Jump to content

hamadryad

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    307
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

1 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Got their questionnaire through today. they have ticked yes to mediation. mine went 1st class yesterday to both the court and them and I ticked no to mediation. watch this space…..as they say! H
  2. Hi, It's due to the recipients on 04 Jul. It's going 1st class today! H
  3. Got the small claims Directions Questionnaire from the court now. Have to complete by 4 July. it says to serve copies on all other parties too. do I have to, or is it a request? H
  4. I emailed them about how I couldn’t log in. Still waiting for a response! Got a letter from the court yesterday though, saying that the case is on the small claims track. Not read it in detail yet cos I’ve was out yesterday and last night. I will read it thoroughly later though. H
  5. I emailed them about how I couldn’t log in. Still waiting for a response! Got a letter from the court yesterday though, saying that the case is on the small claims track. Not read it in detail yet cos I’ve was out yesterday and last night. I will read it thoroughly later though. H
  6. Clearly the MCOL is having a 'hissy fit' today, cos I can't seem to log in to check. Thing is, that the 28 days is up on Monday, so if I don't hear anything by then, by my reckoning it should have died. That is, unless they get a judge to unstay the case. H
  7. I’ve heard nothing from the court so far, and it’s fast approaching the 28 day mark! maybe they’ve folded! H
  8. Apologies, and thank you. New one attached! H Redacted 20220607_Compressed.pdf
  9. Got another letter of claim from Dryad. I'll follow the same procedure. Not sure why they keep on though! H
  10. Hi all, Got a letter back from the court acknowledging my defence and setting out that a copy is being sent to the claimant or their legals. It says that they have 28 days to contact Tye court or the case will be stayed. The only action they will have is that they’ll need to get a judge to lift the ‘stay’. I might yet win! cheers, H
  11. Well, it's either been withdrawn by them, or I have a CCJ, or I should hear back that Ive got a fight on my hands. Fingers crossed that they've withdrawn!!! Any idea when I'll know? H
  12. Sent ti off by email rather than wait for someone else's actions. Got a response back from the court too acknowledging receipt. Cheers all! H
  13. All the assistance I’ve received on here has been very reassuring and a great help, so I’m not panicking really. I’ll maybe send it anyway. It can’t hurt, and would mean that I’m not dependant on the actions, or inactions, of another. H
  14. I've tried again today, so I've got the email addy & I'm planning to send this. What do you thinks? Dear Sir, I am defending the above claim, but am unable to access the website. I am defending the claim on the following basis: The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 1. The Defendant was the recorded keeper of (the car), the car has since been scrapped. 2. It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant. 3. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 4. In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant. 5. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 6. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all. Thank you
×
×
  • Create New...