Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have had a secondary thought.  I borrowed £s from a completely separate entity 6y ago. It was personal and unsecured. I was going to repay upon sale of the property. But then repo and I couldn't.  Eventually they applied and got a charging order on the property.  Their lawyers wrote that if I didn't repay they may apply for an order for sale.  I'm not in control of the sale.  The lender won't agree to an order for sale.  The judge won't expedite it/ extract from trial.  Someone here on cag may or may not suggest I can apply for an order v the receiver?  But could I alternatively ask this separate entity with a c.o to carry out their threat and actually make an application to court for an order for sale v the receiver instead?
    • You left the PCN number showing, but no worries, I've redacted it. Euro Car parks are very well known to us.  I've just skimmed through the titles of the latest 100 cases we have with them (I gave up after 100) and, despite all their bluster and threats, in not one have they taken the Cagger to court. You stayed there for 2 hours &:45 minutes.  I'm guessing the limit is 2 hours and 30 minutes, right?  
    • If the claimant fails to draft directions the court can order a Case Management Hearing to set them but normally in Fast Track claims the claimant sets the directions...Unlike small claims track which are always set the court.
    • Not Evris offer, the court offers mediation service.   All claims proceed to hearing if mediation fails /not happen.   Why do you not wish to attend in person to stand your claim ?     Absolutely you must comply with the courts directions or your claim risks being struck out. Preparation for a hearing should happen irrespective of mediation.   https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/460613-suing-a-parcel-delivery-company-when-you-dont-have-a-direct-contract-with-them-–-third-party-rights-copy-of-judgment-available/#comment-5255007   Andy  
    • LPA.  (I'm fighting insolvency due to all the stuff that he and lender have done).  He appointed estate agents - (changed several times). Disclosure shows he was originally appointed for a specific reason (3m after repo) : using his powers as acting for leaseholder to serve notice on freeholders (to grab fh).  There was interest from 3 potential buyers. He chose one whose offer depended on a positive result of the notice.  Disc also shows he'd taken counsel advice - which was 'he'd fail'.  He'd simultaneously asked to resign as his job (of serving notice) was done and he'd found a buyer.  Lender asked him to stay on to assign notice to the buyer.  Notice failed, buyer didn't buy.  So receiver stayed.  There was 1 buyer who wanted to proceed w/o fh but receiver/ lender wasted 1y trying to get rid of them!  Disc shows why. But I didn't know why at the time. In later months Lender voiced getting rid of receiver. Various reasons - including cost.  But there's a contradiction/ irony: as I've seen an email (of 4y ago) which shows the receiver telling lender not to incur significant costs and to minimize receiver costs.    Yet lender then asked him to serve another notice - again counsel advice indicated 'he'd fail'.  And he did fail.  But wasted 3y trying and incurred huge legal costs - lender trying to pass on to me. Lender interfered - said wanted to do works.  Receiver should have said no.  But disc. shows he agreed to step aside to let them do the works - on proviso lender would discuss potential costs first (they didn't), works wouldn't take long (took 15m), and lender would hold interest (they didn't) (this last point is crucial for me now - as I need to know if I can argue that all interest beyond this point shouldnt be allowed?)   I need to check receiver witness statement in litigation with freeholders to see exactly what he said about 'his position'. But I remember it being along the lines of - 'if the works increased the value of the property he didn't have a problem'.  Lender/ receiver real problems started at this point. The cost of works and 4y passage of time has meant there is no real increase in value. Lender (or receiver) didn't get any permissions (statutory or fh) (and didn't tell me) and just bulldozed the property to an empty shell.  The freeholders served notice on me as leaseholder for breach of covenants (strict no alterations).  The Lender stepped in (acting for me) to issue notice for relief of forfeiture - not the receiver.  That wasted 2y of litigation (3y if inc the works) and incurred huge costs (both sides).  Lender's aim was to do the works that every potential buyer balked at due to the lease restrictions.  Lender and receiver knew couldn't do works w/o fh permission. Lender did them anyway; receiver allowed.  Receiver remained appointed.  I'm arguing lender interfered in receiver duties.  Receiver should have just sold property 4-5y ago w/o allowing any works.  Almost 3y since works finished the property remains unsold (>5y from repo). The property looks brand new - but it was great before.  The lender spent a ton of money - hoping that would facilitate a quick sale.  But the money they spent and the years they have wasted has meant they had to increase sale price.  It's now completely overpriced.  And - of course - the same issues that put buyers off (before works) still exist.   The receiver has tried for 2y to assert the works increased value. But he is relying on agents estimates - which have proved highly speculative. (Usual trick of an agent to give a high value to get the business - and then tell seller to reduce when no-one buys.). And of course lender continues to accrue interest (despite 4y ago receiver saying pause interest). Lender tried to persuade receiver to use specific agent. Disc shows this agent was best friends with the lender's main investor in the property.  Before works this agent had valued it low.  After works this agent suggested a value 70% higher!  The lender persuaded receiver to sack one agent and instead use this agent.  No offers. (Price way too high).   Research has uncovered that this main investor has since died.  I guess his investment is part of probate? And his family want it back?    Disc shows the sacked agent had actually received a high offer 1y ago.  Receiver rejected it.  (thus I don't know if the buyer would have ever proceeded). He was relying on the high speculative valuation the agents had given him to pitch for the business. The agents were in a catch-22.  The receiver sacked them. Disc shows there has been 0 interest ever since (inc via new agent requested by lender). I don't think lender or receiver want all this to come out in public domain via a trial.  It will ruin their reputations. If I can't get an order for sale with lender - can I apply separately against receiver?
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Getting Them To Reveal Their Vitals. Using CPR 31.14 to Your Advantage


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3704 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi

Following a claim received against me I have followed your link above sent, based on a CPR31.14 and a CPR 31.15 request for disclousure (I requested details apertaining to NOA/DN/CA and other info also) to the claimants solicitors I have received the following response back:

 

 

You will note that CPR 31.14 (1) states that

"A party may inspect a document mentioned in -

(a) a statement of case;

(b) a witness statement ;

© a witness summary; or

(d) an affidavit"

 

They go on to state that the info I have requested does not refer to any of the following and as such have not supplied and on that basis they are not bound by my request.

 

They have supplied to me only:

1. CA and T&Cs provided by the CC company

2. Copy Representation of the first NOA sent to me (this I never received!)

 

 

Can you please advice as to my reply to them and the courts in my defence? This will help me greatly.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 108
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

you use 31.14 to request copies of doccuments mentioned or referred to in the POC (you cannot ask for dcouments that are not mentioned in the POC()

 

you use cpr18 for INFORMATION (not documents) which you need to assist you in defending the claim- but this must be confined to relevant information and NOT become like a SAR

 

if the claimant then refers to any document in his response to the CPR18 request- then you are entitled to ask for a copy of that document

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

Following a claim received against me I have followed your link above sent, based on a CPR31.14 and a CPR 31.15 request for disclousure (I requested details apertaining to NOA/DN/CA and other info also) to the claimants solicitors I have received the following response back:

 

 

You will note that CPR 31.14 (1) states that

"A party may inspect a document mentioned in -

(a) a statement of case;

(b) a witness statement ;

© a witness summary; or

(d) an affidavit"

 

They go on to state that the info I have requested does not refer to any of the following and as such have not supplied and on that basis they are not bound by my request.

 

They have supplied to me only:

1. CA and T&Cs provided by the CC company

2. Copy Representation of the first NOA sent to me (this I never received!)

 

 

Can you please advice as to my reply to them and the courts in my defence? This will help me greatly.

 

Thanks

i think that they are right

 

They are only bound to provide documents mentioned in inter alia a statement of case. Therefore if they have only mentioned those documents in the statement of case, then that is all you are entitled to.

 

If you simply Copied and Pasted a template letter, from here, then you have been sorely mistaken, you should always make sure that your letters fit the picture, as you are playing a game here when the stakes are high and if you get it wrong then it can provide costly.

 

as for your defence , without the facts, information and documentation we cannot assist im afraid.

 

you really need to read my thread on CPR 31.14 vs 18 and also the thread i did on embarrassed defences as they may assist

Link to post
Share on other sites

Inspection and copying of documents

 

31.15

 

Where a party has a right to inspect a document –

(a) that party must give the party who disclosed the document written notice of his wish to inspect it;

 

(b) the party who disclosed the document must permit inspection not more than 7 days after the date on which he received the notice; and

 

© that party may request a copy of the document and, if he also undertakes to pay reasonable copying costs, the party who disclosed the document must supply him with a copy not more than 7 days after the date on which he received the request.

 

(Rule 31.3 and 31.14 deal with the right of a party to inspect a document)

 

 

yes but only docs as per 31.14

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...

Hi All

 

Could someone please clear a point up for me on the cpr 31.14? I have a set aside hearing in 3 weeks and think that I should issue the cpr (reading what everyone says). The thing that is getting me muddled is the request for 'an extension of time for me to file a defence'. If the court date is set (by the court) how can the dca give an extension of time? Or is it that the 'defence' in this case would be that submitted if the set aside wasn't granted, and this went to bancruptcy? I have the letter waiting for a stamp but I don't want to send this out and look a complete idiot if it's not appropriate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi All

 

Could someone please clear a point up for me on the cpr 31.14? I have a set aside hearing in 3 weeks and think that I should issue the cpr You cant until you get a set a side (reading what everyone says). The thing that is getting me muddled is the request for 'an extension of time for me to file a defence'.Whos request? If the court date is set (by the court) how can the dca give an extension of time? The Claimant cant you request it Or is it that the 'defence' in this case would be that submitted if the set aside wasn't granted, and this went to bancruptcy? Why would you need a defence if the set a side isnt allowed? I have the letter waiting for a stamp but I don't want to send this out and look a complete idiot if it's not appropriate.

You dont do anything until its (if) set a side.

Regards

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jut saw this :) Much more terse than my reply but essentially the same. I don't think you need to.

 

Quite simply put you cant do anything until there is a claim or cause to defend.Judgment stands for the Claimant until such time its set a side,then it becomes a claim

and possibly defendable.

 

Andy

Edited by Andyorch

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...

Quite a lot of posts have been moved to another thread - off topic or where caggers should have started their own independant threads. They can be viewed on the link below.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?418714-Off-topic-posts-from-quot-Getting-them-to-Reveal-their-Vitals-quot&highlight=Vitals

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3704 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...