**URGENT- CCJ** Need advice if I have posibilities to set aside by N244 and after win the case

Lia_F

Coupon-mad said:

Dear Sirs,

Your ref:  xxxxxxx

I will ignore your rudeness.

Guess what? I'm ahead of you.

I've received reliable advice and have already applied to the CNBC to set aside the improper CCJ. The CNBC will serve a copy of the N244 application to yourselves shortly, as is the usual process.

Given the fact that you know about the error made with my name, of course it remains your choice whether or not to make an application to correct it, before the hearing.

The car was sold 4 years ago, after which I lived abroad, so kindly don't send your usual consumer blame template reply, lecturing me about DVLA fines for not updating logbooks. I've done nothing wrong.

I'll be claiming my costs in full, due to what looks like negligent or deliberate flouting of the mandatory requirement to thoroughly check addresses before litigation. Perhaps your hired LPC Law gun can explain both 'errors' at the hearing.

yours faithfully
Lia F 

Sounds great

Lia_F

@Coupon-mad

I made an error when I submitted the application on 08/11/24. I received an automated reply, but I didn't notice that it mentioned the application size should be a maximum of 25 pages or 10MB. Unfortunately, my application exceeded these limits.

I've been waiting for months and repeatedly calling the court, unsure why I wasn't receiving a response. They kept telling me to wait, which wasn't helpful at all. Today, I noticed the last line in the email that mentioned the size limits.

Is there anything I can do about this situation? Have you encountered this issue before? I'm feeling very nervous 😰.

Best regards,
Lia

Car1980

Pretty sure the filesize is just to avoid any long download times at their end. Most emails take up to 30mb now. 10mb doesn't take much time now anyway, not like it was 15 years ago. How big was it? You would have got a bounceback email if it hadn't gone through I suspect.

I doubt anyone is going to count the pages either.

Coupon-mad

Lia_F said:

@Coupon-mad

I made an error when I submitted the application on 08/11/24. I received an automated reply, but I didn't notice that it mentioned the application size should be a maximum of 25 pages or 10MB. Unfortunately, my application exceeded these limits.

I've been waiting for months and repeatedly calling the court, unsure why I wasn't receiving a response. They kept telling me to wait, which wasn't helpful at all. Today, I noticed the last line in the email that mentioned the size limits.

Is there anything I can do about this situation? Have you encountered this issue before? I'm feeling very nervous 😰.

Best regards,
Lia

Send it again, with fewer pages. If you attached some case law as pages, instead show it as a URL footnote. That'll remove loads of pages.

In the body of your email, explain what you've attached and why, and refer to the date that you first applied and attach proof of already paying the £303 and COMPLAIN that you were fobbed off when you telephoned several times to chase this application.

INSIST they now expedite it.

Then ...

IMPORTANT!

...please do this (you and your partner, separately using your experiences as evidence,  as I seem to recall you both have a CCJ?):

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81070874/#Comment_81070874

It closes next week.

PLEASE tell the CJC that parking firms MUST BE STOPPED from using old addresses and abusing the court process.  Give your personal experience.

Also tell the CJC how bad the CNBC is to contact  by phone and that they've sat in your urgent CCJ set aside application for three months.

The CNBC has done NOTHING except let this 'scammer' get an automatic CCJ with one push of a button and no checks, and they've taken your £303.

Which is another issue: why do scam parking claimants get to file a generic rubbish claim for £35 to an old address, yet a victim Defendant has to pay almost ten times that amount to set the scam default CCJ aside?  A hearing fee is only £25 for Claimants so why can they use and abuse the court for £60 (£35 plus £25) but for a Defendant to get in front of a Judge costs an eye-watering £303?  Is it to deter Defendants? That MUST be viewed as unjust, in cases of parking firms who use old addresses. 

 

Lia_F

@Car1980 I just realized about the bounce email yesterday. It was completely blank, with only the subject line saying "NO READ."
There was no explanation or narrative explaining what was going on. Yesterday, when I spoke with someone from CNBC, they asked me for a bounce email. I assumed it was the automatic reply, but they didn't explain what it was when I asked. That was the first time anyone had mentioned it during my calls. I didn't know what a bounce email was, as I use other term for that.

In the automatic reply, it says the following at the bottom part of the email:

When sending us documents please ensure you comply with the Practice Direction 5B
https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part05/pd_part05b
	Documents not complying will not be accepted, in particular if it is over 10MB or 25 printed pages in size.

The instructions of the practice direction are to notify after sending the documents, not before, which doesn't make sense.

Lia_F

@Coupon-mad
Thanks for your advice regarding my application. In regards the next week deadline I am going to send my evidence. Thanks for letting me know about this.

Lia_F

@Coupon-mad

Hope you are doing well!

I have a hearing to set aside the CCJ at the end of this month and would appreciate your advice on:

1. What to say to the judge. The hearing is scheduled for 15 minutes.

2. I have received the claimant's witness statement, which is signed by a paralegal. In the last part of the witness statement, it mentions: 'c. The Defendant must file and serve a Defence to the Claim within 28 days of service of this Order, in default of which, the Claimant be at liberty to re-enter Judgment.' As I understand it, if the judge agrees to set aside the CCJ, the 28-day period for filing a defence starts from that day (the set aside hearing day). Is that correct?
Many thanks!

************************************************************************************************************************************

47. Without prejudice to the previous, in the event that the court is minded to grant the Defendants application then upon the Judgment being set aside the Claimant would invite the court to give standard directions regarding the progress of the Claim moving forward as it is the Claimants intention to continue with the claim.

48. Should the court elect to proceed as described above, the Claimant respectfully requests the following Order be made;

a. The judgment entered on the xxth May 2023 be and is hereby set aside;
b. The Witness Statement of Joshua Reid stand as the Particulars of Claim and service of the Claim be dispensed with;
c. The Defendant must file and serve a Defence to the Claim within 28 days of service of this Order in default of which, the Claimant be at liberty to re-enter Judgment;
d. Upon receipt of the above, the Claim be allocated to the Small Claims Track with standards directions, to be heard on the first available date within 56 days; and
e. There be no Order as to Costs. 

Car1980

You have submitted a suggested Order, and they have submitted one from their side.

You both agree the CCJ should be set aside. Good.

But the issues with theirs are a) they want you to submit a defence, but their Particulars of Claim are insufficient; and b) they don't want to pay your £303 costs.

So, in theory the set aside shouldn't be an issue. 

It's all about getting the claim struck out, or at least getting them to file further and better particulars, and arguing why they should refund the three hundred quid.

Lia_F

@Car1980 Thank you very much 

I received their WS today 02/04/2025. Does it mean I have until the 30/04/2025 to present my defence?

I have additional questions. In their witness statement for the set aside hearing, they mention the following arguments. Are these arguments valid?

******************************************************************************************************************

5. The Claimant wishes to oppose the application and has provided instructions to my Firm to provide a witness statement in the following terms.

11. The Claimant therefore submits that the Claim Form can be deemed to be properly served.

12. In the event that notwithstanding the above the court still wishes to consider whether or not to exercise its discretion with a view to setting the Judgment aside, the Claimant puts the Defendant to full proof that they have acted promptly and without delay in making this application and that they have a reasonable prospect of successfully defending the Claim if the matter is returned to Claim stage

13. In respect of the first limb of the above criteria, in view of the aforementioned paragraphs, the date

the Claim was issued and as 18 months passed before the Defendant made the application; the

Claimant respectfully submits the Defendant has not acted promptly in making the application and

for this reason, the application ought to be struck out.

18. Notwithstanding the above, the Claimant relies upon the decision in One Parking Solution Ltd v Wilshaw [2021] whereby it was found that it is not necessary for the Claimant to prove the Landowner’s authority to constitute a valid cause of action to recover the PCN; what is required is proof that there is a binding contract between the Claimant and the Defendant, meaning the Signs at the Site. It was further found in Wilshaw that the contract between the Claimant and the Landowner does not affect the validity of any contract between the Claimant and the Defendant.

FYI @Coupon-mad

Coupon-mad

I received their WS today 02/04/2025. Does it mean I have until the 30/04/2025 to present my defence?

No!

Stop reading their draft Order as if it somehow has more clout than YOUR draft Order. @Car1980 already explained this. Stop being so respectful of the Claimants.

THEY don't dictate what happens.

YOU WANT YOUR COSTS AS PER THE BINDING AUTHORITY OF VCS v CARR.

Your job at the hearing is to SAY NO if the Judge is all smiles, saying "this won't take long, you're lucky, look the Claimant has consented!"

Your answer: "No Judge."

Be heard. Do not get caught like a rabbit in headlights. This is YOUR hearing to get YOUR draft Order agreed and YOUR COSTS because the C has acted unreasonably.

If the Judge says it's your fault for not updating your V5C, you disagree politely and say:

 "that wouldn't have made any difference because parking firms can't apply to the DVLA twice. The binding Court of Appeal authority in VCS v Carr (their public video judgment was given on 4th March) confirms that the DVLA address is not a sufficient check, it's just the starting point.  It is never an address for service. And like Mr Carr, I am entitled to ALL MY COSTS. I DO NOT accept the Claimant's draft Order trying to wriggle out of it. This is the same as VCS v Carr. Please watch the hearing video."

I have additional questions. In their witness statement for the set aside hearing, they mention the following arguments. Are these arguments valid?

None of them.