Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

56 Excellent

About domtheman7

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. Can't really say I'm afraid, although under CPR Part 52 to appeal you have to show that the first decision was "wrong", so in essence that is what they are going to be saying - that the Chester County Court got it wrong.
  2. That is a timely post QWERTY, as I have today recieved a copy of Barclays' notice of appeal. The provisional date, before Mr Justice Flaux (of McGuffick fame) is the 16th July 2010, in the Commercial Court in London. I really would not do anything at all until the outcome of this is known, because if it goes in favour of the banks, then clearly no county court action anybody else takes will succeed.
  3. I think it is all well and good reporting them to the authorities, but in my experience they either:- a) Work in an understaffed office, have plenty of other work to do and no appetite to take on big banks (remember Trading Standards or "ConsumerDirect" as they seem to want to call themselves, are paid by the local council and every pound spent on that is a pound less on education, road gritting, etc. in the context of shrinking budgets). b) Have no empathy and therefore do not understand the importance (i.e. "well if you aren't paying them back, they are entitled to chase you for pa
  4. I hope nobody gets the wrong impression by reading these posts. I am very much in favour of consumers getting Pre Action Disclosure. That is why I took them to court for my clients, and indeed why I won the case on behalf of Mr Kneale in the judgment above. But my clients had legal expenses insurance, meaning that if they lost somebody else would pick up the tab. And the attitude of "get the banks they are all a bunch of **** the judge will see you are in the right cos youve been reasonable" worries me. In CCJ actions under £5,000 it doesn't matter that much, but in PAD actions it does!
  5. The problem is this:- 1) You are only entitled to pre-action disclosure if you can satisfy the rules, not simply because it would be good for you, or even make sense. The rules were clarified in a case called Black -v- Sumitomo, which held that pre action disclosure is for use in "exceptional" circumstances only, and only where the document sought is one necessary for the litigation. It is not for "fishing" claims. "Fishing" claims are when you request to search a wide number of documents in the hope you might find something. 2) cases have described "speculative" cases as being not a
  6. Hi, just read through all this thread with interest. I should put my cards on the table and point out that I am a solicitor (with the obvious warning that nothing I am saying should be constituted as giving anybody any legal advice about their circumstances - I am just posting this as a private individual). The fighting spirit on CAG is great and helps people to "get one back" against the large well resourced financial institutions. But I have to say, sometimes it can be overdone. And I think that things can back-fire. I have brought a number of PAD (what people on here call "CPR", b
  7. They would be payable if a court case was started (by you or the bank), you don't "win" (whether because you lose at hearing, or give up before the hearing but after the court claim was commenced), and you can't pursuade the judge to alter the usual rule (which you could try, by saying "if only they had provided the agreement at the outset when I asked them to none of this would have happenned", but it is very unlikely to be a successful argument). They would be added to the amount you would be ordered to (or agree to) repay the bank.
  8. And it will ruin your credit rating as well. It is possible for them to go for bankruptcy, but they would still need the agreement and it is very expensive so unlikely. CCJs are unlikely also, but they do happen to many thousands of people each year. But even if you lost the case it would be rare for you not to have the opportunity to throw the towel in and agree repayments. But then you will also have the bank's legal costs to pay. The can be SIGNIFICANT. Please don't take me as actively advising you to do anything. What you do depends upon your personal circumstances. But afte
  9. Absolutely yes. You stop paying, you request your original agreement. If they don't provide it, you write and say that you infer the reason for this is that they don't have it. You say you will not be paying and you invite them to take you to court. You say you would like them to resolve the dispute out of court by providing the agreement, as required by the pre action practice direction. And then sit back and file the increasing number of letters from moron Debt Collection Agencies in a nice folder, and wait. And after six years it is written off anyway. If they sue, you defend it by say
  10. This judgment is not really aimed at people who are defending cases brought by banks or debt collection agencies. It is aimed at people who bring cases AGAINST THE BANK to have their debt written off. The judge is basically saying that:- 1) If you try to do it because you think they haven't complied with section 78, then don't. (which we knew anyway after McGuffick) 2) If you try to do it because the prescribed terms are not on the same side of the piece of paper where the document was signed, then don't. 3) If you try to do it because you say the agreement was not properly execu
  11. Oh - and court forms, including N244 contain a "statement of truth". Saying "I didn't recieve nothing", when the court have a copy of your defence on file, will not go down too well. Look up Joanne Kirk Contempt of Court on google, to see what happenned in that case (Costs of tens - indeed hundreds of thousands plus a £5,000 fine!) when she signed statements to try to get more compo. It obviously wouldn't happen in this case - but I personally wouldn't be taking the risk of two years in jail for contempt.
  12. Not wanting to pour water over anything, and remembering there are always two sides to every story, the "brother in laws" document, posted on here was an order **AFTER A HEARING**. SEE POST #28 (which regrettably can't be edited to change its effect). It was before a District Judge, who considered the argument, albeit only of one side. To have got this far, the brother must have:- 1) Received the claim form. 2) Acknowledged it, by sending Defence (and possibly acknowledgment of service as well) 3) Filled in and returned an Allocation Questionaire 4) Then not attended the h
  13. How are you getting on? It sounds like a case for an injunction from where I am sitting. Also sounds like a case for compensation against the police, by your boyfriend (the law reports are full of cases like this where the police act completely wrongly by mis-understanding civil law). BUT it does need to be clear. When you say it's your boyfriends car, and your debt, but connected to him, it would help to be 110% clear about some facts. 1) Is there ANYTHING linking this car to you? Is there any evidence which they could show to a judge and say "look sir, we honestly thought it w
  14. One more suggestion I would make is this:- 1) Keep out all law and submissions, unless they are based on essential facts. By law I mean all case law and Acts of Parliament and Regulations. By submissions I mean anything where you are trying to pursuade the court that the law is on your side. Essential facts are "this agreement does not comply with ABC Act because: a) it is not signed" and so on. YOU GET TO TELL THE COURT YOUR LEGAL SUBMISSIONS AT THE HEARING OR IN A SKELETON ARGUMENT. 2) Keep out all evidence. You need to demonstrates the bare facts of the case which mean you don't o
  • Create New...