Marc Gander - The Consumer Survival Handbook


A 220 page introduction to all things consumer related by our own BankFodder.

Includes energy companies, mobile phone providers, retailers, banks, insurance companies,debt collection agencies, reclaim companies, secondhand car sellers, cowboy garages, cowboy builders and all the rest who put their own profits before you.

£6.99



Patricia Pearl - Small Claims Procedure - A Practical Guide


An excellent guide for the layperson in how to use the County Court - a must if you are intending to start a claim.

£19.99 + £1.50 (P&P)


+ Reply to Thread
Page 6 of 6
FirstFirst ... 4 5 6
Results 101 to 111 of 111
  1. #101
    Basic Account Holder Whitely



    Follow Real_CAG on Twitter
    Cagger since : May 2017
    Posts : 134 (11.42 post per day)

    Default Re: Part 85 the Civil Procedure Rules ..... Discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by wonkeydonkey View Post
    The case I was referring to was heard in February!!!!!
    The case Bailiff Advice was referring to was last week.


  2. #102
    Gold Account Holder Bailiff Advice Authoritative Bailiff Advice Authoritative Bailiff Advice Authoritative Bailiff Advice Authoritative Bailiff Advice Authoritative Bailiff Advice Authoritative Bailiff Advice Authoritative Bailiff Advice Authoritative Bailiff Advice Authoritative Bailiff Advice Authoritative Bailiff Advice Authoritative Bailiff Advice's Avatar



    Follow Real_CAG on Twitter
    Cagger since : Apr 2012
    Posts : 4,130 (2.22 post per day)

    Default Re: Part 85 the Civil Procedure Rules ..... Discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by Whitely View Post
    Not sure how I'm being petulant. It seems that between yourself, Bailiff Advice and wonkeydonkey, you claim to be privvy to the details of this case, but then claim you don't have the details as the transcript has yet to be released. As I said, on Sunday Bailiff Advice assured us they would be posting the case details in the next day or two yet nothing has surfaced. However it seems that you three are freely sharing the details amongst yourselves leaving not just me, but everyone else on these boards in the dark. I find it very strange.
    Work committments permitting, I should hopefully be able to start a new thread about the case later today.

    As you know, I have a passion for accuracy so I will make a couple of comments. The case itself concluded quite some time ago (17th February to be precise). All parties were in court and Judgment was given. Leave to appeal was REFUSED.

    Due only to time constraints, the Judge was unable to consider the matter of costs on 17th February. Accordingly, a new hearing date was set for May 10th. At that hearing, he Judge considered representation from all parties and made an order that Mr B must pay 7,000.

    I will not be making any further comments on this thread about the case. I will start a new discussion thread later on.

    PS: As mentioned above, Judgment was handed down on 17th February 2017. Once judgment is made, it is a public record and can therefore be referred to and copied (which I have done).


  3. #103
    Royalties Account Holder unclebulgaria67 Highly authoritative unclebulgaria67 Highly authoritative unclebulgaria67 Highly authoritative unclebulgaria67 Highly authoritative unclebulgaria67 Highly authoritative unclebulgaria67 Highly authoritative unclebulgaria67 Highly authoritative unclebulgaria67 Highly authoritative unclebulgaria67 Highly authoritative unclebulgaria67 Highly authoritative unclebulgaria67 Highly authoritative unclebulgaria67's Avatar



    Follow Real_CAG on Twitter
    Cagger since : Feb 2010
    Posts : 14,156 (5.35 post per day)

    Default Re: Part 85 the Civil Procedure Rules ..... Discussion

    I think there is a reliance on someone that attended the court to send emails to interested parties. And it depends on how the case went as to whether they want to share the information or not.

    Remember when the car was taken on HP and the judge said there was beneficial interest. We saw a burst of excitement feeding its way online and a long thread. Then when further court cases found no beneficial interest existed with the debtor until the finance was paid up and a finance company could not be forced to sell, there was a very loud silence. Trying to get information from the source seemed to be very difficult.

    People only pay for transcripts if they are really helpful to them given the cost.


  4. #104
    Basic Account Holder Whitely



    Follow Real_CAG on Twitter
    Cagger since : May 2017
    Posts : 134 (11.42 post per day)

    Default Re: Part 85 the Civil Procedure Rules ..... Discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by unclebulgaria67 View Post
    I think there is a reliance on someone that attended the court to send emails to interested parties. And it depends on how the case went as to whether they want to share the information or not.

    Remember when the car was taken on HP and the judge said there was beneficial interest. We saw a burst of excitement feeding its way online and a long thread. Then when further court cases found no beneficial interest existed with the debtor until the finance was paid up and a finance company could not be forced to sell, there was a very loud silence. Trying to get information from the source seemed to be very difficult.

    People only pay for transcripts if they are really helpful to them given the cost.
    I agree. I do find it disturbing that a member on here is fed details of such cases, even those subject to sub-judice. We all know the reason why and it is, at the very least, immature,

    However moving on - yes I agree with those dates Bailiff Advice, I was reading some of my notes incorrectly. However I have it on good authority that at least a partial copy of the judgement has been seen by wonkeydonkey, so why then need for all the secrecy is beyond me.


  5. #105
    Gold Account Holder Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball's Avatar



    Follow Real_CAG on Twitter
    Cagger since : Jun 2012
    Posts : 5,286 (2.91 post per day)

    Default Re: Part 85 the Civil Procedure Rules ..... Discussion

    also the ones which appear on the public databases of course. All this is a little spurious and just distracts from the issues. IMO. Which is of course what it is designed to do.


  6. #106
    Gold Account Holder Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball's Avatar



    Follow Real_CAG on Twitter
    Cagger since : Jun 2012
    Posts : 5,286 (2.91 post per day)

    Default Re: Part 85 the Civil Procedure Rules ..... Discussion

    I dont think that is really what happened with HP UB, but again off topic for this thread.


  7. #107
    Gold Account Holder Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball's Avatar



    Follow Real_CAG on Twitter
    Cagger since : Jun 2012
    Posts : 5,286 (2.91 post per day)

    Default Re: Part 85 the Civil Procedure Rules ..... Discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by Whitely View Post
    I agree. I do find it disturbing that a member on here is fed details of such cases, even those subject to sub-judice. We all know the reason why and it is, at the very least, immature,

    However moving on - yes I agree with those dates Bailiff Advice, I was reading some of my notes incorrectly. However I have it on good authority that at least a partial copy of the judgement has been seen by wonkeydonkey, so why then need for all the secrecy is beyond me.

    This is just symptom of your long standing vendetta and serves no purpose.
    If details are correct i for one do not care where they came from.

    It is the case that matters in my opinion i am not interested in some fengling regarding costs. The incorrect information which is rife on the web was blown out of the water, and this is what needs to be shown.


  8. #108
    Gold Account Holder Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball's Avatar



    Follow Real_CAG on Twitter
    Cagger since : Jun 2012
    Posts : 5,286 (2.91 post per day)

    Default Re: Part 85 the Civil Procedure Rules ..... Discussion

    Oh and there is no sub judice , the case has been heard.


  9. #109
    Site Team The Consumer Action Group Andyorch Highly authoritative Andyorch Highly authoritative Andyorch Highly authoritative Andyorch Highly authoritative Andyorch Highly authoritative Andyorch Highly authoritative Andyorch Highly authoritative Andyorch Highly authoritative Andyorch Highly authoritative Andyorch Highly authoritative Andyorch Highly authoritative Andyorch's Avatar



    Follow Real_CAG on Twitter
    Cagger since : Sep 2007
    Posts : 46,343 (13.03 post per day)

    Default Re: Part 85 the Civil Procedure Rules ..... Discussion

    Post unapproved...wondered when it would get personal...normally quicker than 2 days.

    Andy


  10. #110
    Gold Account Holder wonkeydonkey Highly informative wonkeydonkey Highly informative wonkeydonkey Highly informative wonkeydonkey Highly informative wonkeydonkey Highly informative wonkeydonkey Highly informative wonkeydonkey Highly informative wonkeydonkey's Avatar



    Follow Real_CAG on Twitter
    Cagger since : Mar 2009
    Posts : 3,093 (1.03 post per day)

    Default Re: Part 85 the Civil Procedure Rules ..... Discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by Whitely View Post
    I agree. I do find it disturbing that a member on here is fed details of such cases, even those subject to sub-judice. We all know the reason why and it is, at the very least, immature,

    However moving on - yes I agree with those dates Bailiff Advice, I was reading some of my notes incorrectly. However I have it on good authority that at least a partial copy of the judgement has been seen by wonkeydonkey, so why then need for all the secrecy is beyond me.
    Your 'good authority' is superfluous given that I have posted on this matter here on cag and elsewhere, without denial to having seen 'partial copy' of the judgment in question.


  11. #111
    Gold Account Holder Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball Authoritative Dodgeball's Avatar



    Follow Real_CAG on Twitter
    Cagger since : Jun 2012
    Posts : 5,286 (2.91 post per day)

    Default Re: Part 85 the Civil Procedure Rules ..... Discussion

    Sub judice does not apply when you are discussing matters of law even if there is a case to which this is a relavant matter.
    Some freemen friend are doubtlessly conducting a case using the Magna Carta, doesn't stop us discussing King Johns faux paux does it.

    Fengling is a misspelling of the word finagling as i would have thought any intelligent person would have been able to decipher.

    Now on topic please.



Reclaim the Right Ltd. - reg.05783665 in the UK reg. office:- 923 Finchley Road London NW11 7PE
We use cookies to personalise content and ads and to provide social media features. We also share information about your use of our site with our advertising and analytics partners. See details