CCJ Hearing to have judgement set aside

[2 sMoKiN bArReLs]

Some dorks owed us £1200 (in my opinion...it is to be fair a bit less than clear cut)

They crawled into their shell & refused to talk to me. (All I wanted really was to have a deal)

So, I sent them a notice before action. Still no reply, so I opened a case on MCOL. They didn't respond to that so I pressed the button to get judgement. A few days late I rang their accounts as asked how they wished to pay

They've now applied to the court to have the judgement set aside and a date has been set for a 20 minute hearing. (They say they never received the court papers)

What am I to expect? Is the hearing just to hear that they didn't get the papers, or is it actually to hear the facts of the case?

I was happy to sling £70 at it to irritate them. Will there be more costs involved?

Thanks in advance you legal types

[JustinP1]

2 sMoKiN bArReLs said:

What am I to expect? Is the hearing just to hear that they didn't get the papers, or is it actually to hear the facts of the case?

I was happy to sling £70 at it to irritate them. Will there be more costs involved?

They will have paid £155 for the application to set aside.

The long story is that if the judge accepts that they did not receive paperwork, the whole thing goes back to the start and they get to defend the claim by putting in their defence and a hearing about the facts a different day.

My personal tact (if your claim is possibly suspect) would be to look to settle at the earliest opportunity before the matter gets entrenched and more costs incurred.

But, although I understand the processes involved and the law in this area and have been where you are and 'bought the T-shirt', IANAL. How you should proceed should be based around getting someone qualified to look at the merits of your claim, as if it is duff you may as well settle for anything you can grab as otherwise you are just setting yourself up for more time and costs.

Edited by JustinP1 on Thursday 29th October 10:18

[2 sMoKiN bArReLs]

JustinP1 said:

2 sMoKiN bArReLs said:

What am I to expect? Is the hearing just to hear that they didn't get the papers, or is it actually to hear the facts of the case?

I was happy to sling £70 at it to irritate them. Will there be more costs involved?

They will have paid £155 for the application to set aside.

The long story is that if the judge accepts that they did not receive paperwork, the whole thing goes back to the start and they get to defend the claim by putting in their defence and a hearing about the facts a different day.

My personal tact (if your claim is possibly suspect) would be to look to settle at the earliest opportunity before the matter gets entrenched and more costs incurred.

But, although I understand the processes involved and the law in this area and have been where you are and 'bought the T-shirt', IANAL. How you should proceed should be based around getting someone qualified to look at the merits of your claim, as if it is duff you may as well settle for anything you can grab as otherwise you are just setting yourself up for more time and costs.

Edited by JustinP1 on Thursday 29th October 10:18

Thanks.

So, the hearing on the day is just to hear them say "it never arrived gov"

[Lurking Lawyer]

There's a bit more to it than that. As a minimum, they also have to show that they have a defence that is at least arguable . It's not a particularly high threshold though - they just have to show that the defence has at least some prospect of success, not that it is more likely than not to succeed.

[2 sMoKiN bArReLs]

Lurking Lawyer said:

There's a bit more to it than that. As a minimum, they also have to show that they have a defence that is at least arguable . It's not a particularly high threshold though - they just have to show that the defence has at least some prospect of success, not that it is more likely than not to succeed.

Thanks. I am assuming that I will be able to attend? (I'm not working that day & the court is only 15 minutes away..)

[tintopracer]

Yes you can attend and indeed should attend. They have to explain to the judge that their defence has some merit, as others say above and also have to explain why they don't believe they got the court papers. This would be both your claim form and also the notice of judgment which the court would have sent to them.

Also, the judge may also award you your costs of attending (mileage and parking) if you attend. You can ask, the worst that will happen is the judge says "no".

[2 sMoKiN bArReLs]

tintopracer said:

Yes you can attend and indeed should attend. They have to explain to the judge that their defence has some merit, as others say above and also have to explain why they don't believe they got the court papers. This would be both your claim form and also the notice of judgment which the court would have sent to them.

Also, the judge may also award you your costs of attending (mileage and parking) if you attend. You can ask, the worst that will happen is the judge says "no".

Cheers

[JustinP1]

Lurking Lawyer said:

There's a bit more to it than that. As a minimum, they also have to show that they have a defence that is at least arguable . It's not a particularly high threshold though - they just have to show that the defence has at least some prospect of success, not that it is more likely than not to succeed.

This is of course correct OP.

As you mentioned that you thought your claim was less than clear cut, and the fact they've applied for the set aside, my presumption is that they think there is something to argue.

There's a host of case law about where the bar is set on whether a defence is 'arguable'.

In practice through, from bitter experience, it can be that the judge simply interprets as if there is possibly evidence to look at or questions to be asked, that's enough to justify setting aside.

[Cyberprog]

At the very least, you may well have the opportunity now to open a dialog with them regards settling the claim. If you think it's a bit iffy, and they also think that, they may well be receptive to meeting in the middle to save further cost.

[2 sMoKiN bArReLs]

Cyberprog said:

At the very least, you may well have the opportunity now to open a dialog with them regards settling the claim. If you think it's a bit iffy, and they also think that, they may well be receptive to meeting in the middle to save further cost.

You are assuming we are dealing with rational human beings...unfortunately this is not the case!

Thanks for the advice

[Cyberprog]

2 sMoKiN bArReLs said:

You are assuming we are dealing with rational human beings...unfortunately this is not the case!

Thanks for the advice

I've got one of those myself;

https://twitter.com/AlexCyberprog/status/654692372...

Their defence is... interesting, and somewhat lacking in actual defence.

[JustinP1]

Cyberprog said:

2 sMoKiN bArReLs said:

You are assuming we are dealing with rational human beings...unfortunately this is not the case!

Thanks for the advice

I've got one of those myself;

https://twitter.com/AlexCyberprog/status/654692372...

Their defence is... interesting, and somewhat lacking in actual defence.

Dear oh dear....!

What on earth is all that about!?

[Boosted LS1]

Cyberprog said:

I've got one of those myself;

https://twitter.com/AlexCyberprog/status/654692372...

Their defence is... interesting, and somewhat lacking in actual defence.

Yep, you're definately going to jail :-)

[2 sMoKiN bArReLs]

Mine's a whole lot simpler

[Cyberprog]

JustinP1 said:

Dear oh dear....!

What on earth is all that about!?

They sent me spam. Basically an email address that I use for a particular job site recieved a email from Taylor CV's (part of UK Apollo Group Ltd) offering a CV writing service. I know they didn't get my data from the actual job site in question as they can show who accesses your data. So they've broken the DPA by processing my data without my consent (i.e. my consent was for employers or agencies to contact me with job opportunities, not to sell me a product) as well as by ignoring a Subject Access Request under section 7 of the DPA. They've also broken S22 of the PECR by sending the email without consent as well.

[PugwasHDJ80]

Cyberprog said:

JustinP1 said:

Dear oh dear....!

What on earth is all that about!?

They sent me spam. Basically an email address that I use for a particular job site recieved a email from Taylor CV's (part of UK Apollo Group Ltd) offering a CV writing service. I know they didn't get my data from the actual job site in question as they can show who accesses your data. So they've broken the DPA by processing my data without my consent (i.e. my consent was for employers or agencies to contact me with job opportunities, not to sell me a product) as well as by ignoring a Subject Access Request under section 7 of the DPA. They've also broken S22 of the PECR by sending the email without consent as well.

I fully support your right to protect your data but you must have a LOT of time on your hands!

[JustinP1]

Cyberprog said:

JustinP1 said:

Dear oh dear....!

What on earth is all that about!?

They sent me spam. Basically an email address that I use for a particular job site recieved a email from Taylor CV's (part of UK Apollo Group Ltd) offering a CV writing service. I know they didn't get my data from the actual job site in question as they can show who accesses your data. So they've broken the DPA by processing my data without my consent (i.e. my consent was for employers or agencies to contact me with job opportunities, not to sell me a product) as well as by ignoring a Subject Access Request under section 7 of the DPA. They've also broken S22 of the PECR by sending the email without consent as well.

Just so I understand this, you've started legal action against them because they sent you an email?

How much/what are you suing for? Do you really have 60 of these outstanding? Has one of these got to a hearing yet?

Edited by JustinP1 on Friday 30th October 15:42

[Red Devil]

If he has, good on him AFAIAC. The more people who take on companies who think they are above the law the better.
http://news.sky.com/story/1272933/spammer-to-pay-d...

OP, please keep us updated on the set aside hearing.

[2 sMoKiN bArReLs]

Red Devil said:

If he has, good on him AFAIAC. The more people who take on companies who think they are above the law the better.
http://news.sky.com/story/1272933/spammer-to-pay-d...

OP, please keep us updated on the set aside hearing.

I will...it's in a couple of weeks

[Cyberprog]

Red Devil said:

If he has, good on him AFAIAC. The more people who take on companies who think they are above the law the better.
http://news.sky.com/story/1272933/spammer-to-pay-d...

OP, please keep us updated on the set aside hearing.

Yes, that was one of Roddy's finer moments. There's quite a few of us doing this currently.

JustinP1 said:

Just so I understand this, you've started legal action against them because they sent you an email?

How much/what are you suing for? Do you really have 60 of these outstanding? Has one of these got to a hearing yet?

Edited by JustinP1 on Friday 30th October 15:42

Sent me an eMail, failed to answer a Subject Access Request, and have basically totally blanked me.

Yes, had a couple get to hearings and won. Most settle though before getting that far, or when they get the court papers. I normally have a half dozen cases working through the courts. They take ages to get anywhere...

PugwasHDJ80 said:

I fully support your right to protect your data but you must have a LOT of time on your hands!

It doesn't take much. Heavily templated, and easy enough to research to find the companies behind it.

Interestingly my UK spam has totally dropped off since I started doing this at the beginning of the year. Made a few quid too.