@ Durkin

Sorry point wasn't pointing fingers at you but I forgot to use speech marks as I was quoting from the folks that left comments on the news story. (They would have done the same for me too - for anyone who seeks right/justice).

What I did mean is you did lose out financially but then again thats contradicting as I was challenged on "monetary" loss - like I said only the rich folk can afford a 70% deposit of a house (£70k out of £100k that is!!) so obviously I wouldn't have faced a "monetary" loss.

I agree with you 100% on the "male only" judges for supreme court. From experience, and even myself (not blowing my own trumpet) but men are generally broad minded and understand at a broader range than females.

Upon saying that, everytime I spoke it was like I am being halted. Due to this I could not challenge (primarily I didnt want to get on the wrong side of "ma'am") on hardly anything. I was being cross examined, yet when I bought the issues up about the defence it was skimmed over or considered "irrelevant".

@ CitizenB

I am not sure about the written judgement/appeal denail but the reason was given to me there and then.

@Mike

I dont quiet get you on the appeal of Halliday. In fact I couldn't even find a similar case if I could I would have read on it or mentioned it on here.

I dont want to dab it any more as I really dont want to be left with an exaggerated near £2k bill which I cannot afford.

I dont think there was any form of discrimination racial/sexual within the Judgement (funny as it may sound, this kind of thing still is around) but the issue was not understanding it on a broader spectrum.

Due to HSBC upping their offer at the last minute, I thought I was on a winner (otherwise they had no reason to).

Also the DJ was the one that made the directions of 03 Dec 12 (from the name I was thinking it was a male). Also didnt know cases were pre-allocated months before.

Their paginated bundle was used and considered priority much to my dismay!

Regards,

Nadeem.

PS - I think the "solid evidence" should be removed from the title Admin!

There isn't a similar case to halliday and it remains unreported at this time.

Check with bankfodder or andy to see if their subs are up to date.... i'm sure one of them could pull down the appeal transcript from november 2012 with a bit of digging.

What basis was it appealed on ?

Edit : I got the transcript of the 5th Nov 2012. It was given to me today by QC.

Could you scan a copy and post it on here please nod.

sure il do it now.

sure il do it now.

Interesting ?

Hi Noddy,

Briefly, the judge you had "erred in law" (you weren't quoting the Data Protection Act, as was halliday - the QC has successfully pulled the wool over the judges eyes). To say you can't appeal her mistake should be reported while you proceed with the appeal.

What exactly did the judge say when you said "HSBC have admitted wrongfully defaulting me and QC for HFC, a subsidiary of HSBC have confirmed that damages for such action is £8K in Durkin v DSG & HFC, no proof required"?

You do have solid evidence (As I did) but it was completely ignored.

I think you may only have 7 days to get a written case and 14 days to lodge an intention to appeal.

You haven't been awarded costs against you. Things can only improve while you bring these jokers into line. I hope you'll keep up the good fight and don't allow these ladies to boss you around.

Cheers,

Richard.

The QC also said "in your case law how come you didnt find any cases of defaults?"

 

I said "there arent there is always a first".

 

She cross examined me like a horse!

Mine was all about a default, lodged by their pals at HFC. Perhaps it was all the burgers she'd been eating.

Mine was all about a default, lodged by their pals at HFC. Perhaps it was all the burgers she'd been eating.

Ah! Horsing around.

Halliday ruling paragraph 12: "Judges below were wrong to require proof of special damage"

Paragraph 23 (Kpohraror) "awarded for damage not specifically proved"

The judge has erred even according to case law submitted by the QC!

Request for Permission to appeal must be submitted within 21 days.

http://www.insidetime.org/resources/WSDocDownload/I_want_to_appeal_What_do_I_do_EX340_CourtService.pdf

Regards

Andy

I have edited your title as requested, noddy.

Reading back over the thread again, I see were all pretty much convinced that this should have gone in your favour.

If you do not feel comfortable lodging an apeal, then dont let yourself be persuaded otherwise.

You have done a brilliant job to date however, I am aware what this has cost you both to your self esteem and lack of sleep.

You have walked away with no costs - a victory in itself.

An appeal could end up costing you money..

Hi Andy,

Can't you just appeal (as you can in Aberdeen)?

Who can Noddy report the judge to, for saying that he can't appeal her "erring" in law?

Cheers,

Richard

Hi Andy,

 

Can't you just appeal (as you can in Aberdeen)?

 

Who can Noddy report the judge to, for saying that he can't appeal her "erring" in law?

 

Cheers,

 

Richard

I have added a link to the EX340........ purely for information only but I think that it is a decision only Nod can decide and any undue pressure should desist for now.

Regards

Andy

@ Durkin

When I mentioned your case, the DJ muttered "not binding its Scotish blah blah".

It went silent when I mentioned that £8k was reasonable (THIS WAS NOT EVEN TAKEN IN TO CONSIDERATION!!!)

The DJ said other cases have lost "specific and general damages, yours is only general".

I asked the DJ on how to appeal, she said you have to ask permission (and I presumed there and then as its SCT) and it was denied due to no losses financially and that it would waste time!!!

So I dont think I can ask for that to be amended can I?

The only thing I dont want is to pay their costs which is totally unfair and exaggerated on their BoC.

However, I dont mind taking it to someone senior / LJ but how would I do that?

I think it was very unfair I was given the blue folder at the start with Halliday in it which I had no time to flick through!!

Ok just been on the phone guys.

I can appeal against the refused permission to appeal yeterday at the hearing.

I need to complete an N164 form http://hmctsformfinder.justice.gov.uk/HMCTS/GetForm.do?court_forms_id=1069

There will be an order coming out to me in the post on why appeal was refused.

To obtain a transcript the charge is per 17 words and / or £100 an hour.

I can appeal with fee concession apparently.

So I think I am going to appeal and it will be at Nottingham CC as they are an appealent court so it can't go elsewhere.

Good news is that the same Judge wont look at the appeal it will go to a higher level Judge!

If appeal is approved court cost implications will start from there.

You will actually require the transcript if you wish to appeal . The court should be able to provide you with a list of certified transcribers.

Yes but at a hefty cost.

I just need the "order of refusal" to appeal apparently as that is essentially what am appealing for as at the moment permission to appealis denied!

The transcript will be of the whole judgement and won;'t need that - that's what I just been told.

It went silent when I mentioned that £8k was reasonable (THIS WAS NOT EVEN TAKEN IN TO CONSIDERATION!!!)

 

The DJ said other cases have lost "specific and general damages, yours is only general".

 

 

I asked the DJ on how to appeal, she said you have to ask permission (and I presumed there and then as its SCT) and it was denied due to no losses financially and that it would waste time!!!

!

You stuck to general damages to avoid wasting time. Law doesn't require specific loss.

QC was wasting time.

Scottish Court of Session should be persuasive. HFC are based in England.

Supreme Court highly unlikely to disagree with something HFC have already conceded. I wonder if she'll shun them too?

Of course, it's up to you what you do.....

Do you know what? I would have been happy if the Judge awarded something - she kept mentioning "Mr Noddy is claiming for damage to creditworthiness and harrassment by DCAs" - so I was claiming for general loss but I been awarded f**k all?!

Whereas case law was "specific" and general - that's where I have been robbed (AGAIN)!!

The only way I could have had a financial loss was if I went with the 1 or 2 mortgage deals at 70% deposit - my deposit was around £20k for the house, and guys do you know what 70% would have been at??! £60,000!!!

The average working person cannot afford a 70% deposit for a property unless you're very rich and a couple earning at least 6 figure salary in combination!!

And even then they would have made out "Mr Noddy still bought the house it isnt a financial loss, his own money is invested in the property"!

Oh apparently the "DCA's are operating legally they bought the debt off HSBC only 1 or 2 provided letters show they refer to their 'client HSBC' ". Hold on - HSBC kept instructing them.

I was kept back from saying what I want on "point of irrelevance".

Durkin I dont think I had enough evidence in my witness statement, you was saying I should just include the error letter and keep it simple unfortunately the legal system doesnt work on simplicity they like it complicated. So my advice to you for your supreme court would be make sure you cover every hole for the mice!!!

Hi Noddy,

You've done everything right. The judge got it wrong.

Case law states that you DO NOT need to prove specific losses when you can prove that your creditworthiness is damaged!

What's the point? £8K has been conceded by HFC. You're only claiming £5K because that's the most you can claim. Claiming more is wasting time.

You should have been keeping the QC back on "point of irrelevance" but I can see how you were being bullied by the girls.

We've tried complicated (against my will). It didn't work. Supreme Court case will likely be known as the greatest no-brainer.

There aren't any holes in my case. Only totally imagined ones made up by HFC.

Your show but I'd really stick to the claim for general damages that you should have been awarded.

Cheers,

Richard

Judge seemed sided with "ma'am" in their big legal world!

I am considering the appeal.

I am currently in the process of seeking some advice from a legal firm.

Hopefully they will be able to grasp the issue and set it right for once and for all.

In "cross examination" (or one sided as in my case) the barrister asked me "in Kpaohorar's case a cheque was dishonoured would you not accept the loss was to 3rd party rather than Kpaohorar himself" I said "no not all, the 3rd party, as it was a business transaction, can sell the goods to someone else, the loss was to Kpoaroar himself".

Honestly got away with murder she did.

gets worse and worse r as more relevant info comes out!

After seeking some legal advice, I can say I will not be taking this any further unfortunately.