MCOL Judgement by default against EON Homecare **SUCCESSFUL OUTCOME **

[RensterUK]

Hi All,

 

I recently put in a claim against EON Homecare for a few hundred quid, and when they didnt respond, requested a judgement by default, which was granted. The nice folks at Northampton CC have even sent me a copy of the judgement sent to EON, ordering them to pay the amount claimed, plus the £35 charge for filing the claim.

 

That was a couple of weeks ago - and not overly surprisingly, EON havent rushed to pay what the court have said they now owe me. My understanding is that my next step is Warrant of Enforcement - which through MCOL would cost £100 (which is added to what EON must pay). However, reading around I've read comments that county court bailiffs are fairly powerless - if EON refuse entry to their premises, the bailiff can do nothing. I've also read about some sort of delay that they can request? Also, some sort of option they have about claiming they never received any of the paperwork the court sent out (only sent 1st class, not recorded or anything as far as I know).

 

I can see me paying the £100 for the Warrant of Enforcement, and still not seeing any money.

 

Can anyone clarify my understanding for me - what my options are, what EON's options are .... and advise of the best way forward etc?

 

Many thanks

 

Steve

[ploddertom]

What is the Judgment figure?

 

PT

[RensterUK]

I claimed £500, which was awarded, together with the £35 fee for the claim through MCOL - £535 in total....

[ploddertom]

Shame it wasn't for another £66. There are still several options open to you some of which are more designed to cause the Debtor embarrassment or make it awkward for them to keep trading. You may however have to transfer the Judgment to a Court near home in which case you lose all rights to enforce online - not a bad thing in my opinion.

 

You have mentioned the WoE and it is true this can have a varying success as the Court Bailiff has no real desire to enforce if he gets told a plausible story. Whatever happens the Debtor could in any case apply for Set Aside, Variation Order or Suspension of the Warrant - all pending another action. However the £100 fee then takes you over the £600 barrier when you can then use a High Court Enforcement Officer. Have you read leaflet EX321 http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/courtfinder/forms/ex321_e.pdf and in turn EX324 & EX325 for information on further action you may take.

 

PT

[RensterUK]

Many thanks for that PT. Sounds like issuing the WoE is the next step, with the full expectation it'll achieve nothing other than pushing us beyond the £600 mark

 

One other q - can EON claim to have not received either the initial claim, and / or the judgement by default? If so, does this have any bearing on the judgement, and my options?

 

Thanks again

 

[ploddertom]

One other q - can EON claim to have not received either the initial claim, and / or the judgement by default? If so, does this have any bearing on the judgement, and my options? Yes they can, remember everything sent out by the Court is sent by ordinary post and to the address you have provided. However a lot of big companies get caught in this way because really they do not know how to deal with it, then they cough in full and guess who picks up the bill - Joe Public in higher charges. Does this mean we can blame you for all our leccy going up - - only joking honest.

Thanks again

 

 

PT

[Gbarbm]

Renster - they can't say that they didn't get the correspondence because the post office have a returned letter service... Meaning if they can't deliver it they put a sticker on it giving reason for non delivery...if this hasn't happened then they are deemed to have received it so raspberries to them! ;-)

[RensterUK]

Gbarbm - interesting point, and certainly a good argument in my favour there... The only thing I'd say to counter it is that on a couple of occasions we've received "official" post for someone else, at a different address (quite what the postie was thinking I'm not sure!).... and tbh we've never been organised to use the "return to sender" thing... So it's *possible* someone else received both of EON's letters from the courts... but I think that's stretching the definition of "believable"

 

PT - many thanks for that, and my apologies for your escalating bills all I hope is that the unhelpful, unconstructive, petty minded idiots that I was dealing with at EON are among those that are being made redundant... and with the saving on wages there, your bills may come back down. And if you believe that.... ;-)

 

One last q folks if I may - the helpful lady I recently spoke to on the phone at Northampton CC said that it *may* prove helpful to phone EON, and get their take on the judgement. What do people here think? A good idea, or keep all communication via the courts now?

 

Cheers

[wonkeydonkey]

If they apply for set aside on the grounds of not receiving the claim pack or the Judgment in Default that is all they can do, the Court will most likely make a decision on the "probabilities" that they would have received one or the other and dismiss the application for set aside. If you get a Judge who does grant set aside on the "possibility" they never received either then your claim can then be moved to an immediate hearing following that decision, this is when tEON can offer a defence, if the Court do not accept that defence in whole or in part they will simply reinstate your CCJ.

 

WD

[sequenci]

How about applying for a Third Party Debt Order? That would REALLY embarass them!

[ploddertom]

How about applying for a Third Party Debt Order? That would REALLY embarass them!

 

Really do like this one

 

PT

[RensterUK]

Hi All,

 

Just a quick update....

 

I requested a warrant of execution, a few weeks ago. We just got back from holiday, to find the case has been transferred to my local court, after EON requested set aside (Im guessing this wont surprise many of you, based on my description of events so far!).

 

So as I understand it, from previous comments and reading around, either:

 

1, The court will decide EON *would* have received either my initial claim, or the judgment by default, and decline EONs request, at which point the full amount (now 635) will become payable

 

or

 

2, The court will approve EON's request, and at that point both EON and myself will meet in court, and they'll have a chance to present their defence, I'll have a chance to put my case forward again, and the judgment will be made accordingly

 

Can anyone confirm / correct my understanding above.... and give views as to the likely course ahead. Based on gbarbm'#s reply above, it seems most likely to me that the court may well deny EONs request?

 

Cheers

[wonkeydonkey]

Any reply would IMO just be speculation of what will come, I would imagine the court will "hear" what EON have to say and make a decision accordingly.

What is really good news is you have the magic figure of £635 so the next step will be the HCE to give them a taste of their own medicine.

 

Make sure it gets to the media if you are successful as it will make a good story, being as it is the rest of us that are being dragged through the Coursts for these utility companies to add thousands of pounds to "default debtors" accounts while they are struggling to meet the huge increases in fuel costs.

 

WD

[brassnecked]

Any reply would IMO just be speculation of what will come, I would imagine the court will "hear" what EON have to say and make a decision accordingly.

What is really good news is you have the magic figure of £635 so the next step will be the HCE to give them a taste of their own medicine.

 

Make sure it gets to the media if you are successful as it will make a good story, being as it is the rest of us that are being dragged through the Coursts for these utility companies to add thousands of pounds to "default debtors" accounts while they are struggling to meet the huge increases in fuel costs.

 

WD

 

 

that's a ditto from me also, as these greedy companies will run to the court and the likes of Sherfarce as a first option, no matter what they say . I think there will be a few pensioners with Sherfarce or another HCEO at the door come April if we have a cold winter.

[RensterUK]

Hi all,

 

Latest update... After a couple of calls to my local court after the case was transferred, it seems EON had been ignoring a court letter requesting a reason for their request for set aside. The court agreed that was long enough, and the lady I spoke to was going to speak to a judge for a way forward.

 

Then, much to my surprise, we've just got back from a long weekend away to find a notice of hearing, stating that the defendant's application to set aside judgement will take place early next year - Oddly, the letter lists me as the defendent, and EON as the claimant - I'll call the court tomorrow to check this!!).

 

It also says I should attend, and that 15 mins has been allowed for the hearing.

 

At this point should I just "go alone" - or should I now be getting a solicitor on board? What would be the implication of adding such costs to my claim?

 

Thanks again for your ongoing support and advice!

[wonkeydonkey]

No need for a solicitor, you will hardly have time to sit down before the hearing is concluded. Have you had a copy of Eon's defence/ set aside claim? you are entitled to this.

 

WD

[RensterUK]

Hi WonkeyDonkey,

 

So here's the latest!

 

Today I received a notice of EON's application for set aside - based on them believing they have a "real prospect of successfully defending the claim" (CPR 13.3(1)(a)) - a rather predictable reason I guess!. They've assigned an in house trainee solicitor to the case - and this trainee's statement says that they dont believe the money I'm claiming is owed (no surprise) - but the ultimate basis for requesting set aside is that "they have not had the opportunity to defend the claim".

 

Now a few facts and dates:

 

1. MCOL claim issued 17 Aug

2. Judgment in default issued 8 Sep

3. EON's trainee solicitor made aware of claim, and requested account notes 27 Sep

4. EON's trainee solicitor reviewed these notes 30 Sep

5. Date of application and statement 7 Oct - received by me today, 13 Dec.

6. Notice of transfer received around 14 Oct, dated 12 Oct.

6. contact made by me with local court on 2 occasions (dates TBC, but late oct and early nov, or both in Nov) - if nothing else, as per my last post, I contacted my local court 21/11, at which time there was no record of any such statement from EON - despite, as I understand it, the local court requesting said statement from EON.

 

It seems to me that EON seemingly sitting on the original claim for almost 6 weeks before giving it to a trainee solicitor is reason enough for set aside to be denied. Failing that, how on earth do I have a statement from this trainee dated 7 Oct, yet when I spoke to my local court on 21 Nov they had heard nothing from EON?! Following your post on 21st, I contacted the court a couple of days later to ask about this - and was told I should have already received it, and it would be sent again (which I guess explains why I'm receiving it now... But I still don't understand why the court had heard nothing from EON by the 21st Nov.... The only thing I can assume in EON's defence is that at some stage of the case being transferred from Northampton court (MCOL) to my local court their paperwork got "misplaced" - this theory is backed up by the proximity of dates of their application, and the case being transferred - plus their application is headed "Northampton court" - but this has been crossed out and my local court name written instead... Nonetheless that doesn't excuse the 6 weeks of doing nothing about my initial claim however!

 

EON have requested a telephone hearing (can't be bothered to come to court in person it seems). Yet the ntoice of hearing gives my local county court address as the venue - no detail of any telephone number etc. Guessing this means request for the hearing to be held on the phone has been refused! Will phone the court to check tomorrow....

 

Any interpretation of the above, welcomed and appreciated!

 

Cheers again,

[ploddertom]

Sometimes the Courts will allow a lot of leeway on dates when submissions have to be made, others can be strict - it is a bit of a lottery. You may have to be able to substantiate the costs you are claiming rather than think of a figure and double it.

[wonkeydonkey]

Hi

 

Could you just tell a little more..

 

What was it that made you claim against eon? did you have dialogue with them prior to making the claim? did they dispute the claim prior to the hearing?

 

I am trying to buid a picture of the dispute and the way it unfurled to see if they do have a claim to set aside?

 

WD

[RensterUK]

WD & PlodderTom...

 

EON (our then Gas/Electricity supplier) cold called one evening in Feb, offering this service. Even tho it was working fine, having not had our CH system serviced in the almost-6 years of owning the house (new build, so it was also almost-6 years since the system had been installed), it seemd a good idea, so I agreed.

 

As part of the contract, they sent an engineer in early March for an initial inspection - to check that they weren't taking on pre-existing problems, and that all was well with our system. Just 2-3 days after this visit, we spotted a damp patch in our lounge ceiling - so called out one of their engineers out. He looked at the boiler, saw nothing wrong and suggested leaving it to see if it gets worse. It did. Another engineer came out. Exactly the same action and advice. This time, the ceiling partly collapsed. A third repair engineer comes out, and immediately identifies that a pipe at the front of the boiler was disconnected. He reconnected it, and sealed the connection.

 

We complained to EON. They sent out a Manager, who looked at the damage, listened to the sequence of events, and accepted liability, asking us to get repair quotes. Just a few days after that, EON wrote to us, retracting their managers decision, on the basis that the pipe had not been installed correctly (it should have been sealed from day one according to them). I dont know if this is true - but ultimately, the system had worked without problem for 6 years, until their inspection engineer's visit. I'm not suggesting for a moment it was maliciously tampered with - but a moment of clumsiness from their inspection engineer seemingly caused the disconnection. Alternatively, if their argument is that it was always disconnected, why didn't he spot it, and why did it take 6 years to leak?! Plus of course, given the pipe's location (right at the front of the boiler) why did 2 of their repair engineers fail to spot it? Ie, it seems to me had I not taken out the contract with EON, this damage would almost certainly not have occurred.

 

Following their retraction, I wrote twice, outlining the above facts, inviting them to reconsider. They declined. Indeed, in our final letter, I warned them of legal action, and they responded giving details of their legal department... Hence the MCOL route taken.

 

As for how I came to the figure claimed - it now sits at 635. That's 135 legal costs, an estimated (based on quotes) 200-250 for repairs, with the remainder being compensation for stress caused etc, spending almost a year with a hole in our ceiling, and to recover money wasted on this service (10 months at 16/mth) - which includes an annual inspection... but I'm sure you won't be surprised to learn I have no intention of letting any EON engineer near our system again.... I don't feel I'm being greedy - I just want my costs covered, wasted money reimbursed, and a token amount of compensation.

 

Thoughts?

 

Cheers

[wonkeydonkey]

Based on what you have posted above I would be inclined to let them go for set aside....if (which I doubt) they are successful on the grounds of not being aware of your action, it does not end there. You can ask at the set aside for the DJ to immediately move to re-hear the case on the evidence previously submitted, this is quite common practise and it is viewed to save the Court time at a later date, should the DJ be of the opinion there is not time on the day, you ask a date be set to hear the case.

Even though they failed to attend the original hearing the evidence to the case will have been taken into consideration prior to making the Judgment so Eon will know they have a fight on their hands and set aside is merely a delay tactic in the hope of getting a chance to settle outside the Courtroom. You of course will be adding considerably more to any bill of settlement to compensate for having to attend a further hearing and don't forget interest @ 8% from the date of the previous Judgment.

 

WD

[wonkeydonkey]

duplicate post.........gremlins.....sorry

[RensterUK]

LOL No problem!

 

Spoke to my local court - and as I suspected, despite EON's application for a phone hearing, it is indeed "in person" in my local County Court....

 

... but that's not til January - so for now I'll wish you all a Merry Christmas, and a Happy New Year!

[RensterUK]

Afternoon all!

 

So I went to the hearing, and to my surprise (and I'll admit, disappointment!) EON's solicitor was there.

 

Worse still - they got the set aside. The reason? The wrong company name on the original claim - I had sent it to "EON Homecare" at the address EON advised me to use, and it should technically have been "EON PS UK Ltd", even though they are effectively one and the same company. So a technicality really. So now the court are updating the case notes etc, and EON have 14 days to submit their defence. I believe the court will also be sending out allocation questionaires?

 

So for future notes for anyone reading this thread going down the same route - make sure you have the correct (exact!) company name, not subsidiary etc, aswell as the correct address!

 

Cheers, and Happy New Year!

[king100]

I still bet that if you had used the address that they are now asking you to use it would have been wrong and they would have pulled out another. Just more bull**** from big corporations again. Gl in your case and please keep us updated.