Unable to pay CCJ for PI Judgement - c. £30,000

[impecunious]

I've been ordered to attend court next month to be "questioned" about my finances. Specifically in relation to the non-payment of a court order that was issued in November last year for solicitor's fees when my application to set-aside judgement was denied.

 

I assume that the court order was sent to my previous address (which I left 3 yrs ago) as all the other papers from the court were also addressed to that house.

 

On advice from the National Debtline, because I had not received the court order, I was not told not to treat this as an outstanding priority debt and literally to stop all payments.

 

However, I sent the solicitors a letter in early December last year outlining a proposed payment plan of £5/wk - enclosed my first cheque and then sent another cheque for £10. To date I have received no acknowledgement of my letter from the solicitors although they have cashed all my cheques and no acceptance of my payment plan. I therefore stopped sending them monthly cheques.

 

I just wondered whether anyone could offer some advice for when I attend the hearing.

 

Many thanks.

 

 

 

Impecunious

 

Believing in positive mental attitude!

Edited October 21, 2009 by impecunious

[surfaceagentx20]

Imp,

This would appear to be an order issued under CPR Part 71. that said, it sounds to me, but please confirm, that you have not been served personally with the order to attend for giving further information because you talk of presuming it was sent to your previous address. An order to attend must be served personally on you (See CPR 71.3) unless the court directs differently. It is unlikely that the court directed differently.

If it has not been served personally on you then the creditor will be unable to swear the affidavit which is required under CPR 71.5. Without an affidavit the hearing is adjourned and re-listed until such time as you are properly served. If properly served, ensure you ask in writing to be paid travelling expenses. Make sure you make that request within 7 days of receiving the order (CPR 71.4).

If you have already or are ever properly served with an order to attend for further information, make sure you fully comply with the terms of the order, attend court as required and answer all proper questions as directed. A failure to comply may be treated as a contempt of court, ultimately punishable with committal to prison.

x20

[I've got no money]

It used to be called an oral examination - basically you go to court, there will be someone there from the other side - they will ask you questions on oath about your income/expenditure - they may even have an income/expenditure form that you are asked to complete and to swear is true. It actually is really informal - its' not a hearing in open court.

 

Whilst the service point x20 makes is interesting - you've had notice of the hearing - you may as well go now as at some point in the future you have to go or face imprisonment for contempt. The service issue is only relevant if you don't attend. IMO you should attend court now - it saves so much hassle later.

[impecunious]

Thank you for your advice.

 

The order to obtain information was actually posted through my letterbox in a sealed envelope -- it was the original order to pay the solicitor's fees last year that was sent to my old address. Sorry if there was any confusion.

 

Yes, I have every intention of attending court - I absolutely welcome the opportunity to finally prove my "impecunious" state - and hope that the claimant's barrister will FINALLY realise that I don't have "a pot of hidden gold" set aside for a a rainy day to satisfy the judgement against me (in the personal injuries case - up to £60,000). When I prove I can't pay the £600+ outstanding for solicitors fees - they won't be too surprised when I say I can't satisfy a judgement for £60,000.

 

"Never sue an impecunious defendant" sounds like great advice to me - I wonder why the solicitors haven't dropped the case.

 

Hardly seems like justice! Especially when I don't have the financial resources to take on legal representation. It sucks being a litigant in person.

 

 

Impecunious

 

Believing in positive mental attitude!

[I've got no money]

 

Yes, I have every intention of attending court - I absolutely welcome the opportunity to finally prove my "impecunious" state - and hope that the claimant's barrister !

 

There won't be a Barrister - it's likely to be a fairly junior member of staff from either the Solicitors or a local agent...all the firms that I've ever worked for have always sent trainee Solicitors or paralegals...

[impecunious]

Thanks for your response I've got no money --- it's more than likely the barrister will be there -- she'll be at the quantum hearing which has been scheduled just before the hearing to obtain information.

 

She was even there for the application to set aside last year -- the judge reprimanded her charging such extortionate fees and reduced the bill by half and told her to "shut up".

 

She's one barracuda bitch barrister! Oh well,I've just have to eat three shredded wheat before I go to weather the storm!

 

Impecunious

 

Believing in positive mental attitude

[impecunious]

Deleted

Edited October 21, 2009 by impecunious

[impecunious]

Impecunious

Edited February 22, 2010 by impecunious
Posted in wrong area

[Docman]

Your token payment of £1 may be unacceptable to the creditor's solicitor but if that is what the court has ordered and the creditor has had your paperwork, then tough on the creditor as long as you pay £1.

 

Snag is of course that the CCJ will hang around you and not expire whilst you continue paying. If you have no assets and no reason connected to employment, why not the bankruptcy option? I know the government changed the law to exclude student loans from bankruptcy but I'm not sure about personal injury claims. Why do you think they are excluded from bankruptcy? Have the NDL quoted the section of the Insolvency Act or Rules?

[impecunious]

Thanks Docman

 

As far as I know the court hasn't passed any comment on my inability to pay anymore than a token £1/month. I haven't heard anything since from judgment claimant's solicitor either. I've been told so many times that it's easy to get a judgment but enforcement is more difficult. As far as I know, the claimant has not yet attempted to "enforce" payment.

 

I was told in court by the barrister that personal injury claim and student loan would still be extant if they decided to take the bankruptcy option. This was confirmed by the NDL but they did not quote chapter and verse.

 

The claim for personal injuries was won by default - as all paperwork prior to court proceedings was sent to old address and despite Application to Set Aside, Judge ruled in claimant's favour. The claim was "spurious" to say the least but, unfortunately, I did not have the finances to pursue an appeal.

 

I quite literally hate the thought of this hanging over me but, there is no way on God's earth, I can find £30,000.

 

Impecunious!

[debbbbsy]

Snag is of course that the CCJ will hang around you and not expire whilst you continue paying

 

Not true. Keep paying the £1 a month. They have the CCJ, but it will disappear in 7 years. You will have to keep up your payments after this time.

But look at it from a different point. You can make the repayments each month, this account will be costing the claimant more then this to manage the account each month.

You are actually in a very strong position, when the time is right you can offer them a full & final offer of @10%

But for the time being, set up a standing order for your £1, put this problem to one side. As long as your financial situation doesn't change, there is nothing they can do.

[impecunious]

Thanks Debbbbsy

 

Yes, I make sure I make the token payment regularly.

 

I'm really not too worried about having a CCJ and a poor credit rating, as I don't want credit for anything and won't be buying a property again. I only have another 8-9 yrs working life before statutory retirement kicks in, so I can't really see much improvement in my finances for the foreseeable future.

 

I feel sorry for the judgment debtor but his legal team should have checked my financial status before taking me to court. Any enforcement would be futile and cost him money - I agree.

 

Still not a good feeling though.

 

Impecunious!

[impecunious]

Hi Plodderton

 

Thanks for your comments.

 

In the case of the p.i. claim - judgment was given by default as ALL the paperwork re: case was sent to my old address. Apparently a tracing agency "found" me at my "new" address (that I had been living in for almost 3 years) just 7 days before the court hearing.

 

I naturally applied to Set-aside the judgment as I had no prior knowledge of the alleged incident, had not received any paperwork and had no time to consult a solicitor or work on a defence etc. (and no funds either - not eligible for what used to be called "legal aid" and illegible anyway cos it was a personal injuries claim.. The set-aside was declined (something to do with the correspondence being sent to my last known address) and an order issued for costs - at that time c.£650. (Remains unpaid). I could not afford legal representation for any of my three appearances in court and appeared as a litigant in person.

 

As I mentioned, quantum hearing was heard and claimant was awarded £26,000+. I did not receive a bundle before the quantum hearing - the solicitor had only sent it to me on the Monday night before the case was heard first thing Wed morning. (I still have not received the bundle and even checked with the sorting office - nothing had been undeliverable.) I was completely in the dark during the quantum hearing - BUT, in saying that, the judge spoke on my behalf and I believed him to be v. fair and he "held my hand" the whole way through the hearing - allowing me time to read through a copy of a "borrowed" bundle before I questioned the claimant. The whole thing has been an incredibly harrowing experience.

 

I was completely amazed to find out that the claimant's solicitors or anyone appointed by them had not even visited the site of the alleged incident to ascertain topographical evidence, etc. to support his claim. They merely took his word for it. Obviously because my set-aside was declined, I could not offer any evidence in my defence.

 

Seems that justice, in some cases, is only possible when you can pay for it.

 

I'm hanging onto the belief that it's comparatively easy to get a judgment but it's not always enforceable, especially when you have no tangible assets, a modest salary and overwhelming debts.

 

It's a horrible feeling to have this hanging over me - but I have to learn to live with it.

 

Impecunious!

[ploddertom]

Hi Plodderton

 

Thanks for your comments.

 

In the case of the p.i. claim - judgment was given by default as ALL the paperwork re: case was sent to my old address. Apparently a tracing agency "found" me at my "new" address (that I had been living in for almost 3 years) just 7 days before the court hearing.

 

I naturally applied to Set-aside the judgment as I had no prior knowledge of the alleged incident, had not received any paperwork and had no time to consult a solicitor or work on a defence etc. (and no funds either - not eligible for what used to be called "legal aid" and illegible anyway cos it was a personal injuries claim.. The set-aside was declined (something to do with the correspondence being sent to my last known address) and an order issued for costs - at that time c.£650. (Remains unpaid). I could not afford legal representation for any of my three appearances in court and appeared as a litigant in person.

 

Part of the whole idea of Set Aside is that if you did not receive the paperwork you subsequently never give a chance to Defend/Counterclaim/Payment proposal - how long ago did this happen.

 

As I mentioned, quantum hearing was heard and claimant was awarded £26,000+. I did not receive a bundle before the quantum hearing - the solicitor had only sent it to me on the Monday night before the case was heard first thing Wed morning. (I still have not received the bundle and even checked with the sorting office - nothing had been undeliverable.) I was completely in the dark during the quantum hearing - BUT, in saying that, the judge spoke on my behalf and I believed him to be v. fair and he "held my hand" the whole way through the hearing - allowing me time to read through a copy of a "borrowed" bundle before I questioned the claimant. The whole thing has been an incredibly harrowing experience.

 

I assume it is for RTA, did your insurer admit liability, if you worked at the time and were a member of a Trade Union they usually give you access to some legal advice also.

 

I was completely amazed to find out that the claimant's solicitors or anyone appointed by them had not even visited the site of the alleged incident to ascertain topographical evidence, etc. to support his claim. They merely took his word for it. Obviously because my set-aside was declined, I could not offer any evidence in my defence.

 

The Solicitor would only be interested in the money.

 

Seems that justice, in some cases, is only possible when you can pay for it.

 

I'm hanging onto the belief that it's comparatively easy to get a judgment but it's not always enforceable, especially when you have no tangible assets, a modest salary and overwhelming debts.

 

It's a horrible feeling to have this hanging over me - but I have to learn to live with it.

 

Impecunious!

 

Dependent on time scale there may still be some mileage in this.

 

PT

[impecunious]

Hi Plodderton

 

Thanks for your interest.

 

The set-aside was November 2008.

 

The p.i. claim was in respect of injuries allegedly sustained at the rear of an empty property I owned at the time. The insurance cover had been compromised and because correspondence had been sent to the empty property instead of to a corresondence address - I was unaware that the insurance had been cancelled.

 

Through my present employee and friends (who are solicitors) I was given free legal advice - but no-one believed that the set-aside would be refused. The original claim was lodged with the court just 1 day inside the 3 year statute of limitation after the alleged incident and it was generally thought that they were going for an easy judgment by default - believing that I had insurance and considerable assets.

 

The claimant's barrister continually told the judge that she believed I was hiding "considerable assets" - when in reality - I had spent any money I ever had supporting my now adult son who was diagnosed as having paranoid schizophrenia psychosis, depression and panic attacks f9 yrs ago.

 

On investigating the scene of the alleged incident -- it was obvious that the metal bar that the claimant states cut his face protruded from a party wall at the rear of my property at a height of some 4'10 from ground level- the claimant stated that he had walked into it -- he is 6'3 tall!!! If I had walked into the metal bar - and I'm 5'3 - it would have struck my upper arm!

 

In addition, the metal bar was actually embedded between my next door neighbour's wall and our shared party wall ......... the claimant would have been better advised suing my next-door neighbour - whose property he had been visiting at the time of the incident and who was his employer.

 

In view of the above, the whole case seemed a total travesty to me .....

 

I'd welcome your views.

 

 

Impecunious!!

Edited March 5, 2010 by impecunious

[ploddertom]

As for the Set Aside I don't understand that at all as it seems to me you have not been given any opportunity at all. I think I would be inclined to challenge it given what the eventual outcome has been.

 

I know we have got off track with the original subject and must not lose track of that.

 

PT

Edited March 5, 2010 by ploddertom

[impecunious]

Hi Plodderton

 

Yes - we did go a bit off-track but thanks anyway for your comments.

 

I do feel very hard done by but the only saving grace is that since attending a hearing to obtain information in Aug 2009, when my impecunious state was clearly evident, no enforcment proceedings have to come to light as yet.

 

I realise that it would have to be transferred to High Court to HCEO for enforcement (if they go that route) and the thought of HCEO charges is enough to bring tears to anyone's eyes. BUT, basically, at the end of the day, if you haven't got it - they can't take it from you.

 

I think I might be right in believing that although this HUGE CCJ is still outstanding from Aug 2009 along with the smaller CCJ in respect of set-aside costs from Nov 2008, that any Council Tax arrears will take priority as far as repayments are concerned??????

 

Thanks Plodderton

 

 

 

Impecunious!

[impecunious]

Plodderton

 

I do appreciate your comments but could I please ask you to delete previous messages relating to pi claim.

 

Many thanks!!

 

 

 

Impecunious!

[ploddertom]

I think I've done as requested if not give me another nudge. I have to go out shortly but will be back later.

 

PT

[impecunious]

Thanks PT -- much appreciated!!

 

 

Impecunious!

[impecunious]

This may be slightly off-subject here but I'd be interested if anyone knows how a judgment creditor pays their legal costs if the judgment debtor has no assets/modest income and can't pay CCJ?

 

This was for a no win-no fee personal injuries case, decision was made in favour of the judgment creditor for c. £26,000 (£12K legal costs).

 

Would welcome any input!

 

 

Impecunious!

[supasnooper]

They could possibly take them to court and get a CCJ; and then use various options such as an Attachment of Earnings, Charging order etc...

[impecunious]

Thanks for that -- CCJ in the sum of £26,000+ - hearing to obtain information was held - judgment debtor had no tangible assets/modest income and overwhelming debts. (I'd say shouldn't have been sued in the first place.) £1/month being paid in respect of Order.

 

Just wondered how judgment creditor would pay legal fees?

 

 

Impecunious!

[supasnooper]

ahh yes, misread the question.

 

The creditor would have to pay the costs to the legal firm and then the creditor would recoup them from the debtor

[impecunious]

OOOh - poor old judgment creditor. Bet he wasn't expecting that!!

 

Thanks!!

 

 

Impecunious!