Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi, I'd change justice centre to county court. I also wouldn't be including a telegraph article in the bundle. It doens't prove anything law and you don't have distribution rights on it. I also wouldn't personally break down the exhibits on the index page, normally people have a seperate page for this right before the exhibits. The main index page normally just says Exhibits to WX of [Your Name] or at least that's the format I use/see people here use, although really it makes minimal difference.   I also see that despite referencing several judgements you haven't included the EVRi one   paragraph 46 really needs to go imo it has nothing to do with anything. Your in court to apply the law to your case, not to tell the judge about a newspaper that means nothing to your claim.   I also see you've adopted the issues in dispute/not in dispute, which is also known as a scott schedule. if you are taking this approach, for things not in dispute I would say this needs to be things that are agreed between parties, not things like "There is no dispute that I am happy to supply all this evidence which is included in the court bundle." I would say that issues in dispute is to focus on the aspects of the claim that are in dispute, such as whether liability is limited by insurance or not, so I'd be changing that accordingly.   BF should be along shortly to advise on things.
    • J, I just numbered them like that; once the witness statement is made, I'll add it to the pages.   The court date has been set as 02 July 2024. Please find attached V6. I will send an unredacted to the email.  claim budle_V6.pdf
    • I'm afraid that I have tried downloading it three times and each time I am getting an error message. Would you mind scanning it again please and uploading it again. I understand that JK has managed to open it but others may not. Thanks
    • I can see that.   In this case, I'd email both that receipt and your tracking label to evri's small claims email and say that is the information you have.   They'll figure it out from there I'm sure
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 160 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Daily Mail investigation into default CCJ that could lead to bailiff visit


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2679 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Found this on the Mail where people are being hit with default CCJ even for a penny they know nothing about until the bailiff knocks or they are refused credit. It seems Crapita AKA parking Eye are getting default CCJ on alleged debts of a penny, as in o 0.01p.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3784421/Stranger-s-40-parking-ticket-cost-family-new-home.html

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

urm..all seem to be based [bar one]

on the 'debtor' not updating creditors of a change of address.

 

 

could have easily been avoided.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes DX looks like that was the case. Default at old address in some cases.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

urm..all seem to be based [bar one]

on the 'debtor' not updating creditors of a change of address.

 

 

could have easily been avoided.

 

Found this on the Mail where people are being hit with default CCJ even for a penny they know nothing about until the bailiff knocks or they are refused credit. It seems Crapita AKA parking Eye are getting default CCJ on alleged debts of a penny, as in o 0.01p.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3784421/Stranger-s-40-parking-ticket-cost-family-new-home.html

 

 

The figures for Parking Eye judgments since 2013 is really astonishing:

 

 

 

1. Lowell Portfolio (chases old debts claimed by Barclays, Capital One, Halifax, Vodafone, EE, O2). Claims since 2013: 434,736. Smallest judgment: £107.25

 

2. Cabot Financial (Barclays, Capital One, Bank of Scotland, Lloyds Bank and HSBC). Claims since 2013: 239,180. Smallest judgment: £95

 

3. Severn Trent Water. Claims since 2013: 80,849. Smallest judgment: £1.57

 

4.
ParkingEye. Claims since 2013: 60,291.
Smallest judgment: 1p

 

5. United Utilities. Claims since 2013: 50,582. Smallest judgment: £35

 

6. Capquest Investments (NatWest, Halifax, Barclaycard, Santander). Claims since 2013: 50,313. Smallest judgment: £50

 

7. MKDP LLP (Barclaycard, HSBC). Claims since 2013: 44,959. Smallest judgment: £50

 

8. Yorkshire Water Services. Claims since 2013: 43,117. Smallest judgment: £62.83

 

9. The Registrar of Companies (the official responsible for Companies House, which deals with all company filings). Claims since 2013: 34,921. Smallest judgment: 1p

 

10. Anglian Water Services. Claims since 2013: 31,177. Smallest judgment: £1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Those Capita PE penny judgments are reprehensible, but they must be done by the Northampton Bulk Centre to get through the net surely? Once granted no doubt Capita PE will load charges up to over the magic £600 to send in a HCEO, as do Severn Trent and the other water utilities.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Before we go any further. let's try and keep this thread civil.

 

I read the article earlier and the majority of the cases rang true (wasn't sure about the mortgage one though)

 

The guy who had sold his car and informed DVLA got a CCJ due to them not updating their records accordingly which while sounding odd as the new owner (who got the ticket) would have been taxing and insuring the vehicle at a different address, doesn't surprise me.

 

As for Parking Eye. Nothing I read about them surprised me at all. his insidious practice has been going on for years. (just read around the net)

 

There were some good comments on the piece as well. Sending official forms by Signed For delivery has to be the easiest option. Process servers would add too much to the costs. If no one is at home then an 'out card' should be left with the name of the person who the letter is intended for. If the person is in, the postman should say they have a letter for'xxxx' and if that person has moved, return to sender. Not rocket science is it?

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not at all SF, but then they may find claims for a penny are defended, and they lose out , and that would not do for the rapacious Capita, an organisation that is corrosive to the public good with too many fingers in too many pies.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Before we go any further. let's try and keep this thread civil.

 

I read the article earlier and the majority of the cases rang true (wasn't sure about the mortgage one though)

 

The guy who had sold his car and informed DVLA got a CCJ due to them not updating their records accordingly which while sounding odd as the new owner (who got the ticket) would have been taxing and insuring the vehicle at a different address, doesn't surprise me.

 

As for Parking Eye. Nothing I read about them surprised me at all. his insidious practice has been going on for years. (just read around the net)

 

There were some good comments on the piece as well. Sending official forms by Signed For delivery has to be the easiest option. Process servers would add too much to the costs. If no one is at home then an 'out card' should be left with the name of the person who the letter is intended for. If the person is in, the postman should say they have a letter for'xxxx' and if that person has moved, return to sender. Not rocket science is it?

 

Exactly. Almost perfect solution. County courts have to send all claims by recorded delivery ( paid by the claimant) and if the court claim is returned undelivered, a default judgement is stopped from happening. The claimant is advised that their claim has not be served and if they want to continue the claim, they have to ensure the claim is served on the debtor.

 

Should stop default judgements where claims go to old addresses.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently the Prime Minister is looking at the issue

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3786132/I-ll-end-credit-rating-scandal-pledges-PM-acts-Mail-exposes-rulings-ruined-lives.html

Capita needs winding up, too many fingers in too many pies.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

why do all these media outlet continually call private parking invoice FINES!!

 

 

you cant get a CCJ for a parking FINE!

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly DX, and this misrepresentation plays right into the hands of rogues like Crapita PE.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

common for motorists to get these because the parking co applies to the dVLA for the keeper address and they dont start legal action until 2 years later, when often the person is no longer at the address. Theparking co knows the forwarding address but issues to the old address because that is the service address at the time of the event that lead to the claim. When they get the CCJ they send the bailiffs round to the ne4w adress they had all along to collect Immoral but leagl.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And nasty, it needs stomping on.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is also another reason to change things. If, after a year or two, no contact has been made, the PPC should do a check to find any new address if the keeper has moved and must be able to prove that they followed due diligence to a court.

 

The same should apply to companies that have access to credit files. It is so easy to do and takes minutes, especially with the DVLA and their flawed automated service.

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Last week (on 16th November) a very important debate was heard in the House of Commons on the subject of County Court judgments.

 

The debate (by Chris Evans MP) followed the recent investigation published by the Daily Mail that found that 900,000 CCJs were issued last year, a greater than 33% increase on the previous three years.

 

The investigation highlighted the particular case of ParkingEye, a company responsible for many private carparks in this country and a significant user of CCJs to enforce fines.

 

Last year, 1.1 million county court claims were issued in the UK of which 745,000 have judgments entered in default of a defence.

 

Chris Evans MP was proposing changes. For instance, he (rightly in my opinion) considers that the 14 day period in which to challenge a CCJ is to short.

 

He also considers that once the judgment has been paid in full, that record of the judgment should be removed from Registry Trust (instead of remaining on the court record for 6 years).

 

He makes some highly important comments about 'service' of documentation. He considers that lessons can be learned from the Scottish system for delivering court summons where documents are first sent by recorded delivery. If that fails, court documents are sent out with sheriff officers.

 

PS: The comments from the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice are of interest !!!

 

 

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/whall/?id=2016-11-16a.151.2&s=bailiff#g153.1

Link to post
Share on other sites

parking eye CCJ's are not for FINES.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bet government does nothing. They are probably quite happy with the extra court fees, increased profits of companies involved in this who employ people, pay taxes etc.

 

Call me cynical, but government does not normally get involved, unless it can be shown it is their interest to do so.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was copying from the debate. Can you amend for me (I was beaten by the 10 minute edit facility).

 

 

well someone needs to tell them and the media to stop using the word FINE in relation to private parking speculative invoices

 

 

seems like you've got better standings than us mere mortals to point that out....

  • Haha 1

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Almost perfect solution. County courts have to send all claims by recorded delivery ( paid by the claimant) and if the court claim is returned undelivered, a default judgement is stopped from happening.

 

How could that ever work? Anyone wanting to deliberately avoid paying a debt would simply never sign for a recorded delivery letter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How could that ever work? Anyone wanting to deliberately avoid paying a debt would simply never sign for a recorded delivery letter.

 

In that event the court claim is personally served.

 

But you do raise a good point. A default CCJ caused by the claim going to an old address is something that should be avoided if at all possible.

 

The whole process needs to be reviewed.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...