Help with N244

[mike12]

Hi,

 

I am looking into having a CCJ set aside for my gf. In 2009/10 she ran into some problems with a credit card (store credit that turned out to be one) when buying a laptop while away at uni. There were some problems and she missed payments for a while.

 

After a while she got a phone call from a debt collection agency (Lewis Group) and she explained everything and that she was on JSA and they arranged a payment plan. All that is fine and she is nearly paid off now, but recently we found out there is a CCJ against her that we had no idea about. This CCJ is registered at her term time address and this must be where the papers went. The date is 5 months after she moved out, not only that but they did not actually have her term time address the card was registered at her home address as shown on her application/credit agreement we still have.

 

The problem is not that she owes the money, she is paying it off and accepts that. The problem is that I now know that she would have had a month to stop the CCJ from being recorded allowing her dad to lend her the money and stop her from having one stuck on file for 6 years (he is fairly well off). The fact they sent the papers to the wrong address means she didn't get that chance. I am trying to fill in the initial parts of the form for her but I don't know what to say.

 

I have looked and there is there is no information on who took out the CCJ to fill in the claimants name, can I leave that blank if I know the rest?

 

What do I put in section 3, everything I think of sounds silly and I have no idea how to word it. And finally how do I do section 10, what is the difference and what evidence do I put (she has asked me to fill it in for her I assume she still signs it?)

 

Sorry for the long post, any advice is appreciated.

 

Thanks

[sequenci]

Hello there. A set aside should only be used if there is a legal reason as to why the debt is owing. A court are only likely to grant one if there is a realistic prospect of defending the claim. From what you've written it doesn't seem that there is. You may find that you're wasting £80.

 

if the papers were served at her last known address then the claim was properly served.

[AndyOrch]

You could always pay the debt and have it marked satisfied... no adverse credit problem solved.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[mike12]

Hello there. A set aside should only be used if there is a legal reason as to why the debt is owing. A court are only likely to grant one if there is a realistic prospect of defending the claim. From what you've written it doesn't seem that there is. You may find that you're wasting £80.

 

if the papers were served at her last known address then the claim was properly served.

 

It wasn't her last known address, or the address they were even given. If they sent them to wrong address (we still don't know why) when they had the right one this is grounds to have it set aside is it not?

 

And if what you say about the other thing is true it seems extremely corrupt, it is a legal right that she can pay within a month, a legal right that was taken away by improperly serving the papers yet there can be no recourse? I am very surprised to hear this, it is not like she is trying to get out of anything just take advantage of what she should have had to start with.

 

She is on jsa so will get a fee remission so it is worth trying at least, thanks for taking the time to respond. If anyone else can help I would still sppreciate it.

Edited February 29, 2012 by mike12

[mike12]

You could always pay the debt and have it marked satisfied... no adverse credit problem solved.

 

Regards

 

Andy

 

Hi, the only reason we found the ccj was because we were checking the credit file for a career development loan she will need to go on and do a masters - a ccj may well prevent her application and so what I thought was an incorrectly served ccj (I just gave another response as to why I think this) will have a major affect on her life and carreer as a direct result of this.

 

Im sure you can see why it is worth fighting if there is any chance.

[Ganymede]

Yes but as sequenci said you need another reason on top of the service issue to get a CCJ set aside, such as no valid agreement, default notice, unlawful charges etc etc...

 

Service alone isn't enough.

[Ganymede]

Yes but as sequenci said you need another reason and reasonable prospects of defending the claim on top of the service issue to get a CCJ set aside, such as no valid agreement, default notice, unlawful charges etc etc...

 

Service alone isn't enough.

[asokn]

In fairness a failure of service itself means that judgment should not have been entered. If the pleadings weren't served then the judgment must be set aside on mandatory grounds even if there's no real prospect of successfully defending the claim. You can't sue someone by sending the pleadings to the moon and then keep your judgment unless there's a real prospect of successfully defending the claim or some other good reason why the judgment should be set aside!

 

The OP should read CPR Part 6 and, in particular, note the conceptual difference between service and actual receipt. If the OP is still confident that service was not effected then perhaps the application should be made. Bear in mind though that it isn't just the cost of making the application (for which the fee remission will apply) but any costs the applicant is ordered to pay the other side (which are not means tested).

[AndyOrch]

Bad service alone is good enough and a main reason to set a side.

 

Andy

[Ganymede]

The OP can try but it's not a 100% certain.

 

DJs don't like to do it. What would be the point if there is no dispute or no defence? Waste of time and money.

[AndyOrch]

But there is a defence promissory estoppel.

 

Andy

[sequenci]

For all of this to succeed there would need to be a massive amount of clutching at straws. It would be interesting to see how a promissory estoppel argument would work within a set aside for sure.

[AndyOrch]

For all of this to succeed there would need to be a massive amount of clutching at straws. It would be interesting to see how a promissory estoppel argument would work within a set aside for sure.

 

I have seen it work Sequenci firstly you get the set a side on bad service ( see the signaler thread) and then you plead a defence of promissory estoppel once the set a side is achieved.

 

IMHO as I stated earlier far easier to get a Certificate of Satisfaction after clearing the debt and then the CCJ marker shouldn't be a problem.

 

Andy

[sequenci]

I have seen it work Sequenci firstly you get the set a side on bad service ( see the signaler thread) and then you plead a defence of promissory estoppel once the set a side is achieved.

 

IMHO as I stated earlier far easier to get a Certificate of Satisfaction after clearing the debt and then the CCJ marker shouldn't be a problem.

 

Andy

 

I think you're absolutely right on both counts my good man

[Ganymede]

I have seen it work Sequenci firstly you get the set a side on bad service ( see the signaler thread) and then you plead a defence of promissory estoppel once the set a side is achieved.

 

IMHO as I stated earlier far easier to get a Certificate of Satisfaction after clearing the debt and then the CCJ marker shouldn't be a problem.

 

Andy

 

 

 

My point exactly. You need a defence as well as the service issue.

[AndyOrch]

My point exactly. You need a defence as well as the service issue.

 

Only if the Claimant wishes to represent the claim, they didn't in Signallers.

 

Andy

[Ganymede]

Only if the Claimant wishes to represent the claim, they didn't in Signallers.

 

Andy

 

True. I am assuming that the Claimant always wants to!