CPR Advice Please

[Pezza54]

I am trying to get my head round CPR 20 Additional Claims and would appreciate advice
Please correct me if I am wrong in my understanding

The defendant has to get court permission to serve an additional claim on a person or company that is not a party to proceedings if the additional claim is not made at the time their defence is submitted
Notice is not required meaning the claimant may be unaware the defendant has sought the court's permission
The defendant has to wait for a court order to serve the additional claim
The defendant files the claim form N211 and sends the second defendant the claim form, response forms, and original Particulars of Claim, Defence and Reply to Defence
The defendant sends a copy of N211 to the claimant

What happens if the second defendant does not respond?

Is a Part 20 claim necessary in a Section 75 claim where the claimant is claiming against the creditor for the breach of contract by a supplier?
Does CCA 74 Section 75 (2) provide an indemnity to cover the creditor's loss meaning that a court claim is not required?

Thanks for any advice

[atticus]

Q1. This will depend on the case. You may be able to apply for summary judgement or default judgement.

Q2/3 In practice a credit card company may be able to set its claim off against any money it may owe the supplier under ongoing trading arrangements. Otherwise court action will be necessary.

[Pezza54]

Thanks
A1 If the supplier doesn't respond is it the defendant that obtains the default judgement meaning they have to chase the supplier for money if the claimant wins the case?
A2/3 That explains a lot. The supplier if still trading will stop taking payments by credit card

[R0b]

What happens if the second defendant does not respond?

CPR 20.11 applies.

Is a Part 20 claim necessary in a Section 75 claim where the claimant is claiming against the creditor for the breach of contract by a supplier?

I am not sure it is a question of necessity, the creditor has the right to do so if warranted, particularly where the creditor wishes to invoke section 75(2). In practice, I would typically suggest a consumer issues a claim against both the trader and the creditor as defendants to the claim, since there is not much reason not to. Otherwise you may find yourself in situations like this where delays occur because the creditor wants to add an additional party. Plus the advantage of doing it this way is that if the trader was added from the start and failed to respond, you could enter default judgment against the trader and still proceed with the claim against the creditor.

However, as you failed to bring a claim against the trader and instead it is the creditor who brought in the trader as an additional defendant, it is the creditor who is the claimant against the trader, not yourself (they are referred to as 'additional claimants'). Thus CPR 20.11 applies above and CPR 12 on default judgment does not apply.

Does CCA 74 Section 75 (2) provide an indemnity to cover the creditor's loss meaning that a court claim is not required?

No, a court claim would be required to enforce the creditors right, unless by other means it has available.

[Pezza54]

Thanks R0B
at least my understanding of CPR 20 procedure was right
Unfortunately my county court is one of the worst 3 for delays - over 420 days (in 2022)

[atticus]

Thanks
A1 If the supplier doesn't respond is it the defendant that obtains the default judgement meaning they have to chase the supplier for money if the claimant wins the case?

Of course. Who else is going to assert or enforce D1's rights against D2?

[Pezza54]

That's a relief
I did read on another forum in a S75 claim where the claimant sued jointly, won his case and was ordered by the judge to pursue the trader for the money. To me that seemed to defeat the benefit of paying by credit card

Maybe he didn't make it clear in his PoC who should pay his claim?

[atticus]

If he sued both and won, then he will have obtained judgement against both.

In the absence of reliable information, anything is possible.