Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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?
    • Ok many thanks. Just wanted to check that nothing else for us to do / send for the moment. Will update again once we receive a copy of their N181 and proposed directions for review. Our post is a bit hit and miss at the moment. Appreciate the help through this process.
    • Yes and will ask you if you are in agreement and or wish to add /remove any direction.
  • 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

Successful Defence Against Private Parking Charge Michael Sobell of Roxborough


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3886 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

The following documents comprise the full judgement and the case transcript of a case brought by East Kent Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust.

 

They were represented by Michael Sobell of Roxborough.

 

They Lost!

 

CAG member Scouse Magic has given permission for this to be posted in full and without removal of any data.

 

Enjoy!

 

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]45338[/ATTACH]

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]45339[/ATTACH]

Edited by ims21

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

haha that legal team was totally inept and Sm was very well prepared. Good job to SM!

  • Confused 1

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please look out for the the part where ' THE DRIVER' ????? who turned out to be Gary Osner,the managing director of Roxburghe and Sobell (solicitor) perjur themselves to the judge!

 

He kept running over and writing on Sobell's note pad, judge picked up on it at third attempt..............And asked ' hello are you the driver or a paralegal' ...........I am contemplating whether to refer this back to the judge?

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

There were a hell of a lot of mistakes from that 'solicitor'. Love how the judge called out one of the witnesses too, when it was clear that he lied on his statement.

  • Confused 1

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

More than likely he isnt a solicitor. He's probably just from the "legal department" of the PPC

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Now this case was in January, imagine Sobell's surprise when he realised he had to attend the same court, but this time with the Mrs!

 

Well on reflection of the absolute thrashing he had previously by the mighty Scouse Magic, it was not so un-surprising that proceedings were suddenly dropped......just a shame really that he did not file the correct form and offer my costs to that point!

I counter claimed the intial particulars of claim which was totally wrong.......Sobell said they related to one car .....but it was two.

 

For your purusal and enjoyment I post some of the judges comments in my case...................

 

JUDGE "The Claimant notwithstanding being advised by the Court that the application to

adjourn was not being granted, makes no appearance or indeed any

communication with the Court whatsoever. My reaction to that is that any firm

of solicitors, and it may well be that Mr Sobell is the only solicitor employed by

that firm, but notwithstanding that, any solicitor in practice engaged in litigation

who simply fails to attend Court, does not take notice of a message that was left

on his firm’s answering machine, even if he is hospitalised, as per the 15th March

application avers, must have some administrative staff to ensure that whilst he is

personally unable to work, that the work is going to be covered. The world does

not stop simply because a solicitor goes into hospital.

And I am not impressed by the absence of any response to the telephone message that was left and the fact that he even thought it was appropriate to apply for an

adjournment in the first place when it would have been easy to engage either

another solicitor by way of an agency agreement or simply to instruct counsel to

attend on behalf of the client.

So I am dealing with this counterclaim in the absence of anything from the Claimant and also, as Miss Fever has pointed out, in the absence of any

documents put forward in defence of the counterclaim.

The way in which the claim was being pursued is quite frankly a mess.

 

 

The second complaint that Miss Fever makes is that in the letter before the claim and this is from Graham White Solicitors, the letter dated the 23rd October 2012, it

says this:

“Registered keeper details were obtained from the DVLA and my

client wrote to the registered keeper requesting either payment or

details as to who was driving the car at the time of the

unauthorised parking events. During various recorded

communications between the registered keeper, you, and my client

you have admitted to being the driver at the time of these events.

Both my client and my firm have written to you on several

occasions to request payment of the above debt and to date you

have not paid despite offering to pay.”

Well, those two assertions are clearly both wrong. And it is a matter of concern that a solicitor would write to a Defendant setting out not one but two grossly

inaccurate assertions.

 

 

Needless to say Judgement awarded in my favour for £235.00 and £180.00 costs awarded.

 

 

Now then, old Sobell decided he could challenge this.....and was shot down in flames by His Honour Judge Scarrat...." There being no realistic prospect of success".

 

 

I then turned the tables on them, threatening them with a warrant of execution.....They ignored me .....The claimant (hospital) paid out in the end!

 

Edited by dx100uk
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I love it when a plan comes together, and the legal team are anialated.I actually defended myself over a county court claim between a miss Jodie Louise Sutton, and my self.She turned left from a right hand lane at a roundabout , and smashed into my car.She drove off and refused to admit liability later.She decided to put in a claim to Boston county court and even went to such lengths as to get a barrister.I represented myself, ripped her to pieces with my constant barrage of questioning, ripped her barristers defending to pieces and won the case.It way back in about 1998 if i remember.She had to pay me £285.00 within 30 days.After 34 days, no money ,so I took out a warrant of execution, costing £50.00 at the time.3 days later,there was a cheque for £335.00 in the post for me.I stood my ground, did my homework, got a copy of the police accident report, got my 3 witnesses and won.unfortunately,i don't have any details as this was my very first case I took on myself.However,would it be possible to get the transcripts if i contacted Boston county court.......I have since gone on to have someone settle out of court in 2010, and have had a recent out of court settlement for nearly £800.00 from Quinn insurance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I love it when a plan comes together, and the legal team are anialated.I actually defended myself over a county court claim between a miss Jodie Louise Sutton, and my self.She turned left from a right hand lane at a roundabout , and smashed into my car.She drove off and refused to admit liability later.She decided to put in a claim to Boston county court and even went to such lengths as to get a barrister.I represented myself, ripped her to pieces with my constant barrage of questioning, ripped her barristers defending to pieces and won the case.It way back in about 1998 if i remember.She had to pay me £285.00 within 30 days.After 34 days, no money ,so I took out a warrant of execution, costing £50.00 at the time.3 days later,there was a cheque for £335.00 in the post for me.I stood my ground, did my homework, got a copy of the police accident report, got my 3 witnesses and won.unfortunately,i don't have any details as this was my very first case I took on myself.However,would it be possible to get the transcripts if i contacted Boston county court.......I have since gone on to have someone settle out of court in 2010, and have had a recent out of court settlement for nearly £800.00 from Quinn insurance.

 

Well done you......I do love it when justice prevails!

I do wish though that more people would take on these wrongdoers of society. The world would be such a better place and teach them that they cannot abuse the court system in order to demand "give us your money".

 

Unfortunately most people get scared when they get court papers thinking that there may be trouble ahead and just cough up, when in reality, with just a little homework and preparation the outcome can be victorious. Allaluya to that i say.

 

Transcripts are costly though, you wont get much change out of £200, (could be more), depending on the length of hearing and how many folios there are............Well worth it in my opinion.........Makes a fabulous read and keepsake.......... I have no regrets. :peace:

Edited by Liverpool way
spelling
Link to post
Share on other sites

It hasn't damaged your work life or your relationship with your employer? Best of luck!

 

That is of no matter, if they want to use a load of knobs to pursue pathetic claims trying to rip staff patients and visitors off, then they and roxburghe picked on the wrong person

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...