2x CCJ's - Civil Enforcement Limited - Private Parking Violation

RedOrchid

Coupon-mad said:

Use Le_Kirk's Chan and Akande link instead.

Remind us why a defence went in with a N244? Is your case the one that's not about a wrong address being used?

@Coupon-mad

I have 3 CCJs, the first two were sent to a very old address, whilst the latest one (from the same alleged parking contraventions) did go to my current address but it never arrived, so I have added a N244 for all three of them, was that not what was supposed to happen?

Coupon-mad

In normal (wrong address) CCJ set aside cases we tell people not to include a defence.

That's why the CCJ set aside advice says only add a WS about your house move, evidence of where you were living, case law about unserved claims & set asides, and a Draft Order.

The idea is not to give the set aside Judge an excuse to make YOUR paid for hearing into a mini trial of the Claimant's claim (a 'free hit' at a hearing for them just isn't fair or just).

Your third one might have warranted a draft defence to persuade the Judge because that one depends upon the court's discretion under CPR 13.3 and 'prospects of defence' come into play.

With the first two cases, it isn't a matter for discretion and persuading the Judge with a draft defence to 'let you off' sanctions.

A mandatory set aside under CPR 13.2 is the Order required in those cases because the Claim Form was not properly served.

Three separate N244s were needed but no defence with the first 2 cases.

Only a draft defence should have been attached for the final one, perhaps adding Henderson v Henderson and saying that all 3 claims are so similar that they should have been one claim and should now be consolidated, and the C sanctioned for full costs for causing you this detriment.

Chan & Akande included only if ANY/ALL of those claim POC did not plead the breach properly.

RedOrchid

So for the first two CCJ's, I only filed a Witness Statement containing case law and evidence of where I was living and a separate draft order. I think those were OK. 

The third one, I did the exact same and the defence went inside of the Witness Statement, should that have been filed as a separate document? I think I may still be in time because CNBC hasn't touched it and told me to go to my local court as they have now filed for a writ...

@icy_fox seems to have done the same but I could've misinterpreted the thread...

Coupon-mad

RedOrchid said:

So for the first two CCJ's, I only filed a Witness Statement containing case law and evidence of where I was living and a separate draft order. I think those were OK. 

The third one, I did the exact same and the defence went inside of the Witness Statement, should that have been filed as a separate document? I think I may still be in time because CNBC hasn't touched it and told me to go to my local court as they have now filed for a writ...

@icy_fox seems to have done the same but I could've misinterpreted the thread...

A writ! EEEEK!  OMG bailiffs will come soon.

Right, hide your car tonight/first thing and all this week, in a garage where it can't be seen from the road. Not just on another road. Under cover of a locked door.

Do not park any car on your private driveway if you have one.

Do not let HCEOs in. This is DANGER.

Alert the whole household!

Do NOT open the door even a crack and DON'T let them trick you or your housemates/family into 'leaning on something' in the hallway to write, or asking for water or other tricks.

Put in a very URGENT application at your local court ON WEDNESDAY (printed version hand delivered (pay the £14* on the spot and get a receipt for that AND the new N244) and ask for an Order to STAY THE WRIT due to the facts.

Do a VERY BRIEF WS saying that:

1.  this case already has a N244 application (one of three mirror image cases) and a draft defence at the CNBC delayed by them but awaiting allocation to this court;

2.  a copy of that N244 and WS and draft defence (and copy of the receipt for the £303 paid in November for this case) is herewith attached for information;

3.  this is one of three sequential and duplicate facts (bar the PCN dates) court claims involving the same parties, same location, etc., that should have been filed as one claim.  None of the three claims were received and two out of three were deliberately or negligently sent to an old address so were improperly served.

4.  All three (being CLAIM NUMBERS XXXXXX, XXXXXXX and XXXXXXX) are already with the CNBC at N244 stage - already paid for - to set aside all three CCJs with a request to consolidate them into one lead case/one hearing, set all CCJs aside and order costs against the Claimant for unreasonable conduct;

5. The Defendant already having paid a total of £909 (three full hearing N244 fees) to the CNBC who have received all 3 N244s before Christmas, has just (luckily) been alerted by the CNBC staff to the existence of a Writ application in this claim. This has just been discovered when chasing progress of the 3 applications with the CNBC by phone this week.

6.  Hence this very urgent application now seeking to stay the writ and seeking directions for all enforcement action regarding any of the three claims be suspended, until the three N244s are allocated from the CNBC, after which one date be set for an hour's hearing (already paid for by the Defendant, threefold) to set aside the CCJs, strike out all three claims and award the Defendant's costs on the indemnity basis.

Statement of Truth
usual blah blah

signature
date

* an application to stay a writ costs about £14 or £15 only and doesn't require a hearing.

DO IT IMMEDIATELY ON WEDNESDAY.

Drop all other plans.

Once done, wait 24 hours then:

(a)  email DCB Legal with the proof of paying to stay the writ and to tell them to call their dogs off.

(b) ring the CNBC and instruct them to remove the draft defence from the third N244 bundle, as it has already been printed and served to the local court (name that court) so the three N244s can now be allocated there and you will not tolerate any further delays at all, as the CNBC sitting on this application and doing absolutely nothing with it, nearly caused you HCEO disaster!

RedOrchid

Thanks a lot @Coupon-mad - My defence was actually inside of my Witness Statement, quoting Denton tests, Cause of action estoppel, Chan exhibits and so on, does this now need to come out of the WS and be put it into a different document altogether and replaced with the above?

Coupon-mad

No. And no questions, you don't have time.

You do realise that HCEOs will likely come round today or tomorrow? 

RedOrchid

Aye captain, I've emailed since they don't accept anything in person (after having called them), they mentioned they're already suffering with a little backlog but 5 working days at most for it to be picked up.

Car is already locked somewhere and they'll never be able to get into our flat with 3 set of doors through the building...

RedOrchid

@Coupon-mad - Got a reply from my local court (Didn’t need to pay any fees because I had already paid the £303 to CNBC).

“Good afternoon,

 

[CLAIM NUMBER] has already been referred to a judge for directions. We will update once the judge has given directions. We cannot comment on the other cases that are currently with CNBC other than that they have logged your applications on the system and no enforcement has been instigated on those cases.

 

Yours faithfully,

BR

Civil Section.”

Coupon-mad

OK, now email the CNBC and tell them to remove the lengthy WS/defence document from the stalled application and replace it with the attached shorter WS which means the case will now be under 50 pages and needs urgent logging on the system.

Shorter WS should concentrate ONLY on you being prepared to swear on oath (if required) that no claim form was served, plus Henderson v Henderson about the abuse of duplicate claims ('cause of action estoppel') and the set aside argument and relevant case law such as VCS v Carr (Court of Appeal) and the Denton Principles (and CHAN and AKANDE if the POC were hopeless, but they can be a mere URL).

You could add that a draft defence against all 3 claims "is partially prepared but is not included with the applications for 2 reasons:"

 (1) because the CNBC didn't tell the Defendant but it turns out they had 'sat on' and not logged the 3rd duplicate claim CCJ set aside application in November with the defence included, and caused a Writ application by their delay, and

 (2) because none of the 3 claim forms were served and they should be consolidated into one case, one hearing, so it is impossible to respond properly without seeing the claims and having Judge's directions to focus and narrow the issues after the immediate CCJ damage x 3 is ended and the CCJs all set aside. And in any case, the 3 claims should all be struck out in view of the two matching authorities about very poorly pleaded parking claims (Chan and Akande - see link to both transcripts) and you believe these unserved POC likely fail to comply with the CPRs and PD16.


Do that tonight so the CNBC can log it straight on the system so the Judge and DCB Legal can see that there is a 'live' application.

Do it very urgently and chase the CNBC in the morning by phone.

Complain that they caused this ludicrous panic by not bothering to contact you or at least log the application on the system, which was paid for months ago!  So PLEEEASE can they get it logged right now.

The idea is to get it logged this week BEFORE a local Judge looks at the claim later this week.  Then the Judge will have an easy decision: they'll have to stay the writ.

RedOrchid

I have followed your advice and have emailed the CNBC asking them to replace the current WS with the updated version. 

I will call in the morning to make sure that they have received it and demand that they process it this week as a matter of urgency as they have left me hanging for a while. I have a contact inside the court now which I’ve been cc’ing into my emails, they felt bad this has taken so long so a team leader reached out to me!