Third Claim by NPM/Gladstones - Got CCJ cleared - WON AT COURT - Case Dismissed

KeithP

Other than 'parked in breach of the terms', those Particulars don't even state what the driver is alleged to have done wrong.

Coupon-mad

KeithP said:

Other than 'parked in breach of the terms', those Particulars don't even state what the driver is alleged to have done wrong.

Yep so the D just uses the alternative defence linked in the Template Defence third paragraph.

BUT NOTHING GOES TO THE CNBC!

AdamBliss

KeithP said:

Other than 'parked in breach of the terms', those Particulars don't even state what the driver is alleged to have done wrong.

Good point

AdamBliss

Coupon-mad said:

KeithP said:

Other than 'parked in breach of the terms', those Particulars don't even state what the driver is alleged to have done wrong.

Yep so the D just uses the alternative defence linked in the Template Defence third paragraph.

BUT NOTHING GOES TO THE CNBC!

Thank you!

Johnersh

Shame. Having provided an address for service, the claim form was not correctly served and not served at a last known address. It would've been good to make them issue fresh proceedings from scratch, rather than permit them to salvage the old one - the evidence was really good here that the PPC had messed it up. But we are where we are.

Are they really charging bolt on costs when for at least some of the period they were debt collecting at the wrong address?! Sighs. 

AdamBliss

Johnersh said:

Shame. Having provided an address for service, the claim form was not correctly served and not served at a last known address. It would've been good to make them issue fresh proceedings from scratch, rather than permit them to salvage the old one - the evidence was really good here that the PPC had messed it up. But we are where we are.

Are they really charging bolt on costs when for at least some of the period they were debt collecting at the wrong address?! Sighs. 

Well said.

AdamBliss

AdamBliss said:

Coupon-mad said:

Show us the Particulars of Claim.

Sure, here:

They simply amended the address to the correct one, and the password for money claim does not work. 

I just sent them the response pack AoS and emailed it to Gladstones and the Court

The amended claim form does not have a password to access MCOL, there is no way of me accessing MCOL now. They did not provide response form/pack as well. 

Wondering if I can use this in my defence? @Coupon-mad

I had to download AoS form from gov.uk and emailed it to ClaimResponses.CNBC@justice.gov.uk and Gladstones

Gr1pr

Forget about MCOL, its no longer in play , hence why the password doesn't work, it expired months ago 

Correspond with the CNBC in Northampton by email if that is where the claim came from and is where your documents are going  ( or is it through your local civil court. ?  )

You would be emailing the N180 plus the defence to the CNBC if that is where the set aside was from 

Eventually they would send the case to the court you listed on the N180

Nb, the process is not quite the same as with a new court claim, you are turning back the clock and are now responding to the claim, by email, nothing to do with MCOL, follow the court order 

AdamBliss

Gr1pr said:

Forget about MCOL, its no longer in play , hence why the password doesn't work, it expired months ago 

Correspond with the CNBC in Northampton by email if that is where the claim came from and is where your documents are going  ( or is it through your local civil court. ?  )

You would be emailing the N180 plus the defence to the CNBC if that is where the set aside was from 

Eventually they would send the case to the court you listed on the N180

Nb, the process is not quite the same as with a new court claim, you are turning back the clock and are now responding to the claim, by email, nothing to do with MCOL, follow the court order 

Yes, its with CNBC in Northampton, Done the AoS. 

Just need to file the defence as the keeper, I still have not revealed the driver. 

Coupon-mad

Of course the defunct password doesn't work.  It's not meant to. You aren't using MCOL.  Nor are you sending an AOS to the CNBC.

You aren't dealing with the admin centre.