CCJ/Writ

[billybee]

The HCEOA refer to DCBL as members in their correspondence with me and the directory has Claire Sandbrook as a member - the writ is in her name:

[billybee]

What I'm really after is some definitive text that says that when a CCJ is set aside, the writ of control is also set aside (providing there are no other adverse judgments) and any goods seized must be returned automatically.

ploddertom Can you point me in the right direction?

I found this when searching (it's from Mason Bullock)

[billybee]

Amethyst "the court failed to put a bar on enforcement as soon as the application was made"

Is this what should happen or is there normally a delay before the N244 applies?

[ploddertom]

The HCEOA refer to DCBL as members in their correspondence with me and the directory has Claire Sandbrook as a member - the writ is in her name:

Mrs Sandbrook is indeed on the Authorised HCEO list and the first 2 listings are for her own companies. The rest including DCBL is where she "hires" herself out as a HCEO for hire whereby she takes a cut of each Writ for herself, she is not the only one to do so. The other notable names that do this are Simon Williamson & Frank Whitworth. You are making the mistake of thinking a company can be a member of the HCEOA - it is only for named Authorised HCEOs as listed and you will note the majority only work for 1 company.

[ploddertom]

What I'm really after is some definitive text that says that when a CCJ is set aside, the writ of control is also set aside (providing there are no other adverse judgments) and any goods seized must be returned automatically.

ploddertom Can you point me in the right direction?

I found this when searching (it's from Mason Bullock)

You have to remember that if a Judgment is Set Aside then it rewinds back to the beginning as if it was just starting. Therefore the Writ never existed and is expunged also meaning all enforcement including charges must be returned. If goods have been removed they should be returned or if sold then negotiation may have to take place for restitution if they cannot returned. The quote you have from Mason Bullock is pretty much spot on.

[billybee]

Found out today that Channel 5 (or the production company) have deleted their footage.

[ploddertom]

Amethyst "the court failed to put a bar on enforcement as soon as the application was made"

Is this what should happen or is there normally a delay before the N244 applies?

Until an Order is actually made then enforcement may go ahead, just making an application does not halt it - after all it may be refused.

[billybee]

You have to remember that if a Judgment is Set Aside then it rewinds back to the beginning as if it was just starting. Therefore the Writ never existed and is expunged also meaning all enforcement including charges must be returned. If goods have been removed they should be returned or if sold then negotiation may have to take place for restitution if they cannot returned. The quote you have from Mason Bullock is pretty much spot on.

So, you would agree that DCBL should have returned the car immediately when the CCJ was set aside and would have been aware of that? Is it OK for them to use their non-attendance at court plus the judge's failure to be explicit in writing as an excuse?Their complaints officer said that the writ had only been stayed pending the new hearing of the original claim but the writ-issuing court said the writ had fallen away (expunged is a great word) but referred me back to the CCJ-issuing court who were (and continue to be) absolutely useless.

[ploddertom]

It is very rare for the HCEO or their representatives to go to a Set Aside Hearing as in realty it has nothing to do with them. Once the Order is drawn up then it sjould be sent to all interested parties - personally I find it easier to notify Judgment Claimant & HCEO yourself both copied by email/attachment and followed up with a hard copy in the post - there is no room for misunderstanding then. Repayment of monies and/or goods should be undertaken by them within 14 days or next stage as you already have it is give them a taste of their own medicine by employing your own HCEO. At all times the controlling Court in this is the one that hears your Set Aside or Stay of Execution - normally a County Court and I have found it is sometimes better to use one of the larger city Courts as theey are more used to dealing with these applications.

[billybee]

The problem is that the order which was sent to all parties, although setting aside the CCJ, made no mention of the writ or the car, although the N244 application was clearly for a ruling on both the CCJ and the writ.

[ploddertom]

It doesn't need to. What exactly was your application for?

[billybee]

I think the wording was:

"To set aside the CCJ and stay the writ of control."

[ploddertom]

That's OK I was beginning to think you had only submitted a Set Aside application. That's what happens when you try to do a few of these all at the same time. The application for the Stay is more important than that for Set Aside.

[billybee]

ploddertom et al

I have just had this response from Phil Johnson at DCBL as part of a final final response:

"The subsequent Order resulting from the hearing categorically does not state that the vehicle was to be returned as you are fully aware and DCBL work with Court sealed documentation only."

So, in spite of the fact that the hearing was explicitly to set aside both CCJ and writ and that the judge said the car should be returned (which the claimant acknowledges), DCBL are relying on the omission of any reference to the writ or the car on the written order as their excuse for failing to comply.

Is there anything I can do?

[ploddertom]

Typical of them but I suppose you haveto think that moving forward for any recompense against them may be fraught with difficulty. However it is the original Claimant that employed them and they should be help accountable for the actions & charges of their representatives. Personally I think I would draw a line under things - after all you will have been reimbursed for all monies paid + you did get the vehicle back. I would guess DCBL charged your Claimant for all outstanding fees so never really lost out.

In the meantime I will forward a link to this thread to those who may be interested and may in turn bring it to the attention of both MOJ & HCEOA. I am aware of complaints against DCBL being investigated at a senior level.