do we wait for the court to contact us at some point now for a hearing?

I really appreciate the help Coupon-mad.

Coupon-mad

Just forward your full WS & attachments / evidence about your whereabouts (that the courts already have) to DCB Legal, but no rush.

A skelly goes to the local court before the hearing (not to the CNBC). Again no rush but when you do it you will copy in DCB Legal.

Surely you know about CEL v Chan and saw the linked transcript, from when you read the Template Defence thread?  Go and look again.

LDast

You should also add to the skelly:

Issuing a county court claim for an amount that exceeds what is permissible under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) is an abuse of process and an improper claim, breaching several Civil Procedure Rules (CPRs). 

The original Parking Charge Notice (PCN) issued was for £100. The claimant has issued a county court claim for £170. Schedule 4, Paragraph 4(5) of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) states that the creditor may not claim more than the amount of the unpaid parking charges as they stood when the notice to the driver was issued. The claimant’s demand for £170 is in direct violation of this provision.

CPR 1.1 - The Overriding Objective: The claim is not being dealt with justly or proportionately. The excessive amount claimed puts the defendant at a disadvantage, increases unnecessary costs, and is disproportionate to the original charge.

CPR 3.4 - Power to Strike Out: CPR 3.4(2)(a). The claim for £170 has no reasonable grounds, as it exceeds the lawful amount stipulated by PoFA.

CPR 3.4(2)(b) - The claim should be struck out: The claim represents an abuse of the court’s process by attempting to claim an amount not legally recoverable, thus obstructing the just disposal of proceedings.

CPR 27.14 - Costs on the Small Claims Track: CPR 27.14(2)(g): The claimant’s behaviour in pursuing an excessive and unlawful amount is unreasonable, warranting the claim to be struck out and costs awarded to the defendant.

In addition to the above, the claimant has incorrectly calculated the interest. Any interest must be on the principle sum, which as noted above cannot be more than the amount on the original PCN. The sum on the PCN became due 28 days after the issue of the PCN, not the date of the alleged breach of contract.

Interest can only be calculated on the £100 from the due date to no later than the issue date of the claim. 

Blazedsin

Okay - I will get round to putting together the skelly next week when I find the time, and will post here for you to look over when I am done.

Will need to go back and read the threads in the newbie section again, been a couple of months and a lot going on at the moment  

Thank you again.

Le_Kirk

Blazedsin said:

Okay - I will get round to putting together the skelly next week when I find the time, and will post here for you to look over when I am done.

Will need to go back and read the threads in the newbie section again, been a couple of months and a lot going on at the moment  

There is only one thread you need to read and that is the Template Defence thread!  You will find links to CEL v Chan there via the @hharry100 defence.

Harvez63

Take your time but dont leave it until the last moment or it would quadruple the stress for no advantage  

Blazedsin

Update - We had not received any communication from CCBC about a hearing being processed to called up this morning again. They said they sent out a letter in June about a hearing at Brighton County Court (Brighton Hearing Centre) on Oct 11. The letter was sent to my partners previous address in Brighton, despite them having all the information in the pack that she is now living in Worthing.

So the hearing will be taking place in Brighton CC now instead of Worthing, @Coupon-mad do you know if this is a good or bad one?
Will be preparing the Skeleton argument asap to get ready. 

Grizebeck

Get a copy of the order ASAP from Brighton court.  Ask via email normally quick to reply
Makes no difference 
Get them to update the address as well

Coupon-mad

It's a good court but you can't really park there. Hopefully someone can drop your partner off, or get the train and walk down.