Judgment in default (again)

IronWolf

Gr1pr said:

Use the claimresponses email address seen in the defence template thread,  first post 

Mention that you cannot find the auto response email after all time and not received further paperwork,  but do add the date it was sent 

The N180 should have been a completed pdf document,  not scans or pictures 

She should have been checking her MCOL claim history,  regardless of not knowing anything about auto response emails and sorting this out in June and July,  not December 

It was a scanned pdf. The form stated at the end said it had to be signed.

Gr1pr

They are bolshy about scans and pictures,  so possibly it wasn't logged due to it being too big or not the downloaded pdf or similar,  we have seen these problems over a dozen times already with scans and pictures 

Sending anything is not proof of receipt 

The correct method is

Download the official N180 DQ pdf document and fill it in,  TYPE the defendants name into the signature box, if necessary add an e signature to it by signing a white piece of paper in black ink and attaching a picture or scan of it to the DQ document before saving,  although typing the name should be sufficient 

Attach it to the email with reference number and send it to the DQ email address 

No scans,  no DIY workarounds,  no pictures,  no posting,  no royal mail,  just what I said earlier , the official N180 DQ pdf document only

IronWolf

I see. That should be added to the template defence thread instructions as it isn't clear.

The version I sent was a scan so it's too late to change it now as the deadline has long gone. It wasn't a huge file so hopefully it's fine.

I sent the email and they said I have to wait for a reply on it. I have until 2 Jan to pay the CCJ without it affecting my credit record so hopefully they will respond within that time, but being Christmas I don't know.

This whole court process is so stressful I don't know if it's even worth it tbh but it's too late now. Next time I get a PCN I'll probably just pay the £20 or whatever right away.

Gr1pr

There were dozens of these around June, see below 

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81510526#Comment_81510526

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81490078#Comment_81490078?utm_source=community-search&utm_medium=organic-search&utm_term=phoned+the+cnbc

Read the comment by defender001 , But we still see them even now

Coupon-mad

IronWolf said:

Car1980 said:

Sounds like they never received your Directions Questionnaire, which is all too common.

Although I couldn't say whether your defence was struck out because of no DQ or something else, but seems likely because there is only one Order.

Did you email the DQ and do you have proof of this?

Yes my wife emailed it and has the sent email and automated reply. I'll try calling them to find out what happened but have no faith they will resolve it even if it's them that have screwed up.

Oh no, they'll sort it. We see this a lot.

I have until 2 Jan to pay the CCJ without it affecting my credit record so hopefully they will respond within that time,

No. That is irrelevant. They have a Xmas break and won't be able to sort it that quickly. It will be later in January so:

DO NOT PAY IT. You take the temporary blip which won't affect you, as it is so very temporary ... then it will be wiped.

To speed up the complaint send one (proving the email was sent, even if you can't prove the auto receipt any more) to the CNBC and one to HMCTS complaints.

That second one puts a bomb under CNBC.

(The Defendant sends them, not you, but she does that TODAY).

IronWolf

I'll get my wife to submit the complaint, but not sure we want to risk not paying the CCJ if it gets to 2 Jan. The small claims process is terrible, and I've had default judgments against me in the past where I didn't even know I'd been sued and yet neither the CNBC nor HMCTS were willing to do anything about it or admit they'd done anything wrong. They are both a joke and want to fob people off as quickly as possible without giving a fk about fairness.

From a bit of search online, it's possible to get the court to order money be returned when the judgment is set aside, so I will have to do that if they eventually do agree to set it aside.

ChirpyChicken

IronWolf said:

I'll get my wife to submit the complaint, but not sure we want to risk not paying the CCJ if it gets to 2 Jan. The small claims process is terrible, and I've had default judgments against me in the past where I didn't even know I'd been sued and yet neither the CNBC nor HMCTS were willing to do anything about it or admit they'd done anything wrong. They are both a joke and want to fob people off as quickly as possible without giving a fk about fairness.

From a bit of search online, it's possible to get the court to order money be returned when the judgment is set aside, so I will have to do that if they eventually do agree to set it aside.

it will not be an issue as you have evidence of submitting the defence
100% do NOT pay

doubledotcom

If you want evidence of having sent it and it was accepted by their SMTP, system you only need to look at the sent email header metadata. Somewhere in there (you can copy and paste it here, just redact your own email address as "XXX@XXX.XXX", and I can tell you whether it was accepted and therefore served.

The email headers are the forensic trail:

• Each SMTP hop adds a Received: line.
• The bottom-most Received: header (closest to the recipient domain) is the one that matters.
• If you see something like:

Received: from yourmailserver.example.com
    by mx.justice.gov.uk with ESMTPS id ABC123
    for <dq.cnbc@justice.gov.uk>;

That is evidence the justice.gov.uk mail server accepted the message.

Service is effective because the MoJ has formally designated dq.cnbc@justice.gov.uk as an address for service by email. Under the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR 6.20 & PD 6A), once a party has agreed or designated that service may be effected by email, service is complete when the email is transmitted to that address and accepted by the recipient’s mail server.

The SMTP protocol requires the recipient’s server to return “250 OK” before adding its own “Received:” header. That header shows the justice.gov.uk mail exchanger took responsibility for delivery. At that point the sender has discharged their duty. Because the MoJ accept service by email, the presence of the recipient’s “Received:” header in the message is sufficient proof that the claim form and attachment were served.

Whether they then filtered it to spam, quarantined it, or failed internally is irrelevant to the fact of service.

Coupon-mad

IronWolf said:

I'll get my wife to submit the complaint, but not sure we want to risk not paying the CCJ if it gets to 2 Jan. 

You have to be brave if you have evidence that the DQ was sent.

DO NOT PAY IT.

This is why she MUST email HMCTS as well because they act quicker!

Your wife has already lost a good few days by not doing this immediately last week.

ChirpyChicken

Coupon-mad said:

IronWolf said:

I'll get my wife to submit the complaint, but not sure we want to risk not paying the CCJ if it gets to 2 Jan. 

You have to be brave if you have evidence that the DQ was sent.

DO NOT PAY IT.

This is why she MUST email HMCTS as well because they act quicker!

Your wife has already lost a good few days by not doing this immediately last week.

As above
Why has she not acted immediately?