I suggested consideration of bankruptcy some years ago. It was not well received.

No

That is a superb WS. However, I have a few tweaks to suggest. In (2) "indicating" not "indication". I think to be consistent with your numbering, in (6) the Beavis case should be EXHIBIT 2. Do you really need to include over 100 pages of Beavis?  I think that would be likely to annoy the judge.  Just try and find the bit where they decide it was not a penalty due to having an interest in limiting the time that vehicles can stay. I'll have a look myself for this bit later as it's highly likely to be in WSs from PPCs who think that that paragraph means all their charges are valid always on every occasion. After your current (7) add this.  It's always useful to refer to a judgment when making a legal point - 8.  In the case PCM vs Bull, Claim No. B4GF26K6, where the Defendant was issued parking tickets for parking on private roads with signage stating “No parking at any time”, District Judge Glen in his final statement mentioned that: “the notice was prohibitive and didn’t communicate any offer of parking and that landowners may have claim in trespass, but that was not under consideration”.   In (14) if my maths are right the CPR request should be "EXHIBIT 3".  it is missing from your list of exhibits. In (16) the two figures should be £100 and £170.  They are entitled to increase fro,m £60 to £100, they are not entitled to increase to £170.  To make it clear for the judge I would write - 16. The Claimant has artificially inflated their claim for a £100 invoice to £170. This is simply a poor attempt to circumvent the legal costs cap at small claims. 17. The Claimant has also invented a second fictitious charge, for legal representative's costs, when they have no legal representative. You also need ot number your exhibits. The rest is excellent - well done.

Did you ever think of walking away? Become bankrupt and in 12 months it'll all be behind you. My feeling is that you may well get nothing from the sale of the property anyway. Going by the date this thread started it looks like eight years of arrears, lender's costs and receiver’s fees on top.

Just to clarify - I make use of evening legal clinics. It is not always possible to see a lawyer (they have limited time and days/week).  This means questions one has may never get answered or there's weeks between follow-ups.   To be really clear - I am representing myself; I am playing at being lawyer/ barrister - which means I take help wherever I can get it (and then research it thoroughly). Ae - a judge in a recent hearing pointed out the receiver is not part of my current proceedings - and suggested I have a separate claim v the receiver. Disclosure has presented damning evidence v the receiver  The receiver against whom I have a complaint is not part of the receiver governing body.   The receivership is in 2 names - a joint one.  My complaint is directed at whom I was told is the lead receiver.  The other named receiver IS a member of the governing body.  But he has now left the company.  And the lead receiver has retired - but is still a working consultant on my case.   All the evidence shows it was the 'lead' receiver who was doing all the  work/ the misbehaviour.   But if the appointment was 'joint' would I make a complaint against them both?    I am sure that wouldn't go down well with the other receiver who is at the beginning of his career. The law is very much against borrowers.   But the evidence against this receivership is crystal clear.   I just don't know how and to whom to complain.   The places I've tried so far don't offer much transparency