An individual sought urgent advice following the discovery that a default judgment had been entered against him through the online court portal. The judgment was issued in April and subsequently transferred to the Central London court, where administrative delays were anticipated. The individual had not yet received a hard copy of the order. He was concerned about the creditor’s ability to enforce the judgment, particularly through bankruptcy proceedings, an order for sale, or a third party debt order. The individual also faced a separate claim from his landlord, for which he needed to file an acknowledgment of service. He accepted liability for that debt but was unable to pay due to a freezing order imposed in the context of family proceedings. He attributed his financial difficulties to alleged negligence by previous solicitors.
The situation escalated when enforcement agents attended his home. Although they did not remove goods due to the freezing order, their conduct caused significant distress to his family. The individual wished to understand whether he could challenge the bailiffs’ behaviour and how to prevent further visits. He later received an interim third party debt order relating to funds allegedly held in his bank account, though he maintained that the account did not contain the judgment sum.
The consultation addressed the procedural requirements for applying to set aside a default judgment, including the need for an N244 application supported by a witness statement and a draft defence. Counsel explained that he could not assess the merits of any defence without first reviewing the relevant documents, contrary to the individual’s request for limited preparatory time. The individual admitted part of the claim, which raised the likelihood of an immediate payment being required.
Further issues arose concerning the enforcement agents’ attendance. Counsel explained that, if the goods were subject to a freezing order, the agents should not have attempted to take control of them. However, any complaint about their conduct should have been made contemporaneously to the police. The individual’s concern stemmed partly from the impact of the incident on ongoing family proceedings, as his spouse’s legal representatives had criticised him for causing disruption at the property. The interim third party debt order created additional urgency. Counsel advised that any challenge based on lack of service would require evidence of when the order was actually received. The individual also reported that a valuable artwork had been handed to the bailiffs by his spouse, raising questions about compliance with the freezing order and the risk of dissipation of assets.
Counsel advised that an application to set aside the judgment was procedurally possible but unlikely to succeed without a properly particularised defence addressing each itemised invoice. He emphasised that a general assertion of overcharging would not be sufficient and that the individual would need to prepare a detailed witness statement. Counsel also warned that, if unsuccessful, the individual would be liable for the creditor’s costs.
Regarding enforcement, Counsel explained that the bailiffs could not lawfully remove goods covered by a freezing order and should leave the premises if this was made clear. He recommended negotiating a payment plan directly with the enforcement agents, as this would be the most effective way to prevent further visits. The individual proposed monthly payments within a limited range, and Counsel indicated that his clerks would provide a fee estimate for liaising with the enforcement agents on his behalf. Counsel further advised that any complaint about the bailiffs’ conduct should be made to the police, though the likelihood of prosecution was low. He explained the effect of the interim third party debt order and the need for evidence to support any challenge. Counsel agreed to assist with drafting a witness statement if required, noting that this would incur significant cost. The individual was encouraged to continue making voluntary payments to demonstrate good faith, even if previous offers had been rejected.
Call us – Mon-Fri 8:30am – 6:30pm
+44 (0) 20 3034 0077
By submitting this form, I accept this website’s Privacy Policy