Council Tax Manual - Section 3 - Appendix 3.6 - Service of documents by post

Appendix 3.6 - Service of documents by post

Thanks Summerbreeze

Well, without proof that they did anything different it would be assumed they used the cheapest service. Many use UKMail which can be even slower than 2nd class.

Bear in mind that even the Court uses 5 days for service for an N1.

If the creditor really cared about something being time critical they should pay the few pence extra and send it recorded.

Bearing in mind how vitally important a DN is, the contempt shown by many creditors in their record keeping is just beyond belief

There was a post by PT about an argument he used in relation to the fact that the creditor concerned didn't keep a copy of the DN - it was successful - I will try and dig it out if it still exists

Hi gh! Hope you are well. Thanks for that. PT's post would be helpful aswell. Thanks again.

Costa

Costa your answer is within the practice direction at point 3 . You need to ask for proof of service .

2. Practice Direction

Service of Documents - First and Second Class Mail

"With effect from 16 April 1985 the Practice Direction issued on 30 July 1968 is hereby revoked and the following is substituted therefore.

1. Under S7 of the Interpretation Act 1978 service by post is deemed to have been effected, unless the contrary has been proved, at the time when the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post.

2. To avoid uncertainty as to the date of service it will be taken (subject to proof to the contrary) that delivery in the ordinary course of post was effected:-

(a) in the case of first class mail, on the second working day after posting;

(b) in the case of second class mail, on the fourth working day after posting.

"Working days" are Monday to Friday, excluding any bank holiday.

3. Affidavits of service shall state whether the document was dispatched by first or second class mail. If this information is omitted it will be assumed that second class mail was used.

4. This direction is subject to the special provisions of RSC Order 10, rule 1(3) relating to the service of originating process.

8 March 1985

Thanks summerbreeze. 'Couldn't see the wood for the trees'! I have put them to strict proof where the class of post is concerned and shall also be hammering this point at the hearing on Thursday.

Thanks once again.

Costa

......................... at the hearing on Thursday.

Good luck costa

M

Cheers M!

I'll let you know the outcome as and when I can on Thursday!

Costa

Good luck costa

 

M

yes, and from me

Cheers gh!

Good luck

Thanks bb!

Hi All,

Back from hearing. Here’s what happened:

Arrived at the Local CC in plenty of time. Their barrister from ‘down south’ arrived shortly afterwards and introduced themselves. Very polite and gently spoken person, in no way threatening or overbearing.

They asked if I had received their Skeleton Argument. I did at 2.00pm via the post (good job I went home first). They then handed me copies of the CCA etc they would be relying on in support of their argument. Included was copies of CCA 1974 sections 176 (Service of Documents) and 189 (Definitions).

Taken aback by ss176 and 189. Why has this never been picked up on the forum? Or has it?

I handed them copies of what I was going to rely on.

Finally entered Court 45 mins late.

The DJ had just read the case file and had decided that ‘the opposition’ had not allocated enough time on their application. It should be more like 2 hours not 30 mins. He said both arguments were well constructed and covered many points of law and that he alone needed more time to study them in greater detail before giving a judgment.

At this point the DJ asked our opinions. Their barrister wanted to go ahead and said he only needed 15 mins.

The DJ was not happy with that and then asked how long I needed to which I replied at least 30 mins. Thought to myself ‘I’m not going to be pressured into anything’.

He commented on my WS etc. and said that I had obviously taken a great amount of time, effort and thought in preparing and if the hearing went ahead it would prejudice me due to the lack of time allocated.

So hearing adjourned until at least mid-September.

Costa

PS A little worried about this CCA 1974 ss176/189 so going to start a new legal issues thread to get comments.

Not sure where the problem is ....

176.Service of documents.

 

(1) A document to be served under this Act by one person ( “the server ”) on another person ( “the subject ”) is to be treated as properly served on the subject if dealt with as mentioned in the following subsections.

 

(2) The document may be delivered or sent [F1 by an appropriate method] to the subject, or addressed to him by name and left at his proper address.

 

(3) For the purposes of this Act, a document sent by post to, or left at, the address last known to the server as the address of a person shall be treated as sent by post to, or left at, his proper address.

 

(5) Where a document to be served on the subject as being a debtor, hirer or surety, or as having any other capacity relevant for the purposes of this Act, is served at any time on another person who (a) is the person last known to the server as having that capacity, but

(b) before that time had ceased to have it, the document shall be treated as having been served at that time on the subject.

 

(8.) References in the preceding subsections to the serving of a document on a person include the giving of the document to that person.

It was properly served - that's not the argument is it.

It was, in itself, defective in not allowing enough time to remedy.

S189 is just loads of definitions of terms used in the Act. However there is nothing about when a dicument is deemed served. There are so many ways of serving a doc. Had it been handed to you by an authorised officer it is deemed served there and then, otherwise postal and/or electronic communication rules apply

BTW VERY VERY naughty of them to serve the WS at that late hour. Especially when introducing a whole new argument designed to confuse .....

Thanks gh. Getting my head round it now. Just took me by surprise. A tactic to confuse as you say!

I think it was a case of them wanting to see yours before showing you theirs lol.

At least you know where they're coming from now. Advantage 'you' i'd say.

M

I think it was a case of them wanting to see yours before showing you theirs lol.

 

At least you know where they're coming from now. Advantage 'you' i'd say.

 

M

Very true M

Well guess it has just given you more time to polish eh mate, good luck!

Link back here when you creat a new thread in the legal issues forum please.

Hi All,

Adjourned Hearing will take place on 23rd September. 2 1/2 hours are allocated for it! Plenty of time to prepare.

Costa

Hi All,

Received a letter from local CC last week informing me that Hearing (Claimants Application to Strike Out defence and enter Summary Judgment) date incorrect. It is now tomorrow at 10.30am. All prep done. I'll read it all through again later. Will post tomorrow when outcome is known.

Costa

All the best Costa

I'm away at the moment, but I am sure you are well prepared - and you have already had a sneak preview of their very weak IMHO arguments.

Concentrate on ripping their arguments to shreds and their application cannot go through.

Also read up on the rules for Summary Judgement - the rules are quite strict as to when it can be aplllied