CNBC losing the plot

doubledotcom

Here's a good one... a friend who I'm advising on for a PCN that has gone past DCB Legal LoC stage, has received in the post from HMCTS (CNBC) a letter containing a single page of A4. On one side is the standard HMCTS cover letter that accompanies the N1SDT Claim Form and response pack, you know...

Important documents enclosed.

We are contacting you because someone claims you owe them money, and a money claim has been made against you.

The claim is attached to this letter.

What you need to do:

You must respond to the claim before the response date on the enclosed form.

If you do not do this the claimant could request a County Court Judgment (CCJ) against you.

On the back of this letter is a copy of the N30 Judgment for Claimant (in default) form! Nothing else in the envelope but a single A4, double sided page with the above.

You couldn't make this up! It would be hilarious if it didn't mean that the defendant now has to start complaining to the CNBC to get the CCJ set aside and remove the judgment from the public Register of Judgments, Orders and Fines.

Hoping to get the CNBC to do this using there administrative powers without requiring the defendant to make an N244 application and all the work involved with that. Will be expecting compensation for the stress this has caused the defendant.

Coupon-mad

Yes we've seen this before. No idea why they print CCJ default letters on the back of the usual claim cover letter.

doubledotcom

Considering no N1SDT Claim Form has been received, it is an interesting use of resources. Maybe there are some work (in)experience bods being let loose on the backlog!

Coupon-mad

It does make you wonder what even happens to these missing claim forms.

On what date did they supposedly post the claim form? I'm wondering if there is a common CNBC issue here with one day's post:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6613107/judgement-for-claimant/p1

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81503487/#Comment_81503487

doubledotcom

I have just been notified of two other identical CCJs issued without a claim pack being issued, both also printed on the back of the claim form cover letter.

This is indicative of a systemic failure within the CNBC, again! As usual, all calls and emailed complaints to the CNCB are being brushed off with the usual "file and N244 seta side application".

A set aside application at a cost of £313 is useless in these cases because the claimant has not erred and the court cannot order a party that is not part of the claim to pay the costs. These have to be seat aside by the CNBC using their administrative powers.

I am already at stage 2 of the formal complaints procedure with HMCTS about this and I have notified them of the two other, identical, CCJs also. I suspect there is a whole batch of these doing the rounds and I worry that many recipients will be at a loss about how they should deal with this.

I am collecting evidence from anyone else who has had this happen to them over the last week or so. Feel free to PM me if you want to join the group formal complaint to the CNBC/HMCTS a the more evidence we can show, the less chance they will try to sweep this under the carpet.

So far, the CCJs were made on 5th, 12th and 17th June. All are DCB Legal issued claims but for different claimants.

Coupon-mad

Importantly:

Are all the Claim 'issued' dates 20th May? That was the date of one of the linked threads.

doubledotcom

No. They are all different dates. With one of them though, I have since discovered that the defendant did indeed receive a claim pack and did submit a defence, receiving the auto-response email, so I'll deal with that separately.

However, it still raises the concern that the CNBC are sending out default CCJ orders printed on the back of claim response pack cover letters. These are unrelated documents and should never be combined.

Castle

doubledotcom said:

No. They are all different dates. With one of them though, I have since discovered that the defendant did indeed receive a claim pack and did submit a defence, receiving the auto-response email, so I'll deal with that separately.

However, it still raises the concern that the CNBC are sending out default CCJ orders printed on the back of claim response pack cover letters. These are unrelated documents and should never be combined.

Do the letters have dates on them?

doubledotcom

The Claim Response pack covering letters do not have dates on them. However, they are individuals addressed to the recipient, so it isn't a matter of someone at the CNCB trying to be resourceful and re-using previous printed matter.

Coupon-mad

Mass complaints to HMCTS?

Fruitcake

Each motorist should also complain to their MP about this.