i was helping elderly relative with her shopping. was only a few minutes i noticed there was no observation time....i was under the impression there had to be 2 minutes...... is that a requirement ?????

bump

yes , was parked on Double yellows... what about the ticket? any technicalities there ?

xxx100.pdfHi received this PCN (attached) Corner of Newcombe road/Earlsdon Avenue Coventry CV5 6NL can some one please take a look and see if i have a chance of appeal thanks xxx099.pdf

Hi at my recent hearing MBNA/ OPTIMA their Barrister Kate Urrell stated to the Judge that i hadcbeen on this site and as such it was "fishing expedition and typical of the sort of Internet based avoidance"......the judge replied " i quite agree"... they had printed off all of my thread and submitted it as evidence

waeighed up the fors and against my family and my sanity are too importnt to me ive already submitted an application for redetermination asking for installments. Sent in an I&E and will wait and see where it goes from there thank you to every one who has helped over the last 2 years Frank

why not summons dianne powell to appear as a witness. put her on the spot in court. cost £35 on a witness application form plus her train ticket.

please take a look at my thread slevin v mbna i lost at an SJ 16th Septemebr 2010 this is a summary of the events that day "I did not want to post up the events of the hearing yesterday as I knew that my post would be too emotive and this would have clouded the issues I wanted to get across. That has all subsided now and I am back to my usual self. So below I will try and explain to you all what happened yesterday. As this was a Summary Judgement hearing it was down to the possibility of me being able to satisfy the judge I had the prospect of defending their claim and not necessarily defending during this hearing. Counsel for Optima began to state their case as to why they felt I had no possibility of defending their claim Eventually it came around to the Terms & Conditions. Their counsel argued that the T&C's were from 1997 even though they had charges for £12.00 for late payments. Although my witness statement had pointed out that it was after the OFT intervention and their recommendation in 2006 this level of charges was introduced. Therefore the T&C's must be after 2006 Their explanation was that There were also charges on the T&C's that were for £15.00 so if these T&C's were post 2006 all charges would be £12.00. The judge was not entirely convinced by this and told their counsel that although they had said in a witness statement these were the T&C's , I had stated in my T&C's that they were not. And he need positive proof from either of us to prove our case I think the whole case was hinging on the point of the T&C's being those which were from the time of the agreement. (refer to Lynne Thorious judgement) I think at this moment in time they had not satisfied the judge Suddenly the counsel produces from her case a supplimentary witness statement and asked that it be admitted as it had further proof that the T&C's were from 1997. The judge asked for the witness statement. Said that he would have a photocopy made and that I could have 15 minutes to read them and then he would invite me to give him any reasons as to why this statement should not be included in the hearing. While I was reading the Witness statement he would also read a copy to save time. You can imagine that this 15 minutes felt like a lifetime. I am an Litigant in person and I have 15 minutes to come up with an argument as to why it should not be admitted, then also prepare myself just in case it is. So I have to read it, digest it and come up with a defence to it also We came back into the hearing, I pointed out that to introduce new evidence during the hearing was an abuse of process and that the witness statement did not prove anything new. The judge decided that it would be included. I think that after reading it he had made up his mind that it supported their claim that the T&C's were those that were with the agreement in 1997. The witness statement was by Dianne Powell. It discussed the process for obtaining a reconstituted agreement it situations that the original could not be found. Attached were exhibits. 3 photocopies of other peoples agreements from September 1997 with the financial terms on the back page. Also there was I set of T&C's identical to those which had previously been submitted with the court bundle The witness statement was dated 16th September 2010 . At the top of the page it showed that it had been faxed at 8.33am that morning. Althogh the witness statement was New evidence, ther was nothing new with in it that had come to light as this process has been going on for over 2 years Counsel for the claimant concluded their case. I then began with my statement to the court. My points were that this was nothing to do with S77/78 or anything to do with carey. I pointed to the Waksman judgement and his introduction. The judge said that he was well aware of the Carey case and he did not to see the judgement as he had a copy of the summary (1 page ) I raised the issue of the T&C's and the new witness statement and its attached exhibits. Although the photcopies of the other peoples were from 1997 the T&C's had no unique source codes or date identifiers to link them to the agreements. I also pointed to my exhibits in the bundle which was a credit card statement that had a charge of £25.00 for a late payment. So either they had made that charge in breach of the T&C's or the T&C's were not those of 1997 The judge did not even turn to the page in the bundle to look at it. I think he had already made his mind up. I continued to discuss the contradicting witness statements. There were questions that needed answering and this was a compelling reason for not having a summary judgement . The witness had already been summonsed to appear at a full hearing , I went on to point out that optima had been obstructive and not complied with various CPR's or orders of the judge. The judge stopped me at this point and said that he did not want to hear about these issues, they were not relevant. As I continued to present my case, I looked at the judge , he looked totally disinterested. In my mind I was thinking to myself “am I keeping you up” . I had to bite my lip to stop myself from saying it. I laboured on the point that this was not S77/78. The claimant had made the claim it was their case to prove and provide to the court a properly executed agreement as per s60/61 The judge in his summing up said that a reconstituted agreement was sufficient to satisfy S60/61 otherwise why have a process for reconstituting agreements when the lenders could just send a photocopy of the agreement to any one asking for it under S77/78. So reconstituted agreemnts were definaitely acceptable After the judge summed up I asked if he would write to me and explain his reasons for his judgement. He said that it had all been recorded and that I could arrange to have a transcript so there you have it Frank

Hi to my readers at OPTIMA appeal needs to be in by next thursday............ 99% ready......ooooohhhh the suspense is killing me would you like to see it on here or wait for a copy in the post???

Hi... just a quick update to any one following the thread ive been keeping a low profile, but lots been going on in the background. watch this space for more information Frank

you are right about Dianne Powelll having no intention to appear as a witness on the 17th along with the witness summons i attached a cheque for £28.80 to reimburse her train fair. i checked last thursday and she had not cashed the check. this was very telling On Saturday i received a letter from her with my cheque attached... In her letter she advised me to".... put the funds to better use. either towards the debt i owed or to seek impartial legal advice....." oooohhh quite nasty

Yes you are right . Had I had more time on the day Different day , different judge !

Hi The T&C's were on a fax which had then been photocopied . They were so poor it was very difficult to see them (they were probably photocopied prior to being faxed) In hindsight I should have asked for an adjournment and requested the originals to be produced to the court If I try to scan and email the quality will not be readable I know what to look for There were no identifiers to indicate a version or date or to link them to the agreements from 1997, I pointed out to the judge the lack of identifiers, I also pointed out to the judge that the court leaflets I had bought into the room had identifiers which had date codes ie (04/06) for April 2006 Like the red arrows it went over his head Langster , I have read your pm and replied

optimal eagle kiler..... are you who you say you are? why not pm me frank

Freinds , if you are looking in please see post 169