Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Avg. Content Per Day

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


BazzaS last won the day on February 18

BazzaS had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3,255 Excellent

About BazzaS

  • Rank
    Platinum Account Holder

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. OP's family situation gets more complex with every posting of new twists and turns. This time it is both his sister AND her friend. I can only suggest the OP gets each of his relatives / friends with their complex queries to post here themselves : he's not doing them any favours by asking his questions with some combination of being:: a) devoid of relevant info, b) with info that later turns out to be not the actual situation, or c) with ever evolving stories....... Additionally, the circumstances for each are unlikely to be identical, so the answer for each may be different ..... Trying to give accurate info without correct details to base it on isn't likely to be a good use of respondents' time....
  2. You cannot see how this matter will be resolved. How about if this were instead for a parking ticket for an individual, not a dissolved company. An individual who has died, and the OP was an executor for the estate. The estate has been through probate, the executor of the estate behaved correctly in its administration and discharged their fiduciary duties properly, (including issuing a notice inviting any claims against the estate). Are you saying that the executor should; a) File an OOT, or b) Say to TfL / the enforcement agent : The estate has been settled and has gone. There is nothing left to enforce against - in that respect you are indeed “out of time”. i think the 2 scenarios are analogous. The company has died (been dissolved), and (provided the OP behaved correctly as a director), the OP has no more liability than if they behaved correctly as an executor for an individual who died, once the estate has been lawfully distributed, if all was done correctly: no personal liability.
  3. If you don’t want to discontinue before they pay, and they won’t pay before you discontinue: Just let the claim continue for now. You can suggest a Tomlin order (“Consent Order”), drafted at their cost, as a later way to resolve that impasse - that may make them see sense.
  4. Could an out of time statement create a liability? Surely at the moment they are pursuing the OP as director of the now dissolved company and they can only go after company assets. if the company is gone, the OP isn’t a director: so in what capacity do they plan to make an OOT statement? They aren’t a director anymore. Would it be better to not make the OOT, and say “the company has gone, there are no assets remaining to enforce against, and any personal assets I have aren’t subject to any warrant of control you may have for company assets”
  5. You will be relying on their driver a) believing they are at fault, (otherwise, what have they got to lose if their dashcam shows they weren’t moving, or if “the dashcam was off, so I must have had the ignition off, it shows the time I stopped, and the time the ignition was restarted after”) and ALSO b) hoping you won’t contact the company. Even if it was their fault, they are less likely to face a disciplinary for telling the company than not, in case you contact the company. So likelihood they’ll have told their company. Once the company are involved, you can bet the police will be informed there was an accident & details weren’t exchanged. Hence my conclusion of “only way to be sure you are on safe ground : notify the police & your insurers”.
  6. Unless their driver “gets the retaliation in first”. ”I went to speak to her after she hit the van. I told her she had hit my van. She seemed quite aggressive : then she started taking photos. I thought that’d mean she was wanting to exchange details but then she got in her car & drove off (her driving off whilst I was stationary is there to see on my dashcam......)” Road Traffic Act 1988 s 170 (2) 2 things are key : 1) was there any damage (even minor / to the bumper) of their van 2) Have they reported it to the police (which you won’t know until you get asked “they notified it within 24 hours, why didn’t you?” only way to be sure you are on safe ground : notify the police & your insurers.
  7. They'll look at that, see the obvious flaw, and (probably) say "ohh, look, its got a copy of a line from the letter we first saw in Nov 2012". There is no "magic bullet" letter, but I'd suggest: a) Not saying something that they'll immediately say "well, that doesn't seem strictly true" b) by all means use "themes" from letters you have seen on the internet, but don't straight copy : not only does it risk you saying something not appropriate to your situation, but they'll have seen it before, and your own words will 'ring true' and be more persuasive than direct copying from internet forums.
  8. Is the other property (that you are using as a price comparator) freehold or leasehold? if leasehold : are the terms (duration remaining) of the 2 leases identical?
  9. BazzaS

    Cabot - HSBC CC

    What is that? Does it have a DSM-5 (or ICD-11) coding?
  10. If you don’t tell your insurer and the delivery company do, you can invalidate your next insurance renewal unless you declare it then. if you are planning on declaring it then : may as well declare it now!.
  11. A number of potential issues. A) if the van driver says you turned into the back of their van, how will you show they reversed into you? There may be dashcam footage : it could show if they reversed at all. B) Why would you NOT exchange details? if the driver claims they asked you for details and you then drove off, how would you show that you were never asked. Report the incident to the police. Report the incident to your insurers. That way you reduce the risk to you, making it more likely the worst that can happen is your premium rises. Do you have a dashcam? Save any footage if you do.
  12. BazzaS


    Sorry to hear of your cancer diagnosis. Whilst it may seem unemotional, I'm going to focus on the legal picture surrounding the events. I'm not sure I fully agree with EB. While some of the BRCA genes are associated only with increased risk of breast cancer, the most common (BRCA1 and 2) do increase the risk of ovarian cancer, and if they should know this puts an extra onus on the doctors. For there to be negligence (including clinical negligence), a number of steps must exist: a) The negligent party must owe a duty of care b) there must be a breach of that duty of care, c) harm must result, and d) there mustn't be an intervening act that was the cause of the harm rather than the harm being from the breach of duty of care. a) you may need to get advice on which clinician (it may be both!) was responsible for managing the ovarian cancer risk side of your BRCA gene (if your gene increase your risk of ovarian cancer: if it is one that doesn't then there will likely not be a breach of duty of care) b) Did whichever doctor was responsible for following up any increased risk of ovarian cancer do all that they should? Was the initial scan correctly reported? Should there have been a repeat scan / imaging at any stage if there was an increased risk? c) This follows on from b), c) i ) if you would have developed your ovarian cancer anyway (AND it wouldn't have been diagnosed earlier, Or even if it had been diagnosed earlier your prognosis wasn't altered by the lack of earlier diagnosis) : no additional harm beyond what would have happened anyway if things had gone with ideal follow-up, so no harm RESULTING from the breach of care c) ii) should you have been offered preventative surgery either breast, (although the breast surgeon may say: not breast cancer, no harm from lack of breast surgery) , AND/OR ovarian removal (was that offered? that may also be influenced by how old you are / if you are post-menopausal). I think these are reasonable questions for you to be asking (or have someone ask) the clinicians. Given that you have said this was BRCA1 gene, and the geneticist advised a referral for surgery: I would certainly be asking for an explanation: if everything went as it should you need to know that, as much as you need to know if things didn't go as they should.
  13. I think it is fine to highlight that the effect of a conviction could be disproportionate for you because of the profession / employment side of things, just do so factually without 'laying it on thick'.
  14. Note my previous advice “don’t over-egg the pudding”. So, I’m going to be blunt. They’ve heard all of this (and more) before. Are you you looking to have them decide to offer an alternative to prosecution? There will still be a financial cost, and it’ll be expected as a lump sum (you only get “instalments” with a court fine and that’d mean a conviction). or do you want to risk it looking to them that you want them to decide it’s OK for you to evade your fare, arrange a refund for your wife’s Oyster, and have a whip-round in the prosecution office to knock a bit off your credit card debt while seeing if they can sort you another ticket to Canada?? You still need to come across as contrite, not as if you are looking for sympathy and offering excuses.
  • Create New...