Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi Guys,   Following in from my 17 page thread, that dates back over ten years, I am starting a new thread, at the suggestion of the site team. My issue relates the a) service charges relating to the Leasehold flat I bought back in 2006 b) a Managing Agent who is of questionable abilities as a manager of our block of flats. The Managing Agent has claimed £6k in fees to which (I think, as does the new Landlord) he was not entitled. I am wanting to get it back, and/or the fees on my account calculating properly which would leave me with a credit balance.  I am recently in receipt of a 4th claim relating to this dispute, with two of the previous three going 'no where'. The other one they won in default on 2011, but I successfully had that set-aside.They have not given me the money back though. It all started due to poor management of the block, and it transpired upon scrutiny that the management arrangements appear to be unenforceable prior to 2014. It's very complicated. This information is required simply posted, and not as a PDF, so here goes:   1.       BlurredFX Service Charge Saga 2.       Sept 2006 a.       In 2006 BFX buys a leasehold flat. His solicitor advises him that Ground Rent is payable to Landlord-one and Service Charges are payable, but to be wary of the service charges, as he is unable to confirm how they are being administrated. b.       BFX is sent a bill for service charges from PQR Managing Agent. BFX enquires as the legitimacy of the service charges, but is unable to get a satisfactory answer. The service charge requests are not complicit with the required legislation – such as the name of the Landlord. They are served in the name of ABC Management Company Ltd c/o PQR Managing Agents. c.       ABC Management Company has two Directors, both residents of the block in which BFX resides and to which this dispute relates. d.       Landlord-one is absent, except for Ground Rent requests. 3.       2006-2009 a.       Despite written and verbal requests, BFX refuses to pay any service charges until ABC Management Company are properly authorised by Landlord-one – because without such, he has no recourse or way to complain. b.       Demands are not complicit with the legislation. c.       The property was not properly maintained. For example, the lease obligations for an internal redecoration every five years had no been met. The obligations to maintain the exterior of the had not been met, and the timber double glazing was starting to rot quite badly. 4.       2008/2009/2010 a.       TUV Managing Agent Ltd buys out PQR Managing Agent (a sole trader, I believe). They seem to operate interchangeably for a few years, using different headed paper along the way. They seem to be interchangeable. It is the same personnel. 5.       June 2009 a.       TUV Managing Agent LTD, on behalf of ABC Management Company Ltd, file a court claim against BFX. [CLAIM2009] b.       BFX asks them to fully particularise their claim, including asking for details of who authorised them to manage the building and various other pertinent questions. 6.       10th August 2009 a.       BFX sends CPR18 – request for information to TUV Managinig Agent c/o ABC Management Company 7.       2009 a.       Hearing is scheduled for Jan 2010 [CLAIM2009] 8.       February 2010 a.       There is a hearing. b.       Ref: [CLAIM2009] c.       From the Court: IT IS ORDERED THAT the claim be stayed to enable the Parties to endeavour to reach a settlement if no application is made to restore by Tuesday 6th April 2010, the claim be struck out 9.       24th March 2010 a.       TUV Managing Agent sends BFX an agreement to sign, agreeing to pay. BFX does not sign the document. 10.   2010 – 30th or 31st March 2010 a.       BFX attends a meeting with a Director of ABC Management Company and Director of TUV Managing Agent. b.       BFX outlines his position, and suggests a verbal agreement to pay from 2006-2010 once the management of the block is properly administrated – my preference being the ‘RTM route’. c.       The other people at the meeting do not appear to understand. 11.   1st April 2010 a.       TUV Managing Agent on behalf of ABC Management Company write to the Court, asking that the claim be restored, claiming BFX has remained silent. b.       Notice of allocation from the Court, dated 15th April, for a hearing in July. 12.   July 2010 a.       On the day, a lady at the Court informs BFX that TUV Managing Agent has been on the phone, and said that BFX has paid the money and to cancel the hearing. b.       BFX had not paid any money at all. c.       Nothing more is heard of [CLAIM2009] 13.   6th October 2010 a.       ABC Management Co c/o TUV Managing Agent send a letter, after the Freehold Reversion of BFX’s block comes up for sale. TUV Managing Agent outline three options – do nothing, RTM, or buy the freehold. b.       BFX opines that it is not good advice, but is ignored. 14.   December 2010 a.       BFX’s health starts to visibly deteriorate. 15.   Late April 2011 a.       BFX is blue-lighted into the regional hospital, as witnessed by Director of ABC Management Company. 16.   Early May 2011 a.       TUV Managing Agent, on behalf of ABC Management Company, commence a new claim against BFX – literally within a week or so of BFX going into Hospital! b.       This is [CLAIM2011] 17.   August 2011 a.       TUV Managing Agent and ABC Management Company are awarded Judgement in Default. b.       BFX remains critically ill in Hospital. 18.   September 2011 a.       Letter from BFX’s Mortgage Company-One to BFX b.       “We have been advised by TUV Managing Agent that your Ground Rent and Service Charges of £6k-ish has not been paid.” Iy goes on to say pay them. 19.   September 2011 a.       In reference to [CLAIM2011] a letter from TUV Managing Agent to BFX’s Mortgage Company-One states: b.       “As the managing agents of BFX’s Block, I write to advise you that your client, BFX, is in severe arrears and therefore is in breach of his lease. c.       “A County Court Judgement was served on August 2011 in the sum of £6k-ish. A Copy of the Judgement is enclosed for your reference. d.       “I therefore request that this payment is now made in full by your client within 21 days, failure to do so will result in further action being taken and a Section 146Notice [sic] being served on Mr Piggin” 20.   October 2011 a.       Letter from TUV Managing Agent to BFX’s Mortgage Company-One states: b.       “Further to your letter of 25th October 2011, please find below the details of the bank account to make payment of the outstanding service charge and ground rent for the above property” [BFX’s property] c.       Mortgage Company-one makes a payment to ABC Management Co c/o TUV Managing Agent, for the claim amount. 21.   January 2012 a.       Landlord-one sells his freehold to Landlord-two. BFX receives a letter from Landlord-one’s solicitor. It states: b.       “…we write to advise that the benefit of the receipt of the ground rent payable under such Lease has now been transferred to Landlord-two to whom all future payments of ground rent including all arrears and the amount due from 2st January 2012 shall be payable to and whose receipt shall be a full and absolute discharge under such Lease” 22.   February 2012 a.       Landlord-one sells his freehold to Landlord-two. b.       Landlord-two writes to BFX stating that he owes Ground Rent since 2006. c.       That letter from Landlord-two to BFX also states d.       “While we have no wish to disrupt and current workable management arrangements we do have concerns in that respect as the building is not being managed strictly in accordance with the Lease provisions and although we would have no great objection to ABC Management Company Ltd continuing with the management of the structural and communal areas of the building we would be happier if the present informal arrangement, which could in theory be discontinued at any time by any party, could be formalised either by a Deed of Variation being entered into in connection with each individual leaseholder or by a complete Deed of Variation being entere into by all parties. We hope you will support a Deed of Variation and would request your written views in that respect. e.       “We were in direct communication with PQR Managing Agent prior to completion of our purchase and enclose for your information copy letter written to that firm on 11th January 2012. PQR Managing Agent have confirmed they have never received any ground rent payments and they are raising our ‘insurance concerns’ with X Insurer.” f.        The letter referred to above also asks PQR Managing Agent to make certain material disclosures to X Insurer. g.       In his letter to TUV/PQR Managing Agent, dated 11th of Jan, Landlord-two also states, h.       “As management is current [sic] carried out by you on behalf of ABC Management Company Limited, who are not named in the Lease and therefore maintenance obligations are unenforceable against or by that company, you may wish to give consideration to:” It then proposes a) a deed of variation, or b) Landlord-two becomes a client of TUV Property Management, and long term management is done that way. i.         The letter from Landlord-two continues: j.         “Finally, while we appreciate that you are not authorised to collect ground rent and indeed we assume you have not therefore been collecting ground rent, can you please confirm for the avoidance of doubt that you have never collected any ground rent payments from any leaseholder in connection with this building or, if you have collected any ground rent payments, can you please let us have details of such payments.” 23.   October 2012 a.       BFX makes an application for the Judgement to be set-aside, an account of his being hospitalised almost constantly since April 2011. b.       A hearing is scheduled. 24.   January 2013 a.       There is a hearing, the Judgement against BFX is set-aside. TUV Managing Agent and ABC Management Company do not attend. BFX has until February to file his Defence and Counterclaim, which he does. 25.   March 2013 a.       AQ’s submitted, and hearing scheduled. b.       TUV Managing Agent, on behalf of ABC Management Company is ordered to pay the hearing fee. 26.   18th April 2013 a.       Court orders unless TUV Managing Agent, on behalf of ABC Management Company pays the fees, the claim shall be struck out. b.       Letter from the Court: BFX’s counterclaim remains listed for May 2013. There is a hearing, and TUV Managing Agent, on behalf of ABC Management Company fail to attend. 27.   May 2013 a.       After a hearing, where TUV Managing Agent and ABC Management Company fail to attend, the Court orders: “The claim be adjourned generally with the liberty to restore on the application of either party.” 28.   2nd half of 2013 and 2014 a.       Various letter from TUV Property Management, and meetings of residents. It is decided by Leaseholders in BFX’s block that we should exercise our ‘right-to-manage’. 29.   17th February 2014 a.       Letter from a solicitor dealing with the RTM progress, it says Landlord-two now has 28 days to file a response. 30.   4th June 2014 a.       BFX Receives a letter from TUV Property Management it states: b.       “Please find enclosed a new standing order form for BFX’s block. c.       “We have opened a new current account for BFX’s block due to the Right to Manage coming into effect in 1st July 2014 d.       “The new standing order is to commence on 1st July 2014…” e.       It continues with pleasantries about cancelling old SO etc. 31.   2nd July 2014 a.       The newly formed ABC RTM Company Limited (c/o TUV Managing Agent) sends an invoice to BFX for £3.3k, the description on the invoice being ‘Account Adjustment: Transfer from previous Management Company’ 32.   2nd July 2014 a.       The newly formed ABC RTM Company Limited (c/o TUV Managing Agent) sends an invoice to BFX for £3.6k, the description on the invoice being ‘Account Adjustment: For period 4th July 2014 – 30th September 2014’ 33.   28th July 20014 (1) a.       ABC RTM Company Limited (c/o TUV Managing Agent) sends an invoice to BFX for £3.5k, having added £12. It states ‘Account Adjustment: Title Register’. b.       IT ALSO SHOWS BFX’s FIRST PAYMENT of 1 month’s service charges to ABC RTM Company Ltd as ‘Payment Received’ 34.   28th July 20014 (2) a.       ABC RTM Company Limited (c/o TUV Managing Agent) sends an invoice to BFX for £3.8k, having added £360 court fees. It states ‘Account Adjustment: Court Fees’ 35.   28th July 20014 (3) a.       ABC RTM Company Limited (c/o TUV Managing Agent) sends an invoice to BFX for £4k, having added £120 in court fees 36.   11th August 2014 a.       The newly formed ABC RTM Company Limited (c/o TUV Managing Agent) sends an invoice to BFX adding another £85. Description: ‘HM Court fee as fee is £205 not £120 – difference’ 37.   August 2014 a.       Following another emergency admission to Hospital for BFX, ABC RTM Company Limited immediately file a claim [CLAIM2014] for alleged arrears from 2011-2014. Approximately £4k. 38.   November 2014 a.       From the Court: Claim [CLAIM2014] stayed until February 2015, by which time the Defendant is to serve his Defence and in default shall file and serve further medical evidence supporting his inability to do the same. 39.   September 2015 a.       Claim stayed until end of October 2015 40.   November 2015 a.       Claim stayed until Jan 2016 41.   8th January 2016 a.       BFX makes an application for summary judgement [of CLAIM2014] that the claim be struck out, as it is a relitigation of [CLAIM2011] 42.   Feb 2016 a.       Transferred to local Court. 43.   31st March 2016 a.       There was a hearing of my application (I think) b.       From the Court, re [CLAIM2014] c.       IT IS ORDERED THAT d.       The hearing of today’s date be adjourned e.       The Claimant to file and serve a fully Particulars (detailed) Particulars of claim [sic] to set out the basis to the claim, entitlement of the Claimant to recover sums from the Defendant, detailing sums recovered and any outstanding payment plus other details which the Claimand may advise to address by 22 april 2016 f.        The Defendant to file and serve a detailed defence addressing the Particulars of Claim in paragraph 2 above by 12 may 2016 g.       If the Defendant wishes the application of today’s date to be relisted (upon consideration of the fully particularised Particulars of Claim), the Defendant should write to the court, at the same time as filing a defence, with a copy of this order, asking for the Court to relist the application for hearing with an estimated length of 1 hour 30 minutes (30 minutes of it being reading time). In the event that the application is relisted, both parties to file and serve detailed statements addressing the subject matter of the application 7 clear days before the hearing. 44.   17th May 2016 a.       From the court: b.       “IT IS ORDERED THAT The Defendants application be relisted in accordance with the order made on the 31st March 2016 on Monday 27th June at 15:30pm with an elh of 30 minutes,not to be heard by telephone” [sic]” 45.   June 2016 a.       I think there was a hearing, possibly. I am looking for the paperwork. I attended the hearing directly from a different regional Hospital to the usual one, where I was being treated for a brain infection. We got our heads bashed together by a clearly infuriated Judge, Judge advised ABC RTM c/o TUV Managing Agents to get a solicitor, tells BFX to be clearer in what he says. Nothing further was heard. Until… 46.   7th April 2017 a.       BFX has an invoice for 1066.00 from TUV Managing Agent c/o ABC RTM Company Ltd 47.   August 2017 a.       BFX mortgage sold from ‘Mortgage Company-one’ to ‘Mortgage Company-two’ 48.   13th September 2017 a.       BFX received an invoice for £5,000 for his share for new windows to BFX’s block. It seemed complicit with s20 LTA 1985 etc. BFX pays £5k. b.       There was a lot of confusion during this process, I am pinning down the paperwork, but it was paid. The total invoice was not split as per the lease – Leaseholders were asked for funds on a per window basis, but the Lease says the total should be summed and divided by the number of units. c.       N.B. BFX’s flat is in a conservation area, and the price reflects expensive windows, as specified by local planners. There were other attempts to put in cheap, nasty windows, but BFX was able to stop this by making informal representations to the local Borough Council – who in turn contacted TUV Managing Agents, who in turn eventually put in a proper planning application for proper windows, which was approved. d.       There was a lot of confusion during this process, I am pinning down the paperwork, but it was paid. The total invoice was not as per the lease – Leaseholders were asked for funds on a per window basis, but the Lease says the total should be summed and divided by the number of units. 49.   12th October 2017 a.       BFX receives invoice for service charges (or statement of account): £4,800 approx. No payments are made by BFX 50.   25h September 2018 a.       BFX receives an invoice (or statement of account) for a total of £492. b.       It appears they have decided not to collect this amount 51.   March 2020 a.       Claim2020 from ABC RTM Company Limited c/o Company Director (not TUV Property Management) for £890 plus £70 Court fee. BFX has not been paying his fees because the management of the block is terrible.
    • Yes I know.  We would like the story posted up plainly on a post in a new thread with no attachment simply a step-by-step account of what happened and what led to the litigation. I think we can understand why this thread has gone on for 18 pages
    • I think he's hoping the attached pdf would be a satisfactory starting point for a new thread?
    • Please start a new thread so that you can post up a nice brief bullet pointed chronology of what happened which led to the litigation.
    • Hope it all goes well for her CB, let us know how she gets on.
  • Our picks

MOR

Applying for 3 year old CCJ to be set aside - *** Set a side & Withdrawn by Consent***

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2620 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi,

 

Great site and very impressed with all the advise. Unfortunately I'm not sure where to post this. As I'm new to this site I will try and keep this brief

 

3 years ago I had a CCJ registered against me and I ended up paying within 3 months of the judgement, purely because I had a letter threatening bailiffs

 

The original invoice, (from my burglar alarm company), was for the yearly servicing plus for the monitoring. The monitoring is an extra service which I paid for as I used to spend time away from home. I had decided to cancel this service and the additional line required. In June 2008 I received a letter from the alarm company stating that their engineer had advised them that this was not working and I in fact did not want this service and could I reply to confirm. This I did with a phone call and a letter the day I received theirs.

 

Over the next 12 months I kep getting demands for payment and multiple calls to them did not do any good as they simply ignored it. Eventually in Oct/Nov 2009 I received a summons for a court hearing. Foolishly I did nothing as the letter received from them and my reply could not be found so I thought I did not have a leg to stand on. The judgement was made and I paid as stated above.

 

Very recently I found the letters in the loft and now have the proof that the amount claimed against me was not correct, (I did not dispute the service element), and that the company that took me to court had in fact acknowledged by way of letter that this service was not working, therefore they could not provide the service. The invoice by the way was also an advance charge so not something I already had. I have taken some advice but I am being told it is not within the time limits that I should have used to defend myself.

 

My issue is I had no proof at the time but I now do and the company in theory knowingly took me to court for a sum of money it was not due. I have since written to the company pointing this out and requesting a refund of the monies that were not due to them and am awaiting a reply.

 

My question here is can I use this to either defend the original CCJ after so long or even start a new case to have it removed. I feel there is a fault here in the legal system that even though I have concrete evidence, there is possibly no route for me to pursue. There are a number of split opinions on this with advice I have already sought, but I would very much appreciate any help/advice as the CCJ has now impacted me as a job I was due to start has now been taken away due to the CCJ

 

I am keen to pursue this vigorously even if there is a cost attached.

 

Thank you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello and welcome to CAG.

 

I'll move your thread to the legal forum, where the guys should be able to advise you. I'll leave a short term redirect here.

 

My best, HB


Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no problem in principle with getting a judgment setaside - even this late in the day.

 

However, you have a problem in that you do admit part of the debt - the service element and it is a shame that you did not pay this part at the time.

 

For any other people who might read this thread - if you fall out with a company - but you agree that you do owe a portion of what is being claimed - then you should at least pay that portion.

Lots of people withhold the entire amount - but later on, this gives the company a legitimate lever to attack with.

 

You could conceivably apply to have the judgment setaside in part - but it won't help your credit record - which is the real purpose of your complaint, I think.

A setaside application in these circumstances would be messy and might not succeed.

 

You might just be better off suing for the overpayment.

Has the judgment been marked as settled with the CRA?

 

I'm sorry to say that you have handled it very badly.

Once again, for the benefit of others, you should have paid the admitted portion.

You should have had your say in court and not ignored it.

Once the judgment had been given, you should have paid with a month to avoid a CCJ.

 

There is only one slight glimmer of a possibility - how did you express your letters to them? Do you still have them?


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, do you have a copy of their claim form? and did you file a defence?


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello BankFodder and thanks for the reply.

 

Details as follows:

 

Original letter from them dated 2nd July 2008 and excerpt from the letter " Following on from our engineer visit on we have been informed that you have cancelled your Redcare Line, which has caused you Redcare to go into a No Response. Can you please confirm if you still require Redcare Monitoring?" Further in letter " If you no longer require monitoring can you please confirm this in writing so that we can amend your contract & remove the monitoring cost from your annual invoice"

 

My reply dated 4th July 2008 (in addition to phone call to them on 3rd), " Dear xxx, Further to your letter dated 2nd July 2008 asking for confirmation that we no longer require Redcare Monitoring, please accept this letter as confirmation that we wish to cancel this part of the contract"

 

Invoice received from them dated 17th July 2008 including cost of cancelled piece, from there numerous calls to them to dispute

 

On advice by solicitor, a letter was sent to them on 30th November 2012 explaining the issue I have with them and requesting refund of £261.38 as a result of overcharging in respect of a service they knowingly could not provide given them 14 days to respond

 

Yes I now have copies of all paperwork

 

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I only have a copy of the judgement and no I did not file a defence because I thought without the copies which I could not find I would not have a chance

 

The judgement has been marked as satisfied

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was the invoice amount charged as a single item or was it broken down into its parts?

 

Please will you tell us how you expressed the letters.

 

And by the way, what kind of job is it that is so picky that they refuse you because you have a satisfied CCJ on your file?


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The invoice was broken down into 2 elements clearly showing the piece I am talking about as a separate item

 

The job is for a bank but in the back office functions

 

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they were clearly listed as two elements then it puts you at an even greater disadvantage. You still haven't replied about the wording of your letter. If your letter made it clear that you would pay the service if they re-invoiced correctly - or some such then you might try a setaside - but you would have to apply for a setaside of the whole. If you tried only for a part then the CCJ might merely be amended - I'm not sure how it works.

 

An application for a setaside would cost £60 using an N244 plus their travel costs if there was a hearing and they decided to contest.

 

I don't know why you won't tell us about the content of your letters.

 

If you want to apply for a setaside, I would start off my contacting the other side nicely and explain that you now have the proofs you were lacking at the time of the original claim and that you are proposing to have the matter re-litigated.

Tell them that if they will agree to the setaside, that you will not ask for the return of your original claim fee - but if they do decide to contest it, then you will tell the judge that it is in the interests of justice to reopen the matter and to allow you to defend.

You will have to supply a draft of your proposed defence with the N244.

 

You will be very lucky if you get the setaside - but if you do then take steps to have the CCJ removed immediately. then defend the claim on the basis that part of it has now been paid and the rest was never owing at all. Counterclaim for the money you have overpaid.

 

I rate your chances of getting a setaside as very low.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you.

 

I'm not sure what you mean about the letters? In the earlier post I quoted the contents. Have I misunderstood?

 

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I gathered that you had written to them about the incorrect bill - or maybe I have misunderstood - you have been using the telephone?


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahh no. The letter I sent them was to confirm cancellation. When the bill was received I made multiple telephone calls each time they sent a reminder

 

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right. I understand. I'm going to say that this is another mistake - you should never to this kind of business on the phone without recording your calls - never - ever.

 

I suggest that you send them an SAR to see if they have your calls logged. I think that this would help your very fragile case a great deal.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you.

 

In hindsight there's a lot I should have done and lessons learnt and all that, and I will now pursue and let you all know how I got on

 

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. If you decide to go for the setaside, we can help you complete the N244.

 

Try to do it by consent. It is always the best way. If you are lucky enough to get to talk to a human, you might be able to swing it.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you BankFodder, very helpful.

 

I will give them a call to discuss my last letter to them and explain the situation and see if they will agree. Are you saying that if they agree that the amount claimed was incorrect and they have no objection to having the CCJ set aside, (I will also state I am not interested in claiming the money back as you have suggested), that this should improve the chances? And I am guessing I would need some form of letter from them as my defence etc

 

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that it is reasonable to ask for a refund of the monitoring part of the money. However, make it clear that you won't seek any refund of court fees if they will consent to the setaside. Don't mention your credit file at all. That can be taken care of easily once the CCJ has been setaside.

You would then need a letter from them saying that they have no objection to the judgment being setaside - but with no order as to costs.

 

If you are very friendly, very polite and very calm and very charming, you might be able to swing it.

However, I rate your chances as slim.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't waste £80.00.

 

I doubt a Judge would set aside the CCJ after this long. Also, don't think you can even set aside a satisfied CCJ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also agree that the chances are very slim - but yes, you can setaside a satisfied CCJ.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I also agree that the chances are very slim - but yes, you can setaside a satisfied CCJ.

 

 

 

How can you defend a claim that you have paid?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because if it is setaside, the judgment is cancelled.

 

We've done it before. In fact the longest period which had expired was a judgment which had been granted to Nationwide - 6 years earlier.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I wouldn't waste £80.00.

 

I doubt a Judge would set aside the CCJ after this long. Also, don't think you can even set aside a satisfied CCJ...

 

I appreciate your input, but whilst there is a glimmer of hope, (even a small one), £80 would be well spent as this is seriously affecting my ability to obtain a job within an industry and area I an experienced in.

 

Let me ask a different question:

 

 

Does the consent to set aside mean that if I get these people to agree the sum was incorrect and they are happy this should not have proceeded with the claim for that amount, this is cause for the application for the judgement to be set aside?

 

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't put it to them like that.

 

However, if they consent then the setaside will be a formalit. It will have to be approved by a judge - but if both sies agree, then the judge won't ask any questions. It will just be stamped through.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have £80.00 to spare then you could try.

 

But ask yourself 3 questions:

 

1) Were you served? Yes.

 

2) Was your application prompt? No.

 

3) Do you have a Defence to the claim? You admitted and paid in full.

 

 

Up to you but good luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you have £80.00 to spare then you could try.

 

But ask yourself 3 questions:

 

1) Were you served? Yes.

 

2) Was your application prompt? No.

 

3) Do you have a Defence to the claim? You admitted and paid in full.

 

 

Up to you but good luck.

I don't think that he said that he admitted anything. I gather it was ignored and the judgment was a default judgment - is that right?

 

Finally,, there is a very important fourth question which has to be asked - probably the most important of all of them.

Is it in the interests of justice that the setaside application be granted? - CPR1.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...