CCJ Removal - Starting Point

KeithP

Robt123 said:

To be honest he's not fussed about contending the parking fine, that's too late now, (and he feels it was probably correct) or the fees involved, all he wants to do is get the CCJ set aside.

Do keep in mind that the courts take a dim view of credit cleansing.

In other words, if your son makes it clear that he probably does deserve the judgment but he just wants his credit file cleaned, then it is likely that the court will not do that - but will of course keep the money that he has spent applying.

LDast

If the initial claim was never served, then it may still be worth applying for a set aside. As long as it can be shown that the claim was not served and therefore the defendant was not able to acknowledge it or defend it, it should be a mandatory set aside under CPR 13.2.

Whilst it will cost you up to £303 to apply for it, it will be money well spent. A CCJ, even if marked "satisfied" that remains on your credit record for 6 years is infinitely more financially painful.

Robt123

With regrads to the term " credit cleansing" , not something I have heard of before, and this is not the intention. As he didnt recieve the claim, or consequent court documents and so lost his chance to defend himself, then he most definitely wants the CCJ removed. He's not disputing the claim from the parking company, as he feels this was probably correct, and he would have paid the claim before it even got near going to court, if he had recieved it. I agree this will cost £303.00 but as LDast comments "this is money well spent" as he is only 24 and a CCJ will cause him no end of problemss over the next 6 years, athough I am aware that this is not a guaranteed outcome that it will be set a side. I can dfeinitely reassure  you this is not been viewed through rose tinted glasses, I know what courts are like, having taken somebody to court, which took over 3 years to be finalised (I won), and frustratingly their time scales only apply to us and not them, I have found, although this was during the pandemic period, so maybe there is leeway here for my poor experience.

LDast

Whilst this may be academic, especially as the debt was accepted, had he not paid it and applied for the set aside, he would have been able to defend it and even if he lost, he would not have paid as much as was on the claim form.

We find that the vast majority of these PCNs are easy defeated well before ever going near a court. There are always many flaws in these charges issued by unregulated private parking companies. Had it been defended, most judges will not allow the fake added DRA fee/damages of £70 for a start.

Too late now to prevent that waste of money.

For now, a set aside must be applied for. As the claim was never served, it is a mandatory set aside under CPR 13.2.

Zbubuman

I am quite new to this myself, and I appreciate where you are coming from with regards to the fact that if the parking company and their solicitors done their due diligence; your son would have settled the whole matter before it got to court. 

However, this does have the appearance of a "credit cleansing" attempt ( at least to the courts). Not sure how a judge would respond when your son tells him/her " I am guilty as charged, but I am looking to keep my record clean as this is going to have an adverse impact on my life for the next 6 years". From what I have read on the forum, most judges would want affirmation that the original claim would have been defendable. 

Don't want to discourage you, but the fact that you already paid it, that your son is admitting guilt for the original PCN, and the length of time that has elapsed from when you found out about the CCJ and taking action to set-aside. The odds are not stacked in your favor, and you could just be throwing more money down the drain. 

Hopefully, other forum members might know of previous similar cases and provide a better argument to present to the court. However, you might want to look to get the claimant, to consent to jointly have the judgment set-aside and offer to pay for the application. They already got their money, and since it wont cost them anything; they might be willing to help (might get roasted for this, but this might be a rare occasion where you are going to have to play nice with the parking company).

LDast

Isn't any set aside of a CCJ an attempt to cleanse a credit record?

KeithP

LDast said:

Isn't any set aside of a CCJ an attempt to cleanse a credit record?

Yes, quite possibly.

But in this case, rather than then contesting the claim, the Defendant is happy to concede that the claim was justified.

Robt123

Thanks all, comments taken on board. Based on the last comment, I agree as a general overview that all requests for CCJ removal are a form of credit cleasing. But I would assume that as my son will be supplying evidence of why he missed all the post that went to his old address in conjunction with his application to change is adress via the V5C form submitted to the DVLA, he didnt really stand a chance of defending the fine or the subsequent court documents. I would also hope the court takes into account that I have approacehed the CCBC many times to get this matter solved, and the lack of response from them is not my own fault. It also needs to be taken into account that I work the hours that the CCBC is open with limited 30mins lunch btreak to be kept on hold, and no reply to my emails, it isnt like I hadnt attempted to resolve the issue. In reply to an earlier comment, all emails were sent to CCBC from my sons email address from him I only helped with the text within the emails. Maybe copies of emails and telephone records will help me with the issue of the time that has lapsed.

KeithP

Robt123 said:

It also needs to be taken into account that I work the hours that the CCBC is open with limited 30mins lunch break to be kept on hold...

...and it would be very frustrating for you if they did answer your call.
Their first reaction would be "sorry, we cannot discuss this matter with you without the Defendant's agreement".

Gr1pr

It seems to me that obtaining the cheaper with consent set aside may achieve the aim of no CCJ on his record, whereas the contested route is worse odds and costs a lot more 

Its most definitely credit cleansing to most people and to the courts , personal thoughts are irrelevant, it is perceived that way, hence the with consent set aside more likely to be rubber stamped and end of the saga