Can't see that the mandatory grounds in Part 13 apply for pure failure of service only, in which case the discretionary grounds apply (but there won't be any difficulty persuading the court to set it aside). The better route is to persuade the creditor to consent to it being set aside and filing a Consent Order at court - will be quicker than making an application.

If the OP reads CPR Part 6, on service, and concludes that the pleadings were not served (as opposed to just not received) then she can apply for the judgment to be set aside on mandatory grounds and need not prove a real prospect of successfully defending the claim or some other good reason; non-service is sufficient.

Which part of CPR part 6 do I need ? do I need to quote this on the N244 form ? is it risky not to set out the defence just incase the judge doesn't accept that the service argument is not enough and still insists that I need to have a relistic prospect of succeeding ?

Hi All! I know I've asked a load of questions on this thread, but I have absolutely no experience and it looks very likely I am going to lose the job I have been offered

I guess the first thing I need to establish is, am I in a position to submit the N244 at the moment or do I need all of the documents from the original summons ?

The only information I am currently in hold of is that from trust online, which give details of that I have a CCJ against me, the amount, case number, date and the incorrect address. i.e. I have no information regarding the claimant and the details of their claim.

Is this enough for grounds for set aside and to send off the N244? or should I wait till I have all the information and documentation to prevent any costly mistakes?

Can't see that the mandatory grounds in Part 13 apply for pure failure of service only.

see CPR 13.2 and CPR 12.3. Then consider CPR 10.3 and note that the relevant time is from the date of service. Therefore, if, and it is a big if, the claim has not been properly served the relevant time under CPR 12.3 would not yet have begun to run and therefore could not have expired at the time default judgment was entered. As a result, CPR 13.2 applies and the court must set the judgment aside.

To the OP, you're quite right to say it is a risk to rely on just one line of argument. There is no harm in arguing that the judgment should not have been entered and therefore must be set aside but, if this is found to be wrong, nonetheless the judgment should be set aside under the court's discretionary power at CPR 13.3.

t I'm quite peeved by this dirty trick and feel this could set if a dangerous precedent. I.e. A claimant who is fully aware of my address, submits to the court an incorrect address, one I have NEVER lived at, then has a default granted in my abscence. Thus now I have lost the right to defend the claim against me till the set aside is granted and the burden of proof has shifted to me to prove "I have a realistic defence"

I wouldn't waste too much time on this as looking at your OP it seems like you have moved several times without updating your creditors with your new address..

Ganymede, I kept them informed of all addresses until this present one. Although I not sure of the jist of your argument above, even if I had fail to keep them upto date that doesnt allow them to knowingly provide false information to the court?

Anyway I guess your right in terms of raising the above point, further research today shows I'm not the only to be in this position. Just been reading through one thread where a DCA pulled a similar trick, except they used a previous address when they knew the correct address to obtain a judgement by default, and then promptly issued a warrant of execution at the correct address they knew all along!

Fortunatley you guys helped the person out and they eventually won!

I guess I'm still able to use the wrong address as part of my set aside reasons, and let the judge see the obvious trick that has been played here?

Ganymede, can you respond to post 21 for me please, I want to get off first base tommorow

I was just going off what you said in your OP that Aktiv had to track you down twice and that you haven't confirmed to them that you live at your current address so to say they knew of your correct address and intentionally misled the Court is a seriously allegation that isn't supported by your OP.

The Claimant will have probably had to use tracing agents to find you and it is possible that they will argue that you are deliberately evading the debt so have an argument to counter that just in case.

Anyway moving on to more immediately pressing matters, there are plenty of templates knocking around here to set aside for non service, have a look at them, amend and post up for people to comment.

I'm not sure if you said but do you have a copy of the agreement for the loan?

I was just going off what you said in your OP that Aktiv had to track you down twice and that you haven't confirmed to them that you live at your current address so to say they knew of your correct address and intentionally misled the Court is a seriously allegation that isn't supported by your OP.

 

The Claimant will have probably had to use tracing agents to find you and it is possible that they will argue that you are deliberately evading the debt so have an argument to counter that just in case.

 

Anyway moving on to more immediately pressing matters, there are plenty of templates knocking around here to set aside for non service, have a look at them, amend and post up for people to comment.

 

I'm not sure if you said but do you have a copy of the agreement for the loan?

Thanks, Ganymede. Yes best for me to stick to the facts and not resort to allegations. I'm just been going through the initial shock at this tactic. Going through other threads here, I know I need to keep level headed and stick to the facts.

I don't have an agreement for the loan, its actually a credit card and bank account, but have no paperwork.

Looking through my paperwork last night for one of the debts, I found that aktiv had supplied me some cursory details of the account on the annual statements they send me. One of them is the date of the credit agreement, which I'm fairly certain is incorrect by a number of years.

So I am SAR'ing barclays today for both bank account and credit card details today.

Other progress, have phoned up the court and am having the case notes sent to me, Although not the N1 & N24 ? are these critical or is the case notes sufficent ?

Are the courts usually good at sending these things out ? or is it worth following up with a letter just in case ? (Ive had to much experience of people saying they will do things over the phone, not to do it, then say prove it!, am I just being paranoid again ?)

I think you should also lodge a formal complaint with trading standards, as they have clearly gained judgment by using the wrong address.

This has got nothing whatsoever to do with the Trading Standards Institute. Service is a question for the court, focus your time on the court process not in making unnecessary complaints (unless you have time on your hands!)

Ok story so far, sent SAR's today and requested court papers.

got home tonight, to find a letter from akitv kapital threatening court proceedings!

i.e. they are threatenning court action for what have already taken!

but I guess more importantly, I count 300 peices of correspondences from akitiv kapital at my address, 1 months ago they obtain a court order for a different address, now they are writing back to me at the correct address!

Thanks, Ganymede. Yes best for me to stick to the facts and not resort to allegations. I'm just been going through the initial shock at this tactic. Going through other threads here, I know I need to keep level headed and stick to the facts.

 

I don't have an agreement for the loan, its actually a credit card and bank account, but have no paperwork.

 

Looking through my paperwork last night for one of the debts, I found that aktiv had supplied me some cursory details of the account on the annual statements they send me. One of them is the date of the credit agreement, which I'm fairly certain is incorrect by a number of years.

 

So I am SAR'ing barclays today for both bank account and credit card details today.

 

Other progress, have phoned up the court and am having the case notes sent to me, Although not the N1 & N24 ? are these critical or is the case notes sufficent ?

 

Are the courts usually good at sending these things out ? or is it worth following up with a letter just in case ? (Ive had to much experience of people saying they will do things over the phone, not to do it, then say prove it!, am I just being paranoid again ?)

You need the Claim Form too as it will have the PoC on it.

You need the Claim Form too as it will have the PoC on it.

How do I obtain that ? I guess that's the N1 ? checking other threads here, Northampton never give out copies of the N1 form.

Speaking to the woman on the phone today, she reckons the case the notes will give me enough information as the N1 will do for proving who submitted what details.

but as per post above, aktiv are now communicating to me at my correct address.

This has got nothing whatsoever to do with the Trading Standards Institute. Service is a question for the court, focus your time on the court process not in making unnecessary complaints (unless you have time on your hands!)

Actually you are wrong.

The court process is quite straight forward, the claim was issued to the wrong address. Clearly this was done deliberately to gain judgment by default.

An official complaint about a DCA is not a waste of time.

Debbie

The court process is quite straight forward, the claim was issued to the wrong address. Clearly this was done deliberately to gain judgment by default.

None of which has anything to do with TSI! Anyway, clearly we have a difference of opinion so I'll leave it there rather than sidetrack the thread.

Actually you are wrong.

 

The court process is quite straight forward, the claim was issued to the wrong address. Clearly this was done deliberately to gain judgment by default.

 

An official complaint about a DCA is not a waste of time.

 

Debbie

Yes, clearly, that must be 100% the case. There couldn't possibly be another explanation, such as they picked up the (wrong) address from the OP's credit file. After all, the OP has picked up this CCJ on his credit file, a CCJ that was obtained at an address where he has no connection. Obviously this address is in fact connected to his credit file (rightly or wrongly), so it's feasible that that is where Aktiv Capital got the address from.

Yes, clearly, that must be 100% the case. There couldn't possibly be another explanation, such as they picked up the (wrong) address from the OP's credit file. After all, the OP has picked up this CCJ on his credit file, a CCJ that was obtained at an address where he has no connection. Obviously this address is in fact connected to his credit file (rightly or wrongly), so it's feasible that that is where Aktiv Capital got the address from.

As mentioned above aktiv are writing to me again at my correct address, threatening court proceeedings for a debt they already have a CCJ for!

i.e. they are pretending they don't have a CCJ, and secondly how they can write over 300 letters to an address over 3 years, yet the 2/3 that are related to court action are sent to another I have never had connection with, then once the CCJ granted start at writingt at the correct address again ?

In other words, this won't wash regarding the wrong address was an "error"

Yes, clearly, that must be 100% the case. There couldn't possibly be another explanation, such as they picked up the (wrong) address from the OP's credit file. After all, the OP has picked up this CCJ on his credit file, a CCJ that was obtained at an address where he has no connection. Obviously this address is in fact connected to his credit file (rightly or wrongly), so it's feasible that that is where Aktiv Capital got the address from.

That address is not on my credit file as i have never had any connection to it, aktiv have had my correct address for 3 years. that is fairly straight forward issue by checking electoral registers.

This has got nothing whatsoever to do with the Trading Standards Institute. Service is a question for the court, focus your time on the court process not in making unnecessary complaints (unless you have time on your hands!)

Actually thats not correct - the claimant is trading - and is therefore obliged to abide by certain codes of conduct and legislation - and if they have deliberatley made the claim to the wrong address, then that should be complained about.

No complaints are unnecessary if they are genuine.

I would also suggest that if the claimant has deliberatley issued the claim to the wrong address, then you also complain to the Office of Fair Trading.

This thread is getting sidetracked but the OP did say he moved a couple of times and had to be tracked down which implies he was not keeping Aktiv updated and they were forced to trace him. The OP also said he won't confirm with Aktiv that he lives at his current address so something doesn't add up!

Anyway, you won't really need the N1 if you get full details of the claim such as dates of service, PoC etc. The only problem is without the PoC you won't be able to make your CPR request for documents as you don't know what documents are referred to!

This thread is getting sidetracked but the OP did say he moved a couple of times and had to be tracked down which implies he was not keeping Aktiv updated and they were forced to trace him. The OP also said he won't confirm with Aktiv that he lives at his current address so something doesn't add up!

The op states in first post that the claimant had previous dealings with them at their current address - The op also states in various posts - on this page - that they have recieved, and are still receiving, paperwork from the claimant at the corect address. So they had obviously made a trace. The op confirming - or not confirming - their address is not a relevant issue - if the claimant was happy to send numerous communications to the correct address- why issue the claim to another address - at which the claimant has never had a connection?

You seem to be hinting that theop may be at fault - or not giving the full story.

sick of thames credit

You realy need to concentrate on getting the set aside an the grounds that you never recieved the claim - do that first.

Then we can start looking at mounting a defence.

The op states in first post that the claimant had previous dealings with them at their current address - The op also states in various posts - on this page - that they have recieved, and are still receiving, paperwork from the claimant at the corect address. So they had obviously made a trace. The op confirming - or not confirming - their address is not a relevant issue - if the claimant was happy to send numerous communications to the correct address- why issue the claim to another address - at which the claimant has never had a connection?

 

You seem to be hinting that theop may be at fault - or not giving the full story.

The OP also says "I kept them informed of all addresses until this present one".

The OPs story isn't consistent but even if there is an element of debt evasion from the OP I don't really care to be honest.

That address is not on my credit file as i have never had any connection to it, aktiv have had my correct address for 3 years. that is fairly straight forward issue by checking electoral registers.

Ok. But if this address doesn't show on your credit file then nor will the ccj. So as far as your fsa regulated job offer goes not a problem? Obviously you will need to get it set aside sooner or later but surely there is no immediate problem.

The OP also says "I kept them informed of all addresses until this present one".

 

The OPs story isn't consistent but even if there is an element of debt evasion from the OP I don't really care to be honest.

Yes that is true, and then not long after moving in, they sent a letter saying they had used a tracing agent and had tracked me to that address.

I did not confirm to them I was there, I admit that, but likewise I don't reply to [problem] texts, or 419 emails.

The fact that after using a tracing agent and writing to me for 3 years, show they had a pretty firm beleif I lived at my current address. Something that is backed up by them continuing to write to my at my current and correct address since the CCJ was granted.

Anyway, as has already been mentioned, this is neither here or there at the moment. My main focus is to get to the next step. i.e. getting my N244 in ASAP.