Jump to content


CEL B2B ANPR PCN Claimform - defended but court errored - going for set aside - Greyfriars Car Park Priory Road Bedford MK40 1BY 


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 245 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Thank you!  I'm struggling with the technology side.  The illegible scans- actually are more clear than the originals! 

The background is, the claimants put the wrong address on the correspondences, so the paperwork initially went to the wrong address, which just happened to be a vacant unit at the time,

 *months* later, when the agent visited, he scanned in the documents to email them to us... which makes these scans,

scans of scans of documents that had been sitting on an oily floor for months! 

I intended to rewrite the content of the first letter (which I can read with difficulty) but first, I was doing battle with the tech system, which I'm renaming the lawnmower man!  

Link to post
Share on other sites

get the originals then.

they are not attending so you'll get the set aside 100%

dont agree to the £135 as the RK is not responsible , sadly you wont get your £275 back if it doesnt goto a hearing, you can ask but i bet the judge refuses. do it on the day, not mention it before hand.

that n244 statement is a bit jumbled up and unclear, whomever wrote it wants shooting, lots of unnecessary crap in there that did not need that much explaining.

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, the N244 isn't a disaster but it could easily have been so much better and I'm bemused as to why you didn't come here earlier. 

I'm at work now but will have a careful read through everything later and be back on the forum this evening. 

  • Like 1

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, it's there in black & white that you told the fleecers the identity of the driver on 24 November 2022 but they ignored you and sued the wrong person.

The judge will need to be convinced of two things.

1.  Why you didn't defend when you had the chance.

2.  That you have a reasonable chance of defending the claim during a full hearing.

Your chances of winning were already high, but the fleecers' non-attendance just about guarantees it, as dx says.

A set aside hearing normally takes about 15 minutes, so just be very brief and to the point.  No waffle.

Tell the judge that you would like to briefly explain (1) how the default judgement came about, and (2) also to explain that you have a good defence.  (1) Explain briefly about the defence mess-up.  (2) Then say you were not the driver, you have cooperated with the claimant and supplied details of the driver, but the claimant insists on suing the wrong person.

Assuming that goes well, ask for your £275 costs against CEL because of their unreasonable conduct in deliberately suing the wrong person.  This should have been in your WS, but, oh well.  The judge is highly unlikely to agree, but nothing ventured ...

  • Like 1

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, the judge has allocated 45 minutes (should I be worried?)  We didn't initially get the paperwork because the claimant put the wrong address - it went to a vacant building.  Also, the claimants have listed this against (directors name) (business name) as if they are one entity, so... I was thinking of asking that the case gets struck because... who are they suing?? 

That'd be me that wrote that, trying to limit the words but get all.points in.... (so consider me shot!)   What questions need answering? 

Regarding the fee, the Court have said that if they agree, either

1) that the first statement submitted should have been accepted as its a firm not an individual... the firm is named on the claim...  or

2) that the resubmitted statement was submitted *before* the claimants applied for Judgement but processing was delayed by court backlog... which it seems it was, or

3) that the CCJ should not have been issued in the same day as the statement was accepted, so admin error by the Court

Then we get the £275 back.   I think we satisfy all three of these criteria.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

the allocated time means NOTHING. dont forget NO-ONE inc the judge has read ANYTHING until moments before they enter.

you'll be out there in <10mins smiling with every chance you'll get £275 back if the wind is blowing you way.

 

  • Thanks 1

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

dx is spot on so keep your arguments as succinct as possible as explained three posts above.

The judge's "default" position will be to grant the set aside but to deny the £275.

Your argument to get the £275 back makes sense but it's a real pity it's not included in the WS in a little section with COSTS as the title for clarity for the judge (rather than all the waffle that is included instead).

Indeed it's a pity you didn't come here from the start as you would never be at this stage, you would have defended on-line with MCOL like everyone else in every other PPC thread, and there would have been no question of rejected defence or CCJ.  Please learn from this for the future.

So - fingers crossed - when the judge grants set aside immediately pop up and say you ask for costs as the court made a mistake.  If the judge rejects your explanation say you request costs from the fleecers as they deliberately sued the wrong person.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...