NCP and autopay - CCJ set aside: in-person hearing in August

fyonn

man, I wish there was some kind of portal I could look at to see progress…

Coupon-mad

As it's nearly a month since you paid the fee, I would call up the CNBC and ask why they are failing to prioritise applications, and complain that they appear to not even have sent it to the local court yet.

To beat the queue, ring on the dot of 8.30am.

fyonn

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81994272#Comment_81994272

well, I don't know that I want to go in quite that brazen :) I don't know what the likely timescales are for this though. I mean they did send me a link talking about timelines, but I've no idea what I submitted is to know which one it is :) how long would you expect it to take to get a result?

Alas, I usually do the school run in the morning, followed by going to work, but I'll try give them a call on monday, which is the most likely day for me to get time.

What should I expect? an email or letter telling me that it's all cancelled? it's in the queue, it's been rejected etc?

Coupon-mad

It doesn't get cancelled or rejected.

Your application gets allocated to your local court, then a hearing is arranged. Ring and ask for progress because these are not meant to be delayed.

fyonn

okay, I phoned at 8:30 on the dot, was position 3 in the queue.. waited a few mins.. got a ringing noise and then my call was just summarily dropped. called back, was position 27 in the queue, waited 40 mins and finally had a painful conversation with someone I was really struggling to comprehend which basically ended up as "the wait time is 5 weeks, it's been 4, wait some more"..

I then asked about the published weekly performance stats (here) and which of these categories was my submission in, so I could see what the expectation should be, and he didn't understand that question in any way.. is anyone else able to tell me?

anyway, wait some more is apparently the answer…

fyonn

Okay, so I called in this morning to check again, and apparently the case has now been transferred to a local court. they gave me a new number to call, which I did and they tell me that their wait time is 6 weeks… I guess I'll be calling back in 7 then…

fyonn

and I have a court date in early August…! Now to put aside some time to reacquaint myself with my own case…

Coupon-mad

OK, so a CCJ set aside but not due to the claim being served at an old address:

"my household had received letters from the claimant’s solicitor about this fine but which had been filed away without my knowledge."

Due to this, you probably won't get your application fee awarded back but the judge will likely agree if they are persuaded that you have good prospects of defence.

Is it Manchester court? They are good.

I reckon you should now put in a skeleton argument attaching HHJ Moloney's judgment in Beavis, like this:

Skeleton argument re the added fake 'fee' which is disallowed by the Supreme Court

Is the quantum excessive, according to the Supreme Court authority and/or the keeper liability provisions in the POFA?

1. The Claimant has improperly added a false 'recovery fee' which is excessive, unrecoverable and constitutes 'double recovery' of the same heads of cost.

2.This is unreasonable conduct under CPR 27.14(2)(g).

2.1. re POFA:

Pursuant to Sch4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 ('POFA') the claim exceeds the maximum sum and is unrecoverable: see Explanatory Note 221: 'The creditor may not make a claim against the keeper ... for more than the amount of the unpaid parking related charges as they stood when the notice to the driver was issued (para 4(5))'.

2.2.  There is no keeper liability for added 'fees/costs' (except fixed court fees) and the POFA specifically states that 'double recovery' is not allowed at 4(6):

"Nothing in this paragraph affects any other remedy the creditor may have against the keeper of the vehicle or any other person in respect of any unpaid parking charges (but this is not to be read as permitting double recovery).

3. re Beavis:

The binding Supreme Court judgment in Beavis held that an £85 parking charge more than covered 'all the costs' which (at the initial Cambridge 'test case' hearing) HHJ Moloney had specifically listed (at para 2.6) as the letter-chain of demands which followed a £2.50 DVLA look-up, culminating in a LBC. All covered by the PCN itself, see also 3.4:

"Parking Eye's sole or main income stream is derived from the sums it receives from over-stayers: £50 if paid within 14 days; £85 if paid thereafter (less of course its operating costs including the costs of enforcement)."

3.1. The full HHJ Moloney Beavis case transcript is available below, sourced from a link in a publicly available 2015 official Supreme Court blog about Beavis:

https://www.parkingcowboys.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Judgment_1905-OCRD_2.pdf

3.2. The court should also note that HHJ Moloney referenced and relied upon the binding judgment in ParkingEye v Somerfield Stores ChD [2011] EWHC 4023(QB) where HHJ Hegarty held in paras 419-428 that 'costs' inflating a £75 PC (already increased from £37.50) to £135 were disproportionate to the very minor cost of a letter-chain and 'would appear to be penal' (his judgment was later ratified by the Court of Appeal).

4. The same heads of cost cannot lawfully be counted twice. Exaggerated claims for impermissible sums are good reason for judges to intervene.

Name

Date

fyonn

The court is St Helens. I did wonder if there's a chance that the other side won't show up? I imagine NCP isn't paying the solicitors anymore or is that an unlikely situation?

regarding notice, I did miss notice from the solicitors but I'm still confident that I got no notice from the court system itself, that feels like a gap.

In terms of the HHJ Moloney, I assume you mean putting together the info for my case, rather than submitting something now? the amount of the CCJ is certainly a lot more than the £85-£100 range.

you know.. I'm looking at the paperwork I have for this and I don't have a letter before claim I don't think.. I've got some letters from NCP, two letters from trace debt recovery and two letters from moorside legal, but the first from moorside is telling me I've got a CCJ and the second is telling me that they could send the baliffs after me.. I can't see any paperwork that says letter before claim. is that relevant?

I'm pulling together my notes for the court appearance now.

Coupon-mad

"The court is St Helens".

That is your local court?

"I did wonder if there's a chance that the other side won't show up?"

They will not show up to your application hearing, so you will 'have the floor'.

"I imagine NCP isn't paying the solicitors anymore or is that an unlikely situation?"

Nobody pays them. It's a 'no win no fee' champertous arrangement, funded by the legal firms for a share of the gains.

"In terms of the HHJ Moloney, I assume you mean putting together the info for my case, rather than submitting something now?"

No, I told you to submit what I wrote. NOW.