Jump to content

soothy meldrum

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

108 Excellent

About soothy meldrum

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. Wow! I bow to your superior knowledge Langster!
  2. Ouch, "Smooty"? Everything Ive done has been for the best of intentions and aimed at helping somebody who seems to have been the victim of some terrible case handling by a firm of solicitors! I also know some of their staff current and former who have added to the catalog of material and this is why Ive been so well informed although I seem to have got the DR/VDR thing wrong. Apologies offered. Honestly though I am 1000 percent genuine and on your side.
  3. SARN them and do the same to MBNA and state in the SARN to MBNA that you require all material held about you on their behalf by Optima also. Im told that Optima have a case management system where all post is scanned to their system on the day of receipt and it should be noted on the computer file history. dont be fobbed off by them. They need to explain why the witness statements they produced had their witness name misspelt. Get SRA involved. Get the media involved - Watchdog. Daily Mail. Private Eye etc. Private Eye Private Eye | Official Site would love to hear about i
  4. PF: Sorry I havent been around for a while. Been a little indisposed unfortunately. Just wondering whether youd made any progress with your complaints and contempt of court proceedings. Have they dug out the original of the letter you sent them asking for the adjournment yet. It should be stamped with the date it was received as evidence. If it shows it was received earlier than they said it was in the case summary youve got hard proof that they deliberately mislead the court. If you need any help just give me a shout. Remember I have good and reliable sources of informati
  5. PF Ive been doing a bit more digging for you and had a quick chat with my friend on the inside at Optima. She told me that whilst all of the action was going on on your case [name edited] was being managed and supervised by a chap called [name edited]. I am told that this character is a solicitor and if hed been doing his job properly he would have spotted immediately the numerous flaws in the three statements of [name edited]. He would have been the first port of call for quality control before [name edited]. So there is absolutely no excuse for the complete pigs ea
  6. Not sure who this [name edited] is but it looks like she is not a qualified solicitor or a legal executive which is the other recognised qualification in English Law. This can be seen by clicking onto the directory for legal executives at ILEX Fellows Directory and then typing in the firm name - Optima in the search box. You can do the same thing on the Law Society site The Law Society - Find a solicitor and this lists all the solicitors employed by Optima in Bradford. Youll notice that there is an entry in the legal executive list for an [name edited] who I assume is the
  7. Oh I nearly forgot. Somewhere earlier in this thread you said that the Barrister who attended one of the hearings in your case was charging them over £1500. How did you know this? Did they serve a costs schedule on you? If so then they showed again that they havent got a clue as if this case was on the fast track they are limited as to what they can recover for advocates costs. Part 46 CPR PART 46 - FAST TRACK TRIAL COSTS - Ministry of Justice ,akes clear that the amount they can recover is - where the claim is More than £3,000 but not more than £10,000 £690 If they tried to cl
  8. I want to stress that this is only speculation on my part but MBNA would probably never ever have settled for £20 per month and the fact that they are stuck with it now will rankle with them badly and the fact that the way that their solicitor handled the case and the advice given to them appears to have been the main consideration will not have gone un noticed in the corridors of MBNA. Earlier this afternoon I spoke to a woman who used to work for Optima. I asked her about what it was like there and she said that it was not the best of places to work for and nothing like you would think
  9. Another good article here United Kingdom, Litigation and Arbitration, Treat With Contempt - Kennedys - 05/01/2009 10:14:53, Trials & Appeals and Compensation PF as I stated above. The settlement that MBNA was forced to accept is a very great victory for you. My guess would be that MBNA have probably written the debt off anyway due to Optimas handling of the case and that Optima have probably paid them out. This would possibly raise an interesting question as to whether or not you now owe MBNA anything in law as if Optima have paid them out then unless Optima take a legal assignm
  10. Below I have posted a link to an article which points to a case where leave to bring contempt proceedings was granted after a case had been settled. This would be a useful precedent for PF to follow as his case against MBNA is settled but he was denied the opportunity to cross examine MBNAs witness or to address the judge on the dubious nature of the statements by the non existent [name edited]. As I said before there is a massive public interest in ensuring that massive organisations such as MBNA or Optima - backed by Capita adhere to the rules when bringing litigation and this is e
  11. PF By the way I forgot to say Congratulations on the new arrival.
  12. Morning PF. Just a short one tonight. Copy of an article I found online regarding Contempt of Court Its self explanatory that Dianne Powell could not have had an honest belief in the truth of the opening paragraph of the statements. i.e if she signed herself off as "Dianne" she must and should have known that by signing a statement prepared for somebody else - i.e "Diane" she was effectively donning a false identity. The test set out in the Malgar v Leach case below is apt. The maker of the statement should have known that for "Dianne" to sign a statement intended for
  13. Introducing.............. the unfortunate Giles Whistlecraft esq Giles Whistlecraft on Netlog Would anybody like to tell the poor sod what his employers, the top class law firm, Optima Legal Services did to him and what happened to his salary review? What a great reward for his "continued committment"
  14. Pompey There is absolutely no doubt at all that they were going for the Charge. They would also have been looking at the prospect of getting their hands on a chunk of your compensation by way of a third party debt order so they have been thwarted on both counts there. How pleased they must be with the service given to them by their solicitors lol. I have no doubt that the Barrister who attended would not have been party to anything improper. They dont hesitate to criticise where necessary and they are paid to make the best of each and every situation they are presented with but a
  15. PF Sorry about this m8. Just re-read some of this thread and noticed that Dianne Powell sent another statement to you in February here http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/151709-help-23.html#post2003095 This just gets better and proves beyond doubt that they have not got a clue about proper procedure etc. Dianne Powell seems to have had another serious attack of amnesia in spelling her name as this statement is again in the name of Diane Powell. As the statements bear two different names it is reasonable to assume that Dianne and Diane are two different peop
  • Create New...