threads merged for relevant history

please keep to one thread

Live fast track in progress at case management directions hearing soon talk about sje witness defendant has asked for adjournment

to allow time for poss apt part 20 but they also mention window for adr/mediation could some one explain poss outcomes it was in multi track provisional 40k

merged yet again to your existing mystery thread

whereby you have totally failed to give any concrete information of what the beep is actually going on...

little tip to using forums...

you have to tell people the history of your issue in a format that they can understand..

not 9? is it now separate random threads that we've had to merge ....

help us to help you .....WE ARE VOLUNTEEERS REMEMBER....

not mind reader's...

This has been in the court system 15 months

first acheived default judgement that was set aside

,next stage appointment of a litigant friend that was ordered

current stage case management

defendant whats more time to wait for manufacturer to respond on part 20 joining into case

in their bundle they mention adr/mediation

i thought this was not possible in this type pf case

What they are not aware i have alerted trading standards to poss safety breach of product

if correct a recall of over 1000 may happen but this would be a criminal investigation

Having studied the hse site i have provided all docs to the TS concerned with this in motion

how could ADR take place ?

Jack, if you read this thread back you have not given much info, so you obviously don't want help with the case. All you seem to want to do is ask questions on court processes as and when they arise. The problem with this approach is that people don't have any overall understanding of your specific case and how complex it is, what issues you might have, what you could do to help speed up the process. If there are potentially thousands of other consumer claims, are you likely to get paid, even if you won ?

If the case is now just going through the standard court process after the origial default CCJ was set aside, why would ADR not be relevant, IF both parties now decided they would quite like to settle. Perhaps there is no current willingness of either side to settle the claim outside of court. Does not mean that ADR/mediation is not offered as a possibility, even if in your case it is not really appropriate or wanted at this stage.

That is a fair point but if i released to much info all would work out what parties involved part 20 would involve other side with 100 mill turnover per year.

What shocks me now trading standards hub will not speak local TS have not yet responded to my files,there are 5 other non parties involved at trial it may involve a part34 to include technical files and to compound problems there is not any 1 sje in the uk that can undertake this work a best match only option so any one reading this will know this is a lot of work for 1 lip

Trading Standards is not as well resourced as it used to be, so they won't get involved unless they really need to and then with no urgency if they are not the appropriate body to deal with any immediate consumer safety issue.

I don't think you have even given a clue about the type of product, so it could be anything from a summer house for a garden or a kit car that you will use on track days. So your references to various techincal issues, trading standards etc have no background story and therefore people find it very difficult to comment. If you don't want to even provide a very basic background story of your claim,then i can see no point in using a public forum. If you have a £40k claim, then speak to Solicitors about whether they can help on a no win no fee or fixed fee arrangement.

Tried that

not an option

the facts are the consumer is a lone solider

TS will not help which i fully understand and not complaining about

what i notice when phone TS they put me on hold

go see someone

come back

sidestep

i phoned TS not GCHQ

it would of cost 10k to get case to this point

this is how retailers get off what realistic chance has the lone solider consumer got and for recovering all costs at trial when you win risky.

If you had a strong case with good chance of getting paid by this retailer, then a Solicitor would take it on.

If you have seen a Solicitors, what main reason did they give for not being able to help ?

In one easy to understand sentence, can you explain, the main reason for the retailer being liable for a £40k claim ?

Have you still got the item the retailer supplied ?

product bought new

not of satisfactory quality /fit for purpose sog 1979 sec14 ,

5 years on

still have

cannot use

claimant protected party directions

hearing soon at this stage

burden of proof not established

hope next hearing

what shocks me as the joe

thresh hold of proof presents as criminal

the DJ at last hearing had lots of docs but he phoned the doctor at hearing speaker phone.

He advised if go to trial direct access junior barrister what i accept would be required.

What i am trying to establish

burden of proof

unit faulty first 2 months

up to 30 faults

been back to factory with 5 inherent faults

if i get positive SJE hope other side bottle it

or either side part 36

i have been on this 4 years in this time

i have not found another joe dun this tour of duty

so all that read you make find out the real deal what may help others in the future

I can only presume you have had a look at this link but here it is if you haven't. There are relevant links on the page which to me seem relevant in your case and may be helpful.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/contents/enacted

May be something helpful https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/alternative-dispute-resolution-for-consumers/alternative-dispute-resolution-for-consumers

Thanks for input but purchase date 2012

i think now case on move defendant not keen to run with single joint expert

,multi track could have had three ,

what surprised me did not think DJ could allocate 40k case to fast.

The defendant throughout takes no blame

so now they have wrote to the part 20 there may be some shift in position.

In a case like this costs are telephone numbers by doing lots of work costs are kept lower

but i may have made a mistake shopin them to TS it might open up pandoras box

because how can you have a back door deal if there is a product that does not have correct ventilation from new and cause carbon monoxide poisoning and i was a gas safe engineer with the lpg component .

Would and part 20 want this on their table with a show on the blast this year.

Without the full story, your posts don't really mean much. People can't respond to just nuggets of info.

TS don't just jump in. They gather evidence first and your specific case might not be mentioned at all. If you told them it was subject to a current county court case, then they would definitely not have mentioned it, as they would not want to become involved.

TS are aware of the civil case for over 12 months ,

you know when something is wrong when you phone TS hub when call handler checks case file they put you on hold out comes GCHQ.

I have sent docs recorded to head of TS local

includes photos,BSI En1949,2 x manufacturers installation instructions,third party cert on en1948,conform cert from supplying

potential part 20 this includes operators hand book safety instructions etc,

if this part is proven the defendants case and part 20 will fail.

Wot does my box in the joe can not talk to local TS and what is out of order if i have to study TS enforcement procedures and legislation i will have to learn their job.

TS have powers to access manufacturers technical files on safety issues pre trial i would have to wait use a part34 witness summons that is alot of grief .

Question who pulls TS strings.

GCHQ ?

Is this a private residential house where you have had works done including fitting a gas appliance ?

Or is it a business ?

Why has it taken 5 years ?

The players i am trading against are well rehearsed

the joe thinks all are straight point of sale

,if someone wants to dodge the bullet in their interests to delay you may bottle it.

Any joe reading this be warned if you instruct you may buy their BMW

you win but get no costs award hollow victory what good is that.

Joe thinks sog and CRA there to protect think again these are in place to protect business

Back to the 5 year deal ya moan ,waive flags,beat your drum reply we will do it tomorrow.

Joe gets revved up fires missiles at non parties CEO S ban staff from speaking pull shutters down ,

why well the manufacturers what supply the producer all **** in the same pot

the trade body what certs plays golf its one of them,

when MD s sit on each others board how do you break through the force fields you bang it in court then the retailer has lost the

whip hand tomorrow will come for one of the parties.

cant you not just use plain English!!

especially when you hear the infamous click, go down the road to phone box any make personal calls!

What is a " joe "

When i have tried to obtain information from industry related forums the account is blocked

posts are erased and senior members replies are also erased where they may have wanted to hear about it.

A case like this could easily end up in the courts of appeal

any legal person would pick out bullet points SOG/Protected party/5 non parties /multi track/fast track/Single joint instruction/

multi casemanagement/direct access barrister/retailer/part 20 manufacturer/Certification body BSI/poss part 34/poss part 36/poss 1 -2 day trial/multiple apps

so someone in the know would say costs could well be telephone numbers thats why the grunt consumer takes it lying down.

In my life i have learnt rule 1

never trade with the establishment

rule 2

if you do have a fall guy the latter if you lose ya doe pay thats how it rolls no wig likes rule 2 .

So back to my original question

can ADR be retrospective

if so the problem with this the body what certificated the unit there name is in court as a non party for possible breach of en1949 why would i trust that body.

When i have tried to obtain information from industry related forums the account is blocked posts are erased and senior members replies are also erased where they may have wanted

to hear about it.

A case like this could easily end up in the courts of appeal any legal person would pick out bullet points SOG/Protected party/5 non parties /multi track/fast track/Single joint instruction/

multi casemanagement/direct access barrister/retailer/part 20 manufacturer/Certification body BSI/poss part 34/poss part 36/poss 1 -2 day trial/multiple apps so someone in the know would say costs could well be telephone numbers thats why the grunt consumer takes it lying down.

In my life i have learnt rule 1 never trade with the establishment rule 2 if you do have a fall guy the latter if you lose ya doe pay thats how it rolls no wig likes rule 2 .

So back to my original question can ADR be retrospective if so the problem with this the body what certificated the unit there name is in court as a non party for possible breach of en1949 why would i trust that body.

We have not got a clue what your on about Jack...sorry.

Andy

Dam got a splinter from scratching me Head! trying to understand this!

sorry i missed that question

a joe joey grunt all the same jazz member of the public

what i call believers ,

believers are good people that get kicked in the nuts rolled they know no beta ,

me no joe i have bin shopped to the justice minister and had a petition presented to the house of commons about a site i own.

Riddle for people half sensible who would do that.

I will ask the question again case in fast track ,

defendant at next hearing wants time to consider part 20 and mentions ADR

does he mean a part 36 offer to stop proceedings

could this be a ambush to say to the court we tried to settle pre trial ,

the prob with this i could be 10k down where i have a strong case but then depends what you may win at trial.

What are the grounds for any counterclaim by the defendant ?