Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


gh2008 last won the day on January 6 2011

gh2008 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,670 Excellent

1 Follower

About gh2008

  • Rank
    Classic Account Holder
  1. We had spoken about costs and the Judge did prompt my friend BUT my friend cannot put a price on having nothing ever to do with this family again. and for the sake of £80 or so ... So best just left ... just fo rinfo - the costs aspect was included in the WS and the Judge dealt with it with the Law in his opening address saying as it was 2 LiPs then the only costs he would allow would be the 'normal' SCT ones
  2. Just to update the thread with the outcome - my friend won (easily) It did actually go all the way to trial !! I assisted my friend as a McKenzie (sp?) friend. The Judge was very good. Explained the Law carefully re bailment Basically and ignoring any of the disputed facts over ownership, whether it was ever in my friend's care or even its value, as the alleged bailment was for the sole benefit of the bailor (the Claimant), then the Claimant had to prove 'gross negligence' in the care of the property in order to be able to make any claim. The Judge carefully explained th
  3. Thank you for your advice. AFAIK, the missing parts have been missing since it was used in 2010. It is only now, in the POC that he is saying the parts exist and that the defendant is not returning them (which is untrue). Until now (and in the LBA) he was saying that the defendant had not stored it properly and that it had been damaged. In the defence, should it be a short and concise? One just denying the allegations in the PoC? i.e. ownership, that it was ever stored with the defendant's agreement, that it was moved etc should it also cover the fact that the claim is for an unpaid inv
  4. Thanks for looking in Andy I will get it scanned in properly and emailed to me tonight and I will post it up.
  5. Sorry, misunderstood your post back to this then I am not sure of the best course of action especially as it is between 2 LiPs
  6. Playing 'Devil's Advocate', the problem I see with that is because of the letter ping-pong, it is clear the defendant knows exactly what the claim is about. In one letter the claimant was told he should not be issuing an invoice and suing for non-payment but suing for damages and that he needs to work out the damages & show the defendant's liability, having first proved it was even his. (At this point we realised that he was not going to stop so were hoping for a proper POC) My experience of small claims is that almost anything goes on the day if it gets to court, especially when i
  7. Yes, throughout the whole sorry mess we have urged him to seek proper legal advice (I think his 'strings' are being pulled by others. But, him & his family know best!! Problem is as they are not really a POC at all it makes it difficult to know what is best action to take, there is nothing to really to get started with. The defendant doesn't have money to go to a solicitor (her parents raised the previous £24k )
  8. Long time since I have been on here - hope you can help a friend of mine in need, I have never come across anything like this so am out of my depth This MCOL POC has been received by a friend. As with all of these types of disputes it is rather sad & very, very messy. In a nutshell (I hope) The claimant's family owned a pub, the defendant lived there with the claimant's sister. In 2008, The claimant's family bought a 12mx6m 'marquee'/party tent for the pub. This was used for various beer festival summer party events and those type of things. In 2009 the pub wen
  9. there you are Just keep doing what you are doing, and then make a formal complaint - you know the drill
  10. Make your payments and keep a careful record of everything. That's all you can do. MBNA seem to be taking a bit of a bashing at the moment from all sides, you would think they would welcome someone willing to pay with open arms rather than treating them to more of the same .....
  11. Your contributions to answering a pretty simple question astound me as ever ..... I take it, from the noise of the thread that you don't actually have an answer ..... other than trying to persuade everyone that 'by Peter'sLaw' by not paying contractually agreed instalment they are not in breach of the contract hmmmm
  12. imho you've got another x years of this until it becomes Statute Barred !! this is the problem with these accounts left in limbo Even in Harrison, as far as I can see, the only bar is on enforcement. Enforcement is the obtaining a Judgment so anything up to that is 'fair game' Just keep a careful record of everything and it is a good idea not to ignore all of the incoming noise, just keep stating your position. jmho
  • Create New...