** SUCCESS ** Set aside application - is this letter a scare tactic ?

[cymruchris]

Earlier this year when overseas - I found a CCJ in my name that I wasn't aware of. Having posted about it on this forum, it became evident that I couldn't do much about it whilst overseas, as it required me to attend in court. Now I'm back in the UK - I recently submitted an application for a set aside, and paid the court fee of £255 - and have just received a letter offering to to prepare a consent order to remove the CCJ for a fee (all inclusive of their court costs: £280). It mentions that if they attend court - there may possibly be escalated costs of witness statements and what have you - so the question is - would this be a scare tactic that allows them to earn a little fee for something that might likely happen anyway? I've put a summary below of the case, and the scan (minus personal info) of the letter received. If anyone with experience of set asides would be kind enough to take a look through and give me an idea of whether what they're offering is useful - or a way of making it easy for them, whilst not having to attend the court. As always am very thankful for those that have taken the time to read and respond.

Case summary:

(Background - Bankruptcy 2013 - Expecting house to be sold as part of the process at some time in 2016 - so went overseas to work for a while - get a fresh start - I didn't live at the property - but had a royal mail redirection service running to my parents - and they electronically forwarded everything to me)

CCJ issued at Northampton Money Claims court in October 2016 (circa £3k) relating to a service charge on the property
I discovered it on my credit file at the beginning of this year (whilst living and working overseas)
The CCJ recorded name contains a spelling error
Royal mail redirection in place
At the time of the CCJ no paperwork was received by my parents, either prior to the CCJ or on completion
I didn't know about the claim - and so didn't respond to the paperwork
The claimant later received payment of the outstanding charges from my mortgage provider, and so the CCJ value is settled, although it doesn't show as such on my credit report.

I don't contest the value of money paid. I'm not trying to seek a refund. I simply want to set aside the CCJ as it wasn't something I was aware of. I'm inclined to believe that due to the spelling error in my name, Royal Mail wouldn't have redirected it. Therefore I'm not even contesting the fact they sent it - just that I didn't receive it. I'm not actually bothered what happens to the £255 court fee I've already paid - but I know that's not refundable - so the offer received below would be something in addition to this cost.

Would i be sensible to go for the offer as outlined below - or to continue to the hearing to put my side to the judge and let them decide?



the highwayman poem summary



the highwayman poem summary

[jaguarsuk]

Firstly they only get costs if they are successful in preventing set aside, as you were no longer resident at that address and they presumably issued proceedings despite having no response to letters at that address then pursuant to CPR 13.2 and 13.3 you are entitled to set aside. The fact you had a royal mail redirection in place and they misspelled your name just compounds that it's their fault.

It will be them paying your costs of the application if successful and not the other way around. They are basically trying to get you to pay for them to save them the costs they're going to incur if your successful.

Personally I'd juts ignore the letter and attend the hearing to set aside.

[cymruchris]

Firstly they only get costs if they are successful in preventing set aside, as you were no longer resident at that address and they presumably issued proceedings despite having no response to letters at that address then pursuant to CPR 13.2 and 13.3 you are entitled to set aside. The fact you had a royal mail redirection in place and they misspelled your name just compounds that it's their fault.

It will be them paying your costs of the application if successful and not the other way around. They are basically trying to get you to pay for them to save them the costs they're going to incur if your successful.

Personally I'd juts ignore the letter and attend the hearing to set aside.

Thanks very much for taking the time to have a read through my post, and sharing your thoughts. It confirms my gut feel. The case is next week, so I'm going to go ahead and see them there (if they turn up). There is a small risk that the judge might find in their favour - but if I articulate everything clearly based on facts, I think I have a reasonable chance of success. I'll update here after it's all done and dusted whatever the outcome.

[Amethyst]

I don't think that the Judge would seal that consent order - and as they point out they are aware of the issues with it and are only 'hopeful' it'll get signed off, so you'd have paid their £280 and still have the ccj. I'd attend the hearing ensuring you are ready to counter the points they make within the schedule as it is those they are likely to raise.

In their letter they say " however correspondence was sent to the property address and the alternative address"

but in point 1 of the schedule they say that it is agreed between the parties that "it appeared that no valid notification was given to the claimant of an alternative address"

so did they send correspondence to the property address AND the alternative address? Did they write to the alternative address to ensure you were aware of the pending issuance of a claim to the property address ( in which case you could have responded to state to use the alternative address for service ). Was the claim for the service charge because the property had been repossessed ?( in which case they'd know full well you no longer lived there )

I do think I would reply politely declining the offer and say you will be attending the hearing - you don't need to go into detail but you don't want them later claiming they didn't attend because they had made an offer to consent etc.

[cymruchris]

I

I do think I would reply politely declining the offer and say you will be attending the hearing - you don't need to go into detail but you don't want them later claiming they didn't attend because they had made an offer to consent etc.

That's a very good point. I was thinking to not respond, and just attend the hearing, if they didn't attend because of the above, would the judge hear the case in their absence? Or would they reschedule?

[cymruchris]

As an update - I've had the legal team on the phone this morning in which they left an answerphone message saying their client 'was happy to set the judgment aside with consent' and to give them a call to discuss. I did so, more to inform them that I would be attending the hearing next week, and that I would happily agree to them setting it aside if it meant no additional cost to me, but instead they stated that they would be drawing up a list of costs that they'd be applying of if the judge found in their favour, and have received these this afternoon, totalling just under a £1000. My gut feel is that they are doing so particularly to make me think 'Oh your offer of set aside at £280 would be much better value' - but the principle still stands that I didn't receive the paperwork, and am happy to stand in front of a judge and make that statement. There is a risk of it going in their favour - I do understand that - but would you feel this is another step along the path of trying to persuade me to settle it before court?

[ploddertom]

I would suggest that is akin to blackmail and would be taking a copy to the Court to show the Judge about their behaviour.

[cymruchris]

I would suggest that is akin to blackmail and would be taking a copy to the Court to show the Judge about their behaviour.

I'll let you know what the judge says after the hearing this week. Thanks everyone for commenting - I really appreciate it.

[jaguarsuk]

They're just playing the game and trying to get you to break, then agree to what they want.

[cymruchris]

As an update (and appreciate you all will have no doubt read many threads, and posted lots of helpful replies) I attended the hearing today, and the other party's legal representative was late by a few minutes, arriving quite flustered. Spent his entire time with his head in his notes. The judge agreed that a spelling error would on the balance of probability stop the mail redirection from operating efficiently, and so found in my favour and set the judgement aside. The representative put up what I felt were some quite ridiculous arguments, but the judge wasn't having any of it. So now have to wait for it all to come in writing, and then wait for my CRA files to be updated. Thanks to all above who took the time to comment, I really appreciate it, it encouraged me to follow the path I thought was right, and it turned out well. (The judge wasn't very impressed with the other sides attempt to settle the matter out of court for an additional fee either!)

[Amethyst]

Wicked ! Well done for sticking to your guns That's the end of it isn't it now as the claim was actually paid by your mortgage co ?

Oooo did he award you the cost of your application ?

Should come off the register within 30 days, then take a bit longer to come off the credit files ( next time they update after the register is sorted )

[cymruchris]

Wicked ! Well done for sticking to your guns That's the end of it isn't it now as the claim was actually paid by your mortgage co ?

Yes was originally settled by the mortgage company - so nothing more to pay.

Oooo did he award you the cost of your application ?
)

It was a she - she made clear that the other side had no costs to be awarded - but fell short of awarding me cost of application. That doesn't really bother me though - £255 is a lot of money - but with it soon to be off the files, it's money well spent in the grand scheme of things.

[jaguarsuk]

Excellent and I’m glad the Judge rebuked their rep as well. The way in which they went about trying to get that consent order signed was frankly ridiculous and always designed to cover the mess they’d made.

[cymruchris]

Excellent and I’m glad the Judge rebuked their rep as well. The way in which they went about trying to get that consent order signed was frankly ridiculous and always designed to cover the mess they’d made.

Yes - she gave him a bit of a dressing down a couple of times when he was deviating and going off in his own random direction.

[ploddertom]

Good for you and at least you can breathe now. Sounds to me as if the "legal rep" had just been appointed and not had time to read & digest whet they were given.