3rd N244 submission for CCJ set-aside request - help appreciated!

penguin83

This may be why the judge has been unwilling to set the judgment aside - they will look for whether you have a good prospect of successfully defending the claim.

I agree with Rog and see if you can speak to someone at the CAB - they may think you will be better trying to vary the existing judgment to pay by instalments. x x x

silvercar

Have you still got the money? If it is this dormant account, why can't you just pay it back? I understand that you were not expecting the money and didn't notice that it had been paid for months, so a CCJ against you would be unfair. If you knew you weren't entitled to the money and you didn't notice its presence why can't you return it now?

kalifire

silvercar wrote: »

Have you still got the money? If it is this dormant account, why can't you just pay it back? I understand that you were not expecting the money and didn't notice that it had been paid for months, so a CCJ against you would be unfair. If you knew you weren't entitled to the money and you didn't notice its presence why can't you return it now?

Because I have spent it! I did so believing it to be mine. Having sought advise on the CAG forums, I've adjusted point number four on my particulars to read as follows:

"4. Had I been aware of any pending court action, I would have disputed the legitimacy of this 'debt'. In Lipkin Gorman (a firm) -v- Karpnale Limited [1991] 2 AC 548 ('Lipkin Gorman')[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif], [/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]'change of position' was held to be a defence to a [/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]restitutionary claim for repayment of money paid under a mistake of fact to the extent that it would be an injustice if the payee were called upon to repay or to repay in full. My defence would be to establish non-liability under estoppel by change of position."

I only just understand this, but it basically calls on a precedent of law upheld by the House of Lords that a restitutionary claim for repayment of money paid in error was unjustified.

Can someone who knows about such things give me any pointers? Thanks.
[/FONT]

rog2

kalifire wrote: »

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]I only just understand this, but it basically calls on a precedent of law upheld by the House of Lords that a restitutionary claim for repayment of money paid in error was unjustified. [/FONT]

I'm afraid I'm not qualified to comment on that, kf. All I can say is that there have been several cases of 'overpayment' posted on this board, and in the overwhelming majority of those cases, where it has gone to court, the courts have ordered the defendants to repay the overpayments, but have, usually, bent over backwards to allow repayment by instalments that the defendant could afford, in order to minimise any personal hardship.
I appreciate that your circumstances may be different, having been totally unaware of the initial attempts to collect the money and the resultant County Court case and CCJ. My best advice, as I have said before, is that you go to seek specific legal advice - your local CAB should have a list of local solicitors, many of whom will give a free initial consultation.