Can the defendant set-aside my CCJs against them, if they settle my claims relating to the CCJs?

[BankFodder]

If you brought three separate claims all based on the same set of facts than two of them would be abusive and you would not be able to claim costs from the other side. In fact they might be able to claim wasted costs from you.

It might be an idea to start laying out exactly what has happened

[BankFodder]

Firstly, it seems to me that the three claims you have made are not based on the same facts all but the same cause of action which means that they are each for a statutory breach of the data protection act but because it appears that the breach is continuing, you are perfectly entitled to continue bringing actions for their continuing breach.

You haven't told us how much you claimed in each case.

I don't understand why having succeeded on your first claim you now appear to be getting cold feet in respect of the subsequent two claims and are considering simply accepting a settlement of your costs without actually getting the damages which you are seeking.

In my view they are quite wrong that the claims are founded on the same underlying facts. A continuing breach is in effect a recurring breach. If you obtained a judgement in respect of their breach of statutory duty at a certain date and then they continued to breach their statutory duty then that is a separate matter.

Why don't you post up a copy of the second claim form that you filed. If the other two claim forms are particularly different then you should let us see those as well. In their proper order and in PDF format

What is the name of the company?

[BankFodder]

First of all I don't understand the document which you have posted.

You refer to first claim and then to second  claim and then to third claim. Is this all in the same document?

 

I'm not sure why you think that you might be liable to thousands of pounds costs.

Have they actually begun set aside applications or is this simply something that they have threatened?

 

 

 

[BankFodder]

Have they actually provided you with the data that you have requested?

 

I noticed that you haven't identified the company. Are you trying to protect them?

[BankFodder]

Well presumably you obtained the judgements because they failed to respond.

In that case they are responsible and although they might be able to obtain a set aside, it is unlikely that they could recover costs because is they who acted in a dilatory way.

 

Not once, not twice but three times.

 

If they haven't provided you with the data then it seems to be unlikely that they could obtain a set aside.

 

If you want to make them an offer then you could tell them that if they will settle all your costs and provide you with the data that you require you are then prepared to allow them to set aside the judgements but if they will not agree to this then if they make an application for setaside that you will defend and you will explain to the judge that they continue to be in breach of their statutory duty.

 

You can tell them also but that as long as they fail to provide you with your personal data as required by law that you are likely to bring further actions.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[BankFodder]

If there has been a settlement then the defendant will not be able to have the judgement set aside.

 

We have already explained that even though  the claims are based on one single subject access request, it is a continuing breach of duty and as you have already pointed out each claim relates to a different time period.

 

The basis for a set of side are either that the papers were not served on the defendant and that in any event if the defendant were allowed to defend they would have a reasonable prospect of success.

If they have not complied with your sar then they have no prospect of success and so therefore it would be quite astonishing if they could set aside the second and third judgements.

 

Frankly if you have the judgements then I would set about enforcing them immediately.

 

I would would go on to send them a further letter of claim and now that they have sat up and taken notice, then it is highly likely that they will let you have the data you are seeking.

 

 

 

 

[BankFodder]

First of all, your proposed draft doesn't address the issue of the set-aside. On the basis of the agreement you are proposing, the judgements remain in place. From my point of view that is a better result but it is quite likely that the other side won't accept this because they don't want the judgements against them.

The first judgement is a done deal. They have settled it and frankly it's not in the equation any more. There is no chance that they could get that set aside.

So that you should only deal with the two outstanding claims – both of which have now moved to judgement because they didn't respond.

Because they have lost in all of those claims, they owe you the money anyway. There is no need to make any further correspondence other than to say that they have judgements against them and you want your money.

If they want to apply for a set-aside and that is up to them.

If you want you can simply say to them that in respect of the two judgements which so far they have failed to settle, you may be prepared to agree to a set-aside of those judgements if they will undertake to reimburse you the costs of those to court actions.

However, there is still the question of the outstanding data. Do you want the data or not? You really haven't told us anything about that