Received Notice of Debt Recovery - Unpaid County Court Judgement from dcbl

confusedparking

Thank you Coupon Mad I will do that.

I have just called them again, as not heard anything and they said to re-send it and give it another 2 weeks.

By that time it would have been 4 months since I sent the application.

I am already a bag a nerves about defending this in court, so the delay isn't doing me any help.....


Edit, I am so sorry I have just seen the deadline was 28th February.  I am so angry at this delay, I wish I had checked the forums sooner.

confusedparking

We have finally been given a date for 10 days time. 

@Coupon-mad and from what I understand we have to just make sure we are fully brushed up on the witness statement and draft order, make a skeleton argument which is a simpler version of events and be aware of the cases we have referenced? 

Thank you, and everyone else again for all your help it’s so appreciated. 

Coupon-mad

Assuming yours was about a claim not being received (I didn't read back, sorry no time) add a skeleton argument this week, like @Truss_me

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81403972/#Comment_81403972

confusedparking

Thank you so much that is really helpful.

Coupon-mad

Coupon-mad said:

Assuming yours was about a claim not being received (I didn't read back, sorry no time) add a skeleton argument this week, like @Truss_me

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81403972/#Comment_81403972

Did you do the skelly? cc'd to the solicitor?

You need to be sure your Judge at Lewes follows the 'BINDING CASE LAW' of VCS v Carr (CA-2024-001179) final hearing 4 March 2025, where the Court of Appeal hearing and judgment was officially recorded:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FvK6XwAGHcs

The DVLA address was held to be only 'a starting point' not a check.

Parking firms embarking on litigation cannot run with a DVLA address and must take further steps to check an address, especially where their letters were met with silence, which suggests the DVLA address may not be good for service.

I see you posted on another thread and it's Lewes court. 

I've been in front of Brighton & Lewes Judges (same circuit) and they are generally good but one or two are grumpy sticklers and might think they can criticise you for not updating your address. Well the answer to that is that the real fault lies with the Claimant. Mr Carr didn't update his address either, had over 90 PCNs, delayed his application by months and still won AND got his costs, because the bottom line is as in bold above: the CCJ is the fault of the Claimant.

Your partner can be your McKenzie friend (Google it) and he can point to things, hand you pages and whisper.

confusedparking

Thank you so much again @Coupon-mad you’ve been so helpful. 

Yes I followed that and emailed it last week along with the cases attached again (they were already sent before) and the link to the new VCS v Carr appeal video. 

I’ll update the thread tomorrow, thank you again for your time on this. 

confusedparking

Coupon-mad said:

Coupon-mad said:

Assuming yours was about a claim not being received (I didn't read back, sorry no time) add a skeleton argument this week, like @Truss_me

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81403972/#Comment_81403972

Did you do the skelly? cc'd to the solicitor?

You need to be sure your Judge at Lewes follows the 'BINDING CASE LAW' of VCS v Carr (CA-2024-001179) final hearing 4 March 2025, where the Court of Appeal hearing and judgment was officially recorded:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FvK6XwAGHcs

The DVLA address was held to be only 'a starting point' not a check.

Parking firms embarking on litigation cannot run with a DVLA address and must take further steps to check an address, especially where their letters were met with silence, which suggests the DVLA address may not be good for service.

I see you posted on another thread and it's Lewes court. 

I've been in front of Brighton & Lewes Judges (same circuit) and they are generally good but one or two are grumpy sticklers and might think they can criticise you for not updating your address. Well the answer to that is that the real fault lies with the Claimant. Mr Carr didn't update his address either, had over 90 PCNs, delayed his application by months and still won AND got his costs, because the bottom line is as in bold above: the CCJ is the fault of the Claimant.

Your partner can be your McKenzie friend (Google it) and he can point to things, hand you pages and whisper.

Thank you so much for your help. 

We had our hearing today and the judge set aside the CCJ. 

She began by telling us it’s our responsibility to update the DVLA and we were wrong to do so. We mentioned the case law and cited the other cases so she agreed to reserve the costs against the trial for our defence. 

She would dismiss the case, so we will follow the template defence now against DVBL (I’ve saved the thread with the steps and the guide on completing the online defence). 

I feel disappointed we didn’t receive our refund and she didn’t seem like she was willing to entertain the dismissal or the costs refunded, however the CCJ has been set aside which is the main aim for now. 

Thank you again, can I keep this updated or should this be closed now as the CCJ has been heard?

Coupon-mad

Yay! The CCJ is wiped! That'll update by June, maybe sooner. Carry on with this thread as you need to defend the case.

I am so happy that you pointed her to the case law that says the bigger fault lies with the parking firm and the Court of Appeal awarded Mr Carr his costs and blamed the parking firm for failing to check the address because they can't just run with a DVLA address only.

Was it VCS v Carr that she looked at? Did she watch the CoA hearing, do you know?

Well done on getting your costs reserved.

confusedparking

Thank you. 

Yea we spoke about VCS v Carr. At first she said no costs would be awarded as we were at fault, however we stated that they should be and then spoke about the  case and she changed her mind to costs reserved. 

It felt like she didn’t even know about the case we had and hadn’t read our witness statement or looked at any of the exhibit, so I don’t think she has watched the CoA video. 

It’s a strange happiness this part is over but disappointment that it felt rushed and we didn’t have an opportunity to bring up much more. 

Coupon-mad

confusedparking said:

Thank you. 

Yea we spoke about VCS v Carr. At first she said no costs would be awarded as we were at fault, however we stated that they should be and then spoke about the  case and she changed her mind to costs reserved. 

I hoped you'd say that.  You turned it around just as you were coached to do! Brilliant.

She'd read nothing and had to have the recent Court of Appeal authority explained to her to get your costs reserved.

Well done indeed for having the confidence to change her mind. She'll hopefully remember that authority and might even watch the video in a quiet moment and that could/should help others in your shoes (with parking firm CCJs sent to old addresses) who don't know about VCS v Carr. Now she knows, she can't not use that authority in future!