Acknowledge of Service without a Particulars of Claim - CCMCC

[jaguarsuk]

Sorry I have only just seen this, what response did you give them?

I would have sought guidance from the court regarding a video link and/or their views on adjournment. If the claimant is concerned they can apply to the court for a stay and therefore there is no need for consent or a consent order. The claim could also be heard via telephone, which you can still request for Wednesday. If it were me and I could keep it going ahead safely I would given the evidence.*

If the worst happened, the one surviving parent would become the sole defendant and if both parents passed then the claim would continue to recover the monies for their estate.*

[Ssssssssss]

Sorry I have only just seen this, what response did you give them?

I would have sought guidance from the court regarding a video link and/or their views on adjournment. If the claimant is concerned they can apply to the court for a stay and therefore there is no need for consent or a consent order. The claim could also be heard via telephone, which you can still request for Wednesday. If it were me and I could keep it going ahead safely I would given the evidence.

If the worst happened, the one surviving parent would become the sole defendant and if both parents passed then the claim would continue to recover the monies for their estate.

Hey thanks Jaguarsuk. I didn't respond at all initially as didn't know what to say really as i always thought these things are up to the court and when i google consent orders they didn't seem relevant and i couldn't really understand if i'd be landing myself in more trouble.

But this morning (23rd) at around 10am. - we got letter 1 attached from them which to be honest I was not impressed with the tone. Plus neither my parents are in the very high risk categories announced on Friday and I'll be honest, I would doubt his father is either but i don't know.

I phoned the court and they took my details and said that they would call me back but they didn't so at around 4 i sent them attached email. It basically said that we don't know what is happening. Can the court use video. Do we need to come in. All the questions you raised above which is good.

I then replied to the claimants solicitor ( attached below) and said that it was up to hmcts and the court to decide their policy and we were awaiting their response so no consent order would be necessary at this stage ( in line with what you suggest was the right thing to do I think).

After 5:30 pm they sent letter 2 attached below which again got me riled and seems to be having a go at us for hmcts not doing what they want and then threatening to put an application in if we don't agree.
To that last letter i have not responded yet as i was just so angry with the tone being taken when this is not our fault.

Given tonights briefing by Boris, I think the hearing will be adjourned anyway but I will write to pursue a telephone or video hearing as that seems like the best approach to get this thing sorted out. It's not ideal but then nor is waiting 3 to 6 months more. Not sure what else we can do. I'm minded not to bother responding to that last letter ?

[Ssssssssss]

oh and thanks for responding regarding what would happen if someone passes away. It was worrying. It's a horrible question to have to ask but the circumstances are pretty awful I guess.*

[jaguarsuk]

Write back with the below and send a copy to the court.

I am writing in response to your letter dated 23rd March 2020, a copy is enclosed as there were more than one.

It is the responsibility if HMCTS to keep all parties safe and it is not up to the defendants/counter claimants to act as substitute for any failings they might have, perhaps if you are so concerned about their inaction you ought to spend your time petitioning HMCTS instead of pointlessly writing to the defendants/counter claimants.

The defendants/counter claimants are happy to attend a hearing with social distancing measures in place, are not merely because of their age in the very high risk category and have none of the underlying health conditions that would put them into that category, you suggestion they are is sensationalism at its finest.

We do not see a reason why the claimant/counter defendant cannot attend a hearing, his father is not required to be involved in this matter and as you have only stated concern for his father we must assume he has no underlying health conditions that would put himself in the high risk category. However, there's a really simple way of not having to attend a hearing if your client does not wish to and that is to discontinue the claim then settle the counter claim amount owing for his bodge job in full, then he won't have to attend anything.

In any event it is the claimant who seeks an adjournment, so a consent order is not the appropriate vehicle to request this and it certainly is not incumbent upon the defendants/counter claimants to sign one as well as share the cost of it being sealed. We have sought clarification from the court and will await their directions, but if you want to waste the money of your client making applications unnecessarily we'll add this to the list of unreasonable conduct on the claim pursuant to CPR 27.14 for when the hearing turns to costs.

We feel that this matter has dragged on long enough, if possible safely that a hearing should go ahead and ideally that will be via telephone or video conference call. Whether that is the case will be decided by the court.

Yours sincerely



The Defendants/Counter claimants

CC - X County Court, the street, town, postcode.

[Ssssssssss]

Write back with the below and send a copy to the court.

Thanks Jaguarsuk.*

I was literally about to send this letter out but just in the last few minutes i received email from court with other side copied in saying*"

Dear Sir/Madam,*I am writing with regards to the hearing scheduled for the above case number on 25 March 2020. *Due to the current Covid-19 situation the Judge has adjourned all hearings therefore tomorrow’s hearing will not be going ahead.* Any queries please contact us on x"

Is it worth sending the letter you suggested now ?* I'm assuming its probably not worth it anymore as the decisions been made for all cases currently underway at this particular court.

[Ssssssssss]

I went back to them with the first paragraph of what you said about the fact it IS the responsibility of HMCTS to keep us safe and to direct their issues to HMCTS themselves in future. * Then just said we would await the courts direction going forwards as its out of both parties hands.

[Ssssssssss]

jaguarsuk**Hi Jaguarsuk, it looks like things are moving fast at the court to get themselves digital. *We have received following order. *I am inclined to think that our preference should be for a Skype hearing as otherwise the judge might not see the video of dot and dab we submitted and it will be a lot harder for all 3 of us to be on the same telephone call and 2 from their side as well...They might even get their lawyer involved now. * Is the fact we have submitted video enough of a reason to want a Skype hearing ? *I guess also, if we need to share any documents or web pages with the court like the additional examples of dot and dab then that might be an issue now ? * * Additionally, if any photographs or evidence needs to be examined like the originals then how can this be done over the phone...in particular their doctored photographs that they have submitted ?

It does seem to be asking whether we want Skype or telephone or something else but i'm not sure if they are saying we will have to do the point 4(2) witness statement if that is the case ?

*The order is*
upon noting the public health emergency from Covid 19 and the need for safe working and the need to avoid unnecessary face to face contact :-

It is ordered that :-
1. *The final hearing listed on 24th March ( they meant 25th), is adjourned to the first available date after 28 days.
2. *It appears that the matter may be is suitable for a hearing by telephone, Skype or other remote means. *The parties shall by 4pm 1st Apr 2020 each supply to the court in writing telephone numbers upon which they may be contacted for the purposes of a telephone hearing and state their preference as to which type of remote hearing they would like. *Upon receipt the court will either fix a remote final hearing or fix a further date for a hearing by telephone *and directions as to how the telephone hearing will take place.
3. *As an alternative to a telephone hearing any party can ask the court to decide the dispute in his or her absence. *The court will then consider that party's statement of case and other documents he or she sent to the court. *Should you wish to do this you will ned to notify the court and the other party at least 7 days before the hearing date.
4. *Because this order has been made without a hearing, any party may apply to set aside or vary this order upon sending to the court and the other parties written notice provided : *(1) *that any such application is made within 7 days of receipt of this order (2) *It is accompanied by a witness statement to be relied upon in support explaining (if it be the case) (a) why the hearing needs to be heard urgently (b) why a telephone hearing is not appropriate.

[jaguarsuk]

All you need to do is reference the point the order mentioning Skype, provide your skype address and telephone number.*

4 is if you want to apply to vary the order, saying you need to make an application and provide a witness statement to explain the application.*

[Ssssssssss]

All you need to do is reference the point the order mentioning Skype, provide your skype address and telephone number.

4 is if you want to apply to vary the order, saying you need to make an application and provide a witness statement to explain the application.

Thanks Jaguarsuk. We wrote to the court today as per your message and the directions given (attached letter).

We have just now been copied into the claimants letter to the court (attached below) which was submitted at 4.15 so 15 minutes late but also they don't really seem to have done what the court asked ! They seem to be asking for a physical hearing but one that is delayed until such time as social distancing is no longer what the government is asking for - which could be 6 months from now for all we know !! Not sure what they are trying to do here other than delay the whole thing even more. Can they even do this given the directions that were given ?

[Ssssssssss]

Btw, contrary to what they have written, we have not made any reference in our witness statements to additional physical evidence...

[jaguarsuk]

They’re just delaying as much as they can, it’s the game they’ve been playing all along and this has just given them another chance to do it further.

[Ssssssssss]

They’re just delaying as much as they can, it’s the game they’ve been playing all along and this has just given them another chance to do it further.

Thanks Jaguarsuk. Yes It looks like exactly that :-(

Sadly we got a letter on Saturday from the court which said that upon receiving both letters from us and them, they have decided that our case is not suitable for a remote hearing and that we will have to go in in person on 25th August !

I'm not sure how they have drawn this conclusion and whether the letter the other side wrote them was enough to sway them but its clearly worked. It could also just be that the court doesn't have capacity or remote video capability setup well enough yet. Who knows.

I guess not much we can do now but wait

My only concern is that it gives the other side more time to concoct stuff but I guess not much we can do about that now? It won't change the good evidence and video we submitted though in any case i guess.

[GBExile]

I'm not sure how they have drawn this conclusion .

Where have you been for the last 6 weeks? They are delaying this case for your protection too.

[Ssssssssss]

Where have you been for the last 6 weeks? They are delaying this case for your protection too.

thanks gbexile.

If by "they" you mean the court - of course I know that.

If by "they" you mean the other party - they have been delaying the case for months and months before Corona ever happened.

My comment was in regards to the fact that it can be done remotely and there is nothing in the case that should have stopped that.

[GBExile]

thanks gbexile.

If by "they" you mean the court - of course I know that.

If by "they" you mean the other party - they have been delaying the case for months and months before Corona ever happened.

My comment was in regards to the fact that it can be done remotely and there is nothing in the case that should have stopped that.

I doubt the courts will be prioritising debt cases to be done remotely. All of the kit required to do so would be transferred to criminal cases. Or simple stuff.