Someone claiming to be from them phoned yesterday. They stressed the importance of agreeing to a set aside . They said normal practice is to issue proceedings against claimant and recover total outlay including HCEO costs's etc. So claimant becomes defendant and vice versa. Probably a tactic of some sort.

Suggest you start to record these calls if you can and create a log sheet.

This might not be a one off call and they may keep calling you. If it gets to the stage of it being harassment, you need evidence to support this.

You need to simply state to them that as far as you are concerned the matter is closed, they should desist from phoning you and that you will be putting the phone down. DO NOT get into any conversation.

I can't see that there can be a set aside of this CCJ, as it is really too late for them.

I agree that this is bizarre behaviour.

I cannot see how they could reasonably get a court to agree a set aside - unless it was by mutual consent. If you don't agree, I don't think there's anything else they can do. Certainly don't be intimidated by any suggestion that they can re-litigate, by making you the defendant in a separate action to recover monies paid under the Court Judgement. That would be kicked out as an abuse f process.

In terms of handling, I would tell them a) that you do not agree to a set aside; and b) that any future communication should be in writing, and you reserve the right to share these letters with third parties, including the court. I bet you'll never hear from them again!

If they say something stupid, like what you referred to in your previous post, just ask them to put it in writing. I bet they don't.

try ignoring them. They can apply to court for a set-aside of the origianl judgement by paying to do so and showing some reason as to why the judgement should be set aside (ie judge got the law wrong) and then submit all their evidence and still lose as the matters of fact werent wrong

Just been told another call recieved from securitas and now court claim promised by thier credit control. Person has been told that securitas are going to persue this all through the legal system as will not consent to a set aside.

Have you told them to put this in writing, as advised?

Yes . This is what they have been told.

The key question is told by who. If told in a formal letter from a solicitor or from Securitas' legal department, that's one thing. If just told by some debt collector over the thing, its probably a load of tosh.

No phone call's are from securitas. Not a debt collector. Am awaiting next action if any. As far as i am concerned this matter finished with the hceo's going in. Now if they want to kick a fuss up then its their problem. The question that i cant answer is why did they ignore all previous correspondence and also why did they ignore emails sent to them regarding the judgement and paying up. Once this is sorted out i will put up a letter sent by their solicitor. They knew what would happen but turned a blind eye thinking his bark is worse than his bite.

they are just trying to bully you into agreeing with them, they know that they arent going to get a set aside. You should find a method of recording the calls, even if it is a pocket memo machine held to the phone. Once you have r recording of them you can go after them for harassment and breach of the DPA

Have you looked into Dun and Bradstreet credit worthiness yet?

Personally am not bothered about it. Trouble is they are suffering because of it. Now a days any sort of judgement means major contracts go. Also you cannot renew or tender for contracts as the company and directors have to be free of any judgements. This is a nightmare for them. They should stick their little finger out and sort it. I would not be surprised if there are other people out there who have had serious problems with them and are wandering what to do. Just like what happened with JBW A few years ago. As far as helping i will. It gets to a point when you know a company is taking the peas out of you.

I think this has now died down as have received no sort of contact from the other side. Something may kick off later. If i was this entity and had a judgement. I would be desperately tying to get rid of it as government contracts etc require that the contractor does not have a ccj etc. Correct me if i am wrong.

Received letter from other side stating that if set a side is not voluntarily agreed then hearing will be applied for and call transcripts etc will be provided to the court. Also apparently a barrister is being appointed. This will be be persued strongly and recover any and all costs that fall due.

Have they said why it is just/reasonable for you to agree a set aside?

Bearing in mind they are a large company who:

A) no doubt have a legal team they could have defended the case..... or

B) could have paid the judgment to prevent the CCJ showing on the register and sought an appeal / set aside at that stage prior to the judgment becoming enforceable (& showing on the register)

If they are threatening costs, point out that you are happy to have the court decide who is better placed to know the court's procedures & who has followed them .......

They have confirmed a claim form was recieved on time but was not passed onto the right department. Internal muck up.

thye are talking utter b******.

let them do their worst, which will cost them a fortune, you nothing and they wont get anywhere. They can apply for a set-aside for £255 if they wish to and get on witrh it rather than ever contacting you so ask yourself, why havent they? Answer? they wont get one so they need you to agree so they can then try and save face.

Sod them, ignore.

Dont enter into any correspondednce witht eh or they will keep going on about this for ever.

Received letter from other side stating that if set a side is not voluntarily agreed then hearing will be applied for and call transcripts etc will be provided to the court. Also apparently a barrister is being appointed. This will be be persued strongly and recover any and all costs that fall due.

Would it be worth notifying their customers of this ? I have again written to them and told them the matter is closed. If they were to go any further then i will produce their solicitors first letter to confirm claim form was recieved at the correct address. Would it be of any good if the clients were to get wind of this judgement ?

No. You want to look like you are doing the right thing at all times.

Have you thought about asking them, whether they are willing to make you an offer, as it is their fault if they failed to follow the proper process of dealing with the court claim after they received it. As far as you are concerned the matter is closed, but if the CCJ on their records is causing them a problem, perhaps they need to make an offer, that is satisfactory to all parties.

They dont want to go down that route. They are claiming that they are certain they can have it set aside at a hearing by involving a barrister and so on. Unfortunately i am used to this sort of talk as you may recall me having a run in with jbw and ccs enforcement limited and getting all that off them.

As the HCEO earned fees from enforcing, i doubt they would want to set aside either, as presumably it would mean refunding their fees ?

Do they think that your original court claim can be defended, if there was a hearing ?

I do not think there is but i am sure this lot will try and think of something. According to their solicitors letter . The claim form was received at the service address and the next few weeks it was passed around from pillar to post. A payment was made to the hceo a day before he turned up. There was no protest etc. It looks like something has happened. change of mind or something. It just shows even though they are a security company providing security services they can arrange a proper P*** up in a brewery. Also from my understanding. Their government contracts state that they should have no ccj's. They have probably realised the severity of it. Trouble is they didnt take it seriously from day one. If they had bothered replying and dealing with everything from the start things may have gone another route. However they decided to ignore everything. Their contracts manager and regional manager couldnt give 2 hoots about it. Hr were non existant but give them a chance now and they will try anything to avoid what has happenned. Still dont think they have learnt anything.

Let them do their worst. They arent going to get anywhere and they know it and that is why they are harassing you. The only thing you should say is that if they dont stop it you will be suing them for that as well.

They pay the solicitor so he is going to say what they want him to say and dress it up to look like he is the oracle on this matter. Ignore them and if they write again you send a letter saying that thsi is harassment and you will treat their behaviour accordingly and that may include further court action.

If they have worded their letters exactly as you report they know that it is an abuse of process and harassment so will be very wary of then going for a set aside anyway.

I repeat, if they are so sure of their set aside being granted they woulf ahve just done it, not tried to get you to agree to reverse the courst decision and pay them back the money. The fact is they lost and didnt appeal so that is that.

They dont want to go down that route. They are claiming that they are certain they can have it set aside at a hearing by involving a barrister and so on. Unfortunately i am used to this sort of talk as you may recall me having a run in with jbw and ccs enforcement limited and getting all that off them.

Yes i agree as well. they would just go for a application without saying anything to me.

I think it will now finally die .

A form has been lodged with the county court notifying a solicitor is acting on behalf of Securitas.

Good for them. But acting in what? Unless and until they make an application for a set aside - which they could have done at any time and yet oddly haven't - there's no case. There's nothing in what you've told us that gives obvious ground for a court to agree a set aside and frankly the longer they leave it, having been aware of this for quite some time now, their chances of success become even smaller.