CCJ set aside of CEL claim

Coupon-mad

I’ve also sent a letter to CEL requesting confirmation of the closure and that they notify the court. While waiting for their response, I plan to inform the court of the DCBL email and CEL’s decision.

No.

Stop! There is no 'decision'. 

Nobody has closed the claim.  DCB have stopped being involved but they were never actually 'involved' in the court case.

I wasn't joking with my advice but DCB Ltd were always going to walk away, due to your N244 re-opening the litigation.

This is YOUR CASE. Your hearing.

Nobody can close it.

You need to do what I said. And only what I said.

Sumsum12

Hello Coupon-mad, I used the wrong word earlier when I said "decision." What I actually meant was the client’s request to DCBL to stop their services. 

As for my responses to their letters and emails, I want to reassure you that I am closely following all your advice on how to handle and respond to their correspondence, as I am unfamiliar with how to deal with these situations on my own.

I have  also drafted this email to the court based on your suggestion. Could you please check if it is correct?

Thank you. 

—-----

Case nr:Xxx

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am writing to update the court regarding the above case. I have received confirmation from Direct Collection Bailiffs Limited (DCBL) that they are no longer pursuing the outstanding balance on behalf of Civil Enforcement Ltd, as the case has been closed by their client.

I have attached a copy of the email from DCBL dated November 2024 for your reference.

I also wish to formally request a hearing in this matter. I am concerned that the Claimant's submission may be generic and potentially misleading to the Court. Furthermore, I am cautious about a common tactic used by parking firms, where consent orders are drafted in a way that could be mistakenly interpreted as having been signed or agreed to by the defendant. 

For clarity, I confirm that I have not signed any consent order. I stand by the Defendant’s Draft Order and maintain that the claim should be struck out. This position is supported by HHJ Evans' judgment in Car Park Management Service Ltd v Akande and HHJ Murch's judgment in Civil Enforcement Ltd v Chan.

I trust the Court will consider this request and am happy to provide further clarification if needed.

Thank you for your attention.

Coupon-mad

Yes that'll do.

Sumsum12

Perfect . Thank you 

Sumsum12

Hi, just a quick update. I received the confirmation letter from CEL today regarding their request to halt enforcement action, but they’ve mentioned they’re not willing to discontinue the claim at this point. I’m still waiting for an update from the court on whether they’ve started processing the claim or if it’s still pending—it seems they might push it to next year. Wishing you a happy holiday season and a wonderful New Year!

Coupon-mad

Chortle. You made them jump! 

Sumsum12

"Yeah… they definitely didn’t see this coming—me persisting to defend the claim.  

Sumsum12

Hi,

I wanted to provide an update on my claim after waiting for more than three months. 

I contacted CNBC today for an update and was informed that while my emails containing the claim application were received, the court has no record of my case. As a result, they instructed me to resubmit again my entire application documents to the case processing team.

I was also told that my resubmission would be treated as a completely new application, meaning I will have to wait another three weeks or more for processing. When I asked whether I could modify or amend my arguments, I was informed that I am allowed to make changes since it is being treated as a new submission.

However, I am unsure whether I can truly trust this advice and whether I should correct or change my initial statement as suggested. From my experience, it seems that no one is thoroughly reviewing emails or notes, and I am concerned that after waiting another three weeks, I may be told the same thing again.

Has anyone else experienced this situation? Am I genuinely allowed to draft a new statement, or will any changes be compared to my original submission—eventhough they claim that these documents are not recorded in their system.

I am unsure how to proceed. Should I simply forward my previous emails, application, and skeleton arguments again, or would it be better to draft a new statement including all the key points from my skeleton arguments into my submission? Should I notify Civil Enforcement Limited about the new submission now, or would it be better to wait for the court's response first?

Any advice on the best course of action will be appreciated.

Coupon-mad

Do you think your previous effort was lacking something? If not, resubmit it 'as it is' and also:

1. lodge a formal complaint (separately) to the HMCTS complaints team and tell them what the CNBC have done to you, which has caused huge unexplained delay to what is required to be a prompt N244 application, and you believe this should be investigated and compensation and an apology are due;

2. Could you also complete some answers to this Call for Evidence? Deadline in two weeks:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81070874/#Comment_81070874

It's just been re-opened due to the change in Government.  We must go again with it and your case is important because it demonstrates the twin issues of

(a) default CCJs made too easy by the Claimant-favouring automated CCJ churning 'MCOL' system and

(b) the CNBC then failing to prioritise a victim's application...and giving no apology, explanation or effort to resolve it...

...whilst bending over backwards to enable rogue parking claimants who can't be bothered to check addresses before litigation, and just get away with it in hundreds of thousands of similar default CCJ parking industry cases per year. 

Your experience should be taken into account and this is just a matter of answering some questions (not all of them, if not appropriate to you).  Closes in just two weeks time.

Sumsum12

Hi Coupon-Mad, thanks for getting back to me. I’ve just sorted out my network connection with my provider and wanted to update you about the court response. As I mentioned earlier, the court asked me to resubmit my application because they had no record of the case, meaning it would be treated as new. I had seen your response at the time but couldn’t forward my documents due to a server error. I was only able to send them last Tuesday to the case Progression team.

To make things easier for them, I added all the necessary documents—including my skeleton arguments and judgment PDF—into one email, ensuring it didn’t exceed 10MB as per their website guidelines. I also forwarded previous emails to show when I originally submitted the documents.

Surprisingly and without any formal complain, I received an email on Thursday apologizing but informing me that my application was being returned because my documents exceeded their 50-page limit, even though the file size was only 6.5MB. They now require me to either send it physically by post or adjust the email content. Additionally, if any amendments were made, they must be submitted by post. 

Does switching between a hearing and a decision without a hearing qualify as an amendment to the application? This is the only change I made on the N244 application before resubmitting it !!

Regardless, if they had made this clear from the start, I would have resubmitted it sooner rather than waiting anxiously.

Since my documents (excluding the judgment PDF) are under 30 pages, I’m considering resubmitting my email without the judgments pdf altogether or instead search and provid a URL link, so they don’t delay it further. At the same time, sending the physical documents by post (or bring a hard copy of the judgments to court during the hearing )to ensure they have no reason to delay the process further.

I just want to get this over with—it’s been an exhausting and stressful process since October last year.

As you mentioned, we are the ones affected by these companies' actions and are the ones bearing the consequences.