IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including number plates, reference numbers and QR codes (which may reveal vehicle information when scanned).
We're aware that some users are experiencing technical issues which the team are working to resolve. See the Community Noticeboard for more info. Thank you for your patience.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

VCS - DCBL - Own Space - 2 Claims - 1 CCJ

Options

Hello All,

Hoping you can help. I've received a CCJ, which was issued on Friday night. I'd discovered this after attempting to respond to a claim on MCOL on Saturday.

Most of the advice on the forum for responding to a CCJ that I've found are for sending letters to the wrong address. My situation is different as I've been away from home for an extended period, initially for work and then for a holiday. Having reviewed the information available on this site, I'll post my intended N244 response, along with my understanding of the next steps.

Any advice or comments would be most appreciated.

Best Regards,

----

----

Next Steps - Re. CCJ

If I understand correctly from the NEWBIES thread, then my next course of action should be as follows:

  1. Attempt to contact the Claimant to set aside the CCJ
  2. Apply to Set Aside the CCJ to the court directly using an N244 response form per a template from the NEWBIES guide.
  3. Await response / reissued claim prior to fully defending the claim in full.


Questions

  • Contacting Claimant to set aside the CCJ
    • Given that my situation with this is different to the "wrong address" examples, would this still be worthwhile?
  • N244 Application Method
    • MCOL states "If you believe you are eligible for fee remission you must not submit your application via the Money Claim Online website."
    • Question: To confirm, is this MCOL statement referring to eligibility to not pay court fees due to low income?
      • In other words, if I submit online and want to reclaim court fee costs from the claimant in future, am I still safe to submit this via MCOL?
  • County Court Location
    • The claimant's court is based in Northampton.
    • What should I state at the top of my response for "IN THE XXXXXXX COUNTY COURT".
      • E.g. should I put "IN THE NORTHAMPTONSHIRE COUNTY COURT"?
      • Or can I state for this to be handled in my local court? I ask as I can't see any reference to any County Court based on the data I can see on MCOL


CCJ Response (Key details redacted)

IN THE NORTHAMPTONSHIRE COUNTY COURT

Claim No. [CLAIM REF]

BETWEEN:

Vehicle Control Services Limited

Claimant

– and –

Defendant

[MY NAME]


WITNESS STATEMENT OF [MY NAME]


I, [MY NAME] of [MY ADDRESS], being the Defendant in this case will state as follows;

  1. I make this Witness Statement in support of the application for an order that the judgment in this case (Claim No. [CLAIM REF] Judgment dated 06/09/2024) be set aside.

  2. I learnt of the existence of this claim on the 07/09/2024, after viewing the Claim Form [CLAIM REF]. This claim form was found in my letterbox having returned to the United Kingdom and specifically my address on 05/09/2024.

  3. I was away from home between 18/08/2024 and 05/09/2024. This was for business between 18/08/2024 and 25/08/2024, followed by a trip outside the United Kingdom between 25/08/2024 and 05/09/2024.

  4. The letter received had not been served in person, nor had it been signed for by myself.

  5. I therefore respectfully request that the Court sets aside the judgment in this claim and allows 14 days for me to submit my defence.

Statement of Truth

I, [MY NAME], the Defendant, believe the facts stated within this Witness Statement to be true.

Signed: ________________________________

Dated: 07/09/2024


----
----


Additional contextual info:

To note, I've received 2 separate claims for multiple, related PCN's. The following details are applicable for all PCN's and both claims received:

  • Claimant: VCS (Vehicle Control Services)
  • Legal Firm: DCBL Legal
  • Court: Civil National Business Centre (Northampton)
  • All PCN's spread across the two claims were issued for not Parking in my own space
  • My permit had actually become stuck between the dashboard and windscreen. Despite multiple attempts with a variety of tools, it couldn't be recovered from the extremely tight gap.
  • During September-December 2023, the newly implemented parking enforcement for VCS had been paused after multiple residents had received PCNs despite having not yet received a permit.
    • The residential management company resolved these issues for other residents (mostly where the permit hadn't yet been issued).
    • My understanding at this stage was the new parking scheme with VCS was under review and tickets would not be issued during this timeframe (this was confirmed by other residents at the time).
  • After 2.5 months of relative peace, the parking scheme had restarted - with no prior notice from our residential management company. So I wasn't aware it was being restarted.
  • My appeal and related requests to the residential management company for cancellation of any of my PCN's in light of this and the lease wording (which makes no reference to displaying a permit) were rejected.
----

Claim Details

Claim One (Separate - Currently Pending response to Defence)

PoC

The Defendant (D) is indebted to the Claimant (C) for a Parking Charge(s) issued to vehicle [VEHICLE REG] at [RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS]. The PCN(s) were issued on 30/12/2023, 31/12/2023. The defendant is pursued as the driver of the vehicle for breach of the terms on the signs (the contract). Reason:94) Parked Without Displaying A Valid Ticket/permit. In the alternative the defendant is pursued as the keeper pursuant to POFA 2012, Schedule 4.

Current Status
  • AoS was submitted, followed by my defence in accordance with the excellent advice from this forum.
    • I'm happy to share the details of this if required.

Claim Two (CCJ issued)

PoC
  1. The Defendant (D) is indebted to the Claimant (C) for a Parking Charge(s) issued to vehicle [VEHICLE REG] at [RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS].
  2. The PCN(s) were issued on 19/08/2023, 22/08/2023, 01/09/2023, 02/09/2023, 01/01/2024.
  3. The defendant is pursued as the driver of the vehicle for breach of the terms on the signs (the contract). Reason:94) Parked Without Displaying A Valid Ticket/permit,
  4. In the alternative the defendant is pursued as the keeper pursuant to POFA 2012, Schedule 4.

AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS

  1. £850 being the total of the PCN(s) and damages.
  2. Interest at a rate of 8% per annum pursuant to s.69 of the County Courts Act 4984 from the date hereof at a daily rate of £.11 until judgment or sooner payment.
  3. Costs and court fees
Current Status
  • Claim Issue Date is listed as 12/08/2024.
  • However I hadn't received this by the time I'd left my home on 18/08/2024.
  • Logged onto MCOL this morning, only to find that a Judgement was issued last night (06/09/2024)
«134

Comments

  • LDast
    LDast Posts: 2,496 Forumite
    1,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    What was the "issue date" of the claim that was not responded to and resulted in the CCJ?
  • icy_fox
    icy_fox Posts: 20 Forumite
    10 Posts Name Dropper
    The date on the form was 12/08/2024. However I didn't have this claim letter prior to my time away.

    Post I receive often seems to arrive later than I expect. However I cannot be sure exactly when the form was delivered to my letterbox.
  • Coupon-mad
    Coupon-mad Posts: 151,659 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    edited 10 September 2024 at 4:53PM
    • The claimant's court is based in Northampton.
    No it certainly isn't. That's an admin centre!

    You need to know that you almost certainly won't get your £303 fee reimbursed because the claim was served at the right address. Unless the conduct of two claims convinces a Judge that VCS / DCB acted unreasonably... worth asking...

    It is also a claim totalling over £600 so DCB Group will be sending HCEOs (yes, bailiffs) to your door and to clamp your car a bit later this month (VERY SOON) unless you get the application in damn quick - this week, no delay, no emails until AFTER it is in and you've paid the fee to the CNBC.

    Only then tell DCB not to pass the case to HCEOs and to retrieve it sharpish, if they have, because your application is in and includes staying any HC writ.

    You'll have to ask for 'relief from sanctions' and explain the reason for your purported 'breach' in not defending the case. The fact you were away and didn't see it but it had not arrived before you left on the Sunday.

    You are required to overcome the 'Denton tests' which apply to applications:
    https://www.curzongreen.co.uk/546-relief-from-sanctions-what-is-the-3-stage-denton-test-2/

    ALSO ask in your N244 and WS for "an Order stay any High Court writ obtained and enforcement to be stayed" until the Defendant's very prompt application is heard. 

    And don't do this N244 application on MCOL because you will need a strong WS and evidence of being away (attached as numbered exhibits) AND a draft defence to convince a Judge to set the CCJ aside and let you defend. AND a Draft Order asking for all of the below to be ordered:

    In your WS I strongly recommend you cite the initial CoA findings in the similar VCS case that has gone (has the green light) to be heard at the Court of Appeal this year:

    https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6544855/court-of-appeal-case-vcs-permission-to-appeal

    Silver bullet transcript!  This is BIG.

    Really important your Judge reads that transcript. The CoA has accepted the case to be listed for a full hearing and the Judge was damning of VCS in the preliminary finding.

    It's VCS v Carr

    Looking to overturn an error by HHJ Evans at Manchester who blamed the D for delay in applying to set aside a £10k CCJ.  The set aside by the first Judge was not wrong and HHJ Evans fell into error by overturning it, contrary to the Overriding Objective.

    Now dragged to the second highest court in the land.  SRS must be twitching!

    VCS v Carr's relevance to your case is twofold:

    1.  VCS v Carr is VERY similar in facts: a multi PCN case of predatory ticketing at the Defendant's own home, a new scheme started with no notice (unfair imposition of a permit obligation that was impossible to fulfil and interfered with residents' rights) ... just like in your case.

    2. the CoA's initial preliminary finding is that in cases where the D did not see the claim and has good prospects of successful defence, it is only right and in the interests of justice for the court to set aside a CCJ because the D has not had a chance to defend.  And was a resident with very strong defence arguments

    And unlike Mr/Ms Carr you are acting very promptly, so your position is stronger.

    ALSO state in your WS that 
    2 separate 'exact facts match' claims were inexplicably made for multiple, related PCNs.  Double intimidation, unnecessary duplicated costs exposure and an abuse of the court system / deliberate duplication of court time. The doctrine of cause of action estoppel applies (ref Henderson v Henderson - Google it).

    The just 
    way to proceed (and at minimal cost to all concerned, including saving time and money for the Court service) would be to consolidate claim no xxxxxx with claim no xxxxxx to be heard at the D's local court as one hearing and the Defendant respectfully asks for that to be ordered too, with the defence lodged for the other claim to stand for both cases.

    Oh, also state clearly in your WS that the Claim Form had not been served before you left for holiday on DATE and you will swear to this on oath if required, therefore as a matter of fact and law, the 14 days from the date of actual service had not expired by Friday 6th September. 

    The envelope from the CNBC admin centre enclosing the claim wasn't franked second class, was it...?

    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
    CLICK at the top or bottom of any page where it says:
    Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
  • Grizebeck
    Grizebeck Posts: 3,967 Forumite
    1,000 Posts Second Anniversary Name Dropper Photogenic
    As above
    Act now. HCEOs are easy to deal with if things get delayed outside of your control

  • I'm sure it goes without saying, but I hope you and the others who contribute to this forum understand how appreciated this advice is.

    There is plenty to digest, so I've attempted to break it down to allow for a collective review before I complete the final key tasks for my application.


    Key Reference Points

    The following points are what I've listed to specifically consider / reference within each key document (WS / Defence / Order):

    • Own Space Example - CCJ Set Aside (VCS vs Carr)
      • Multi PCN examples of predatory ticketing at the Defendant's own home
      • Strong case for successful defence
    • Duplicate Claims (Henderson vs Henderson)
      • Request to Consolidate
    • Service not issued - therefore not 14 days. (No opportunity to Defend as yet)
    • Prompt Response upon learning of claim & CCJ


    Document Content

    N244 Application

    (Content To Follow)


    Witness Statement

    Witness Statement - Content

    I, [MY NAME] of [MY ADDRESS], being the Defendant in this case will state as follows;
    
    1. I make this Witness Statement in support of the application for an order that the judgment in this case (Claim No. [CLAIM-02-REF] Judgment dated 06/09/2024) be set aside.
    
    2. I learnt of the existence of this claim on the 07/09/2024, after viewing the Claim Form [CLAIM-02-REF]. This claim form was found in my letterbox having returned to the United Kingdom and specifically my address on 05/09/2024.
        a. I was away from home between 18/08/2024 and 05/08/2024. This was for business between 18/08/2024 and 25/08/2024, followed by a trip outside the United Kingdom between 25/08/2024 and 05/09/2024.  
        b. The letter received had not been served in person, nor had it been signed for by myself.  
        c. I will swear on oath to the above facts if required, therefore as a matter of fact and law, the 14 days from the date of actual service had not expired by Friday 6th September.  
    
    3. I respectfully request that the judge reviews the largely similar case referencing the same claimant (VCS vs Carr - Reference: CA-2024-001179) to be heard at the Court of Appeal this year. The relevance of VCS vs Carr to this case is twofold:
        a. The case related to multi PCN examples of predatory ticketing at the Defendant's own home, a new scheme started attempting to enforce an unfair imposition of a permit obligation, which was impossible to fulfil and interfered with the resident's rights.  
        b. The CoA's initial preliminary finding is that in cases where the Defendant did not see the claim and has good prospects of successful defence.  
    
    4. The claimant has inexplicably made this second claim despite the set of circumstances have striking similarities to their previous claim ([CLAIM-01-REF]), including the same particulars, same car park, same vehicle and same reasons provided. The final date of this second claim ([CLAIM-02-REF]) is within one day of the PCN's referenced within [CLAIM-01-REF].  
    
    5. Both claims made by the claimant make reference to a multitude of additional charges:
        a. Court Fee  
        b. Legal Representative's costs  
        c. "Interest at a rate of 8% per annum pursuant to s.69 of the County Courts Act 4984 from the date hereof at a daily rate of £.11 until judgment or sooner payment."   
    
    6. This course of action from the claimant has 3 considerable impacts: 
        a. Double intimidation  
        b. Unnecessary duplicated costs exposure  
        c. A deliberate duplication of court time.  
    
    7. The Consumer Rights Act 2015 Section 71 states that fairness in contracts can be brought up in court even if it has not previously been mentioned during proceedings, and that issuing yet another claim with identical particulars is unfair and a breach of court protocol as determined in Henderson v Henderson.
    
    
    I therefore respectfully request that the Court sets aside the judgment in this claim and allows 14 days for me to submit my defence.
    
    Statement of Truth
    
    I, [MY NAME], the Defendant, believe the facts stated within this Witness Statement to be true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.
    
    Signed: ________________________________
    
    Dated: 10/09/2024
    

    Witness Statement - Comments

    • Is the list layout okay? E.g. for 5a, 5b, etc. or should it be a single level numbered list only?

    • Evidence

      • 25/08-05/09: I have flights & a taxi to prove the dates involved there
      • 18/08-25/08
        • As I was driving, I don't have any ticket receipts or the like for this.
        • However I was staying with family in another part of the country.
        • Question: Would some type of statement here suffice? As I've already confirmed willingness to go on oath if required.


    Draft Order

    Draft Order - Content

    The claimant issued a second claim relating to the same measures outlined within an original claim, which the defendant had already acknowledged and responded to. The defendant was not present at home on the date that this second claim was delivered.  
    
    BY CONSENT IT IS ORDERED THAT:
    
    1. The Judgment entered against the Defendant on 06/09/2024 is hereby set aside.
    
    2. The claim stands dismissed.
    
    3. Any High Court writ obtained and enforcement to be stayed, pending the outcome of the application.
    
    4. There shall be no order as to costs.
    

    Draft Order - Comments

    My intention behind this wording, compared to other examples I've seen is:

    • Ensure I highlight the conduct of VCS / DCBL issuing two claims to hopefully bring it to the forefront of their mind during the review (hopefully they agree re. claimant acting unreasonably).
    • Exclude the lines of "the claimant has been made aware", as I've been advised not to do send anything to the claimant before sending the full application to the courts.

    One question: Should I include words to the effect of:

    Should the court opt against paragraph 2, consolidate [CLAIM-01-REF] with [CLAIM-02-REF] to be heard at the defendants local court, with the defence lodged for the other claim to stand for both cases.

    Also presumably if I add this here, I should also update the witness statement from "allows 14 days for me to submit my defence." to "to be heard at the defendants local court, with the defence lodged for the other claim to stand for both cases."


    Draft Defence

    Draft Defence - Content

    (Content To Follow)

    Draft Defence - Comments

    I'm conscious that the WS should be punchy and my draft could therefore be considered too lengthy. So I'd appreciate any feedback on that before providing a full defence draft (I also appreciate I must act on that very quickly following any feedback received). As I may need to move / copy some of the WS content to the Defence & re-write in 3rd person.

    When writing the Defence (and all key documents), I intend to consistently refer back to the "Key Reference Points" I've outlined above.


    Question: When I do fully write up my defence, presumably I should still be using the Template Defence and renumbering - just as I would in a "non-CCJ" scenario?



    Final Comments

    CNBC Admin Centre Envelope

    Unfortunately I was so focused on the Claim itself upon receipt that I've already thrown out the envelope. If I somehow receive yet more wonderful correspondence from the claimant in future, I'll be sure to keep an eye out for it.


    Denton Tests

    Shortly before posting this, I spotted the requirement to overcome these Denton tests following your latest comment amendment.

    If it is decided at this stage that the breach in question is neither serious nor significant then there is no need to consider the other 2 stages or to issue an application.

    My initial interpretation is that not too much should need to change, providing:

    • The response is prompt
    • The defence is strong
    • The defence is well reasoned
    • The Application is procedurally complaint

    I'll go through the finer details of the requirements for the N244, once all my other ducks are aligned.


    Next Steps

    Based on the info presented so far, my interpretation of the next steps here are:

    • Pay the £303 fee to the HC
    • Complete N244 (Print & Sign it)
      • Send to court along with WS, Draft Order & Draft Defence
    • Contact DCB Group not to pass the case to HCEOs and to retrieve it sharpish (Via Phone and Email? - Anyone else to cc?)
  • Just a quick follow up comment to say the content of the Draft Order and Witness Statement will not have random connecting words (the, to, on, etc.) highlighted in bold or other colours! This is just how they've been highlighted / represented on this forum.
  • Coupon-mad
    Coupon-mad Posts: 151,659 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    edited 10 September 2024 at 10:07PM
    I can't read most of those entries.  Don't try to quote them in 'CODE'.  It is unreadable.

    I suggest you post separate replies for each document for us to look at. No code or quote.

    You don't pay anything to the High Court.  You will be ringing the CNBC 'fees' number at Northampton, where this claim started. That's where you email your application bundle UNLESS your local court will agree to take it, in view of the imminent urgency and HCEO writ risk.

    I would ask your local court on the phone first.  They might even only charge you £14 (the fee to stay a writ).  I've seen that happen before!

    I think re Denton, your argument there is that there was no breach at all because the CCJ was premature.  In a case where the time to acknowledge or defend the claim has not in fact expired (service can only have taken place in the Defendant's absence and not sooner than Monday - give that August date) then the Defendant was not in breach on Friday (give the CCJ September date).  Thus there is no need to consider the other 2 stages of Denton.

    Draft Order:
    You aren't drafting an order 'BY CONSENT'.  Should just be this at the top of the Draft Order:

    UPON reading the Defendant's application and hearing from the Defendant in person, IT IS ORDERED THAT 

    (The claim won't be dismissed. Remove that).

    You should put in your Draft Order that the duplicate claim refs xxxxx and xxxxxx be consolidated and the defence entered for claim ref xxxxxx stands for both claims. Directions Questionnaires to be served to both parties.

    Ask for costs at the end of that Draft Order because the judgment was requested prematurely and the Claimant acted unreasonably by artificially doubling the court fees, adding multiples of disproportionate 'debt recovery fees/damages' that were not incurred and are an abuse, and issuing two claims for matters that turn on duplicated facts which has wasted court time and resources.

    Your statement of truth is VERY out of date.  The NEWBIES thread covers this and the exemplar CCJ set aside thread by @Zbubuman (signposted in the NEWBIES thread) shows what everything should look like.

    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
    CLICK at the top or bottom of any page where it says:
    Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
  • Having reviewed, Zbubuman's thread & example WS, I've rearranged the numbering from my previous draft.

    From what I've checked here - (cannot post link to MSE Forum yet), the only additional part I have compared to Zbubuma's statement of truth' is ", [MY NAME], the Defendant,". However I've updated it as below (paragraph 22).

    Also, having re-reviewed the PoC from Claim 1, I've found that while the interest % is consistent, DCBL appear to have made up the daily rate between each - despite the final date for this one being one day after that of the previous one.

    I was going to reference this (stating the claim should be struck out similar to Zbubuman's example). However s.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 - (cannot post link to MSE Forum yet) specifically references this:

    Interest under this section may be calculated at different rates in respect of different periods.

    Does that impact / invalidate my point here? Either way the overall Estoppel point still stands, so I think this additional point may still be worth highlighting.


    N.B. I attempted to post the links in a more concise format, however received the forum message "You have to be around for a little while longer before you can post links.".

    --

    Exhibits (sugggested)

    EXHIBIT XX-01 Screenshot from MCOL confirming the claim [CLAIM-02-REF] resulting in a CCJ (dated 06/09/2024).
    EXHIBIT XX-02 Statement from Family member whom I stayed with while travelling south for business between 18/08/2024 and 25/08/2024.
    EXHIBIT XX-03 Receipts for the flights used for travel outside of the UK.
    EXHIBIT XX-04 Taxi Receipt to confirm arrival back home on 05/09/2024
    EXHIBIT XX-05 Property Lease wording regarding the parking space for the defendants address (Should this be saved for the Defence?)

    --

    WITNESS STATEMENT

    I, [MY NAME] of [MY ADDRESS], being the Defendant in this case will state as follows;

    1. I make this Witness Statement in support of the application for an order that the judgment in this case (Claim No. [CLAIM-02-REF] Judgment dated 06/09/2024) be set aside.

    2. I learnt of the existence of this claim on the 07/09/2024, after viewing the Claim Form [CLAIM-02-REF]. This claim form was found in my letterbox having returned to the United Kingdom and specifically my address on 05/09/2024.

    3. I was away from home between 18/08/2024 and 05/08/2024. This was for business between 18/08/2024 and 25/08/2024 (EXHIBIT XX-02), followed by a trip outside the United Kingdom between 25/08/2024 and 05/09/2024 (EXHIBIT XX-03 && (EXHIBIT XX-04).

    4. The letter received had not been served in person, nor had it been signed for by myself.

    5. I will swear on oath to the above facts if required, therefore as a matter of fact and law, the 14 days from the date of actual service had not expired by Friday 6th September.

    6. I believe that I have a strong defence to the claim, and should it not be dismissed despite the wealth of case law below that supports the claim being dismissed at the set aside hearing, I should (at the very least) have the opportunity to defend it properly. My application relies upon the 'mandatory set aside' rule in CPR 13.2 (in the alternative, 13.3) in light of the above facts. This application also relies upon CPR 11 (but due to the lack of service when I was present at my home, I was unable to acknowledge the service, which that rule assumes a defendant can).

    7. I have set out the grounds for my application in the attached draft order.

    VCS VS CARR

    8. I respectfully request that the judge reviews the largely similar case referencing the same claimant (VCS vs Carr - Reference: CA-2024-001179) to be heard at the Court of Appeal this year. The relevance of VCS vs Carr to this case is twofold:

    (i) The case related to multi PCN examples of predatory ticketing at the Defendant's own home, a new scheme started attempting to enforce an unfair imposition of a permit obligation, which was impossible to fulfil and interfered with the resident's rights.

    (ii) The Court of Appeal's initial preliminary finding is that in cases where the Defendant did not see the claim and had no opportunity to defend. Furthermore, the defendant is also a resident in this instance, with good prospects of successful defence.

    ESTOPPEL

    9. The claimant has inexplicably made this second claim despite the set of circumstances have striking similarities to their previous claim ([CLAIM-01-REF]), including the same particulars, same car park, same vehicle and same reasons provided. The final date of this second claim ([CLAIM-02-REF]) is within one day of the PCN's referenced within [CLAIM-01-REF].  

    10. Being legally represented, the Claimant knows, or should know, that by detaching or allowing to remain detached, elements of alleged debts and issuing separate claims, each which rely upon essentially duplicate particulars and facts, is an abuse of the civil litigation process.  


    11. By filing two separate claims (for parking charges with exact same facts, issued within days of each other), the claimants have doubled the costs and court time wasted. This can also be considered as a tactic for double intimidation against myself.  Having only recently learned of the second (near duplicate) POC, I have reproduced them below:  


    [CLAIM-01-REF]

    1. The Defendant (D) is indebted to the Claimant (C) for a Parking Charge(s) issued to vehicle [VEHICLE REG] at [RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS].
    2. The PCN(s) were issued on 30/12/2023, 31/12/2023. 
      1. The defendant is pursued as the driver of the vehicle for breach of the terms on the signs (the contract). Reason:94) Parked Without Displaying A Valid Ticket/permit,
      2. In the alternative the defendant is pursued as the keeper pursuant to POFA 2012, Schedule 4.

      AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS

      £340 being the total of the PCN(s) and damages. Interest at a rate of 8% per annum pursuant to s.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 from the date hereof at a daily rate of £.06 until judgment or sooner payment. Costs and court fees

      [CLAIM-02-REF]

      1. The Defendant (D) is indebted to the Claimant (C) for a Parking Charge(s) issued to vehicle [VEHICLE REG] at [RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS].
      2. The PCN(s) were issued on 19/08/2023, 22/08/2023, 01/09/2023, 02/09/2023, 01/01/2024.
      3. The defendant is pursued as the driver of the vehicle for breach of the terms on the signs (the contract). Reason:94) Parked Without Displaying A Valid Ticket/permit,
      4. In the alternative the defendant is pursued as the keeper pursuant to POFA 2012, Schedule 4.

      AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS

      1. £850 being the total of the PCN(s) and damages.

      2. Interest at a rate of 8% per annum pursuant to s.69 of the County Courts Act 4984 from the date hereof at a daily rate of £.11 until judgment or sooner payment.

      3. Costs and court fees

      12. In Arnold v National Westminster Bank plc [1991] 3 All ER 41 the court noted that cause of action estoppel “…applies where a cause of action in a second action is identical to a cause of action in the first, the latter having been between the same parties or their privies and having involved the same subject matter.”  


      13. In Henderson -v- Henderson [1843] 67 ER 313 the court noted the following:  

      (i) when a matter becomes subject to litigation, the parties are required to advance their whole case;  

      (ii) the Court will not permit the same parties to re-open the same subject of litigation regarding matters which should have been advanced in the earlier litigation, but were not owing to negligence, inadvertence, or error;  

      (iii) this bar applies to all matters, both those on which the Court determined in the original litigation and those which would have been advanced if the party in question had exercised ''reasonable diligence''.  


      14. Two claims were raised on behalf of the claimant where one would have sufficed; which has doubled the waste to court time and also doubled the cost in setting aside the two CCJ’s.   


      15. The Claimant filing the first claim and failing to advance the whole case, any cause of action was immediately extinguished for any other similar fact Parking Charges against the Defendant. The courts may estop a second claim where the cause of action is substantially the same.


      16.  The Defendant invites the court to dismiss the second claim under the grounds of cause of action estoppel. In the alternative, the Court is respectfully invited to consolidate the claims to be determined together, and to apply appropriate sanctions against the Claimant.  


      DENTON TEST

      17. A 3-stage Denton test was established in Denton v TH White Limited [2014]. which requires the court to:  

      (i) identify and assess the seriousness and significance of the non-compliance 

      (ii) consider why the breach occurred 

      (iii) evaluate all circumstances of the case so the application is dealt with fairly


      18. To confirm, no breach has occurred at all in this instance because the CCJ was premature. Service can only have taken place in the Defendant's absence (from 18/08/2024) and not sooner than Monday (19/08/2024). As such, the defendant was not in breach on Friday 6th September 2024, when the County Court Judgement has been issued.


      19. If it is decided at this stage that the breach in question is neither serious nor significant then there is no need to consider the other 2 stages or to issue an application. In light of the above facts, there is no need to consider the final 2 stages of the Denton test.  


      SET ASIDE APPLICATION WAS MADE PROMPTLY

      20. I have responded to this matter as promptly as possible. I discovered a CCJ was lodged onto my credit file on the 7th September 2024. After immediately seeking guidance, today on `11th September 2024` I have submitted my case in order to set-aside this judgement and fairly present my case.  

      21. Considering all of the above, I was unable to defend myself against this claim. I believe that the Default Judgement against me was issued incorrectly and thus I therefore respectfully request that the Court sets aside the judgment in this claim and allows 14 days for me to submit my defence.  

      Statement of Truth

      22. I believe the facts stated within this Witness Statement to be true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.

      Signed: ________________________________

      Dated: 11/09/2024

    3. Draft Order

      UPON considering the application of the Defendant to set aside the Judgment by default entered on 06/09/2024;

      AND UPON reading the evidence in support of the application;

      AND UPON the court taking note that the claimant issued a second claim relating to the same measures outlined within an original claim, which the defendant had already acknowledged and responded to;

      AND UPON the court taking note that the defendant was not present at home on the date that this second claim was delivered, thus not providing a full 14 days for the defendant to acknowledge;

      IT IS ORDERED THAT:

      1. The Judgment entered against the Defendant on 06/09/2024 is hereby set aside.

      2. Any High Court writ obtained and enforcement to be stayed, pending the outcome of the application.

      3. Consolidate the duplicate claim references [CLAIM-02-REF] with [CLAIM-01-REF] to be heard at the defendants local court, with the defence lodged for the other claim to stand for both cases. Serve Directions Questionnaires to both parties.

      4. Costs of the application be paid by the Claimant to the Defendant in the sum of £303 in light of:
        (i) The judgment being requested prematurely
        (ii) Unreasonable conduct by the Claimant by artificially doubling the court fees, adding multiples of disproportionate 'debt recovery fees/damages' that were not incurred and are an abuse. Also for issuing two claims for matters that turn on duplicated facts which has wasted court time and resources.

    4. Coupon-mad
      Coupon-mad Posts: 151,659 Forumite
      Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
      edited 12 September 2024 at 12:29AM
      EXHIBIT XX-05 Property Lease wording regarding the parking space for the defendants address (Should this be saved for the Defence?)
      I would attach it now.
      Your case is slightly unusual in that the Claim Form was served to the right address but not until Monday 19th August at the very earliest.  So your prospects of defence to the claim may be something that the Judge also wants to be satisfied about.

      Did you check the envelope to see if there's any clue about whether the CNBC sent this or both claims 2nd class? Dynamite if they did.

      There's a date wrong in your WS: it says you were away until 5/8/24.



      VCS vs Carr - you will have to Exhibit the transcript (shown in our thread about it).  The Judge may not be able to find it easily as it's not reported or completed yet.

      This sentence isn't complete and makes no sense:

      "8
      (ii) The Court of Appeal's initial preliminary finding is that in cases where the Defendant did not see the claim and had no opportunity to defend."


      Delete your para 2 and change it to:

      2.  I learnt of the existence of this claim on the 07/09/2024, after opening my post and finding the Claim Form.  I had received two near-duplicate claim forms in my absence from this same Claimant, and I went online to acknowledge them both. I was shocked to find that this one had had a judgment entered already, which I later calculated was premature.



      Delete your para 4 and change it to:

      4. The very earliest that the Claim Form could possibly have arrived at my home was Monday 19th August because (and I will swear on oath if required) it had not arrived by the day I left (Sunday 18th). This is vital information because the statutory 19 days (adding 14 +5 after the date of service) to acknowledge or defend the claim had not started until Monday 19th August at the earliest, and thus this period  did not expire until the end of 7th September (albeit that was a Saturday).  Accordingly, the judgment dated 6th September was entered prematurely.


      Remove this sentence from para 14. You don't have two CCJs. You have one and must defend the other:

      "and also doubled the cost in setting aside the two CCJ’s."


      At the end of para 21 change:

      "allows 14 days for me to submit my defence."

      to this ending:

      Allows the defence that I have filed and served for the duplicate claim to stand as my defence for this claim (with the later claim of the two either being dismissed due to cause of action estoppel, or consolidated with this one if the court sees fit to allow both claims to continue).


      And I saw near the end one wrong spelling: 'Judgement'.  There is no middle 'e' in this legal context of that word.

      Ring your LOCAL court in the morning and tell them you are in a race this week to lodge your application (to stay a writ and set aside a CCJ) quickly and pay the fee before HCEOs turn up at your door.  You are aware that the CNBC in Northampton is a service 'on its knees' with a 5 week delay in admin, many lost of overlooked documents and severe delays.  Ask if it would be better to email your application to the local court (pretty please) right now... butter them up.

      The worst that can happen is they say no in which case you email it to the CNBC and phone and pay the fee there. The best that might happen is your local court says yes AND might only charge you £14 as the application includes 'staying a writ'!

      REALLY URGENT TO GET THIS IN.

      Your N244 wording must cite 'CPR 13.2 and in the alternative CPR 13.3' and your order you are asking for must MATCH (exactly) what your draft Order says and you must tick that this application requires a hearing before a District Judge. Estimate 30 mins.
      PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
      CLICK at the top or bottom of any page where it says:
      Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
    Meet your Ambassadors

    🚀 Getting Started

    Hi new member!

    Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

    Categories

    • All Categories
    • 350.9K Banking & Borrowing
    • 253.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
    • 453.5K Spending & Discounts
    • 243.9K Work, Benefits & Business
    • 598.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
    • 176.9K Life & Family
    • 257.2K Travel & Transport
    • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
    • 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
    • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

    Is this how you want to be seen?

    We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.