Default CCJ after AOS and defence submitted, was I too late?

Coupon-mad

They will set aside the CCJ. No N244 needed.

1baldtyre

Advice, please. Bailiffs could soon be at the door.

AOS was confirmed received, defence posted into CNBC well on time on 15 April but allegedly not received. 

Have now sent in five chasing letters and made two calls following the surprising judgement in default. I had included copies as trail. Yesterday I finally got a reply.

The reply was a template, not sure which letter they were replying to as it did not acknowledge the content and loss of previous letters, including my original defence and the later copy of it, with photo showing the actual defence posted into their box. The copy of defence was resubmitted same day I received the letter of judgement in default saying no defence received, and ought to have alerted CNBC to the error.

However the generic template letter I just received really only advised payment or to submit N244. 

In spite of having taken the precaution of also posting the defence to the claimant at the same time as posting into CNBC and later writing to the claimant on receiving their threat of bailiffs, the claimant has not acknowledged that there is a technical error and has gone on to instruct bailiffs as the CCJ has not been set aside. Their bailiffs letter was received earlier this week.

How should I now proceed, please to avoid bailiffs, move this on to get the case reinstated, get some sort of acknowledgement that the service has caused loss and maybe to make a claim for this?

Gr1pr

1baldtyre. ,  Please start your own thread if you want advice

I am not convinced that bailiffs will arrive at your door, especially if the CCJ recording was for less than £600

I believe that you have had threats, but you have not shown us redacted paperwork about this, just anecdotal stories about your interpretation of the letters , hearsay with no proof 

If bailiffs were appointed, then there would be a warrant of control issued, or a high court writ issued, so show us those as pictures, minus your personal details, no reference numbers, no identifications, but leave the fire contents showing 

LDast

1baldtyre please start your own thread if you want advice.

Johnersh

Ok so we know the court service is not as efficient or resourced as it could be. I’m sure we’ve been here before….

Since there are no downsides whatsoever (and indeed it’s a CPR requirement more generally under 15.6 perhaps the FAQ thread should recommend that forumites serve copies to the ppc when filing at court, even if within the MCOL system the court will also send them a copy.

when a claimant requests default judgment they declare that no defence has been received. If the court hadn’t processed the defence, but the ppc had received it from the o/p they’d never have requested judgment.

1baldtyre

Thanks. Since I had previously added to the thread, my later experience about the CNBC becomes a surprising, but linked, continuation of the OP’s default ccj post.

Hoping to help anyone else coming to this same topic as it was a parking issue. Since there was a direct reply from coupon mad, they may be interested in its progress and share practical experience.

Gr1pr

Either way, if you require bespoke assistance, please Start your own thread, or add to an existing thread created by you

1baldtyre

No need for bespoke. This is a continuation of the OP.

Replies from anyone who has had same problem and handled it successfully would be best. 
The generic advice would be on ‘how to’ options regarding setting aside ccj when CNBC has caused the problem by simply not responding.

So this is also a heads-up for anyone experiencing, or who will experience, this extra hassle over an easily defended parking fine.

Coupon-mad

Are you the OP, whose username was @imranjan94 ?

Loads of people have had the same and sorted this problem with no N244 application or fee.  Loads and loads of similar threads, e.g. this one: 

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/80666460#Comment_80666460?utm_source=community-search&utm_medium=organic-search&utm_term=ring+cnbc+every+day+thorn

And @lurpdog101  had the same thing and it is now sorted and back on track, with £75 compensation:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/80801377/#Comment_80801377

And this one by @Kessler:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/80836720/#Comment_80836720


And this person was wrongly told by the CNBC to waste money on a set aside application despite being able to prove sending a defence:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/80832369#Comment_80832369?utm_source=community-search&utm_medium=organic-search&utm_term=cnbc+complaints+email


Another one where they lost the DQ:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/80793195#Comment_80793195?utm_source=community-search&utm_medium=organic-search&utm_term=cnbc+complaints+email


And this one includes the complaints email:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/80830040#Comment_80830040?utm_source=community-search&utm_medium=organic-search&utm_term=cnbc+complaints+email


Be assured: No bailiffs will come round if the 'debt' is under £600.

If it's over £600 they will; if so you'd be well advised to pay £14 to apply to stay the writ like in the first linked thread about the situation suffered by @LionsShare

1baldtyre

Immensely informative. Thank you, all.