Jump to content

GaryTravers

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    89
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About GaryTravers

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. thats disappointing. strange how they agree to change it one time but now are being hesitant.. maybe give them reference to the previous time they fixed it FOC and clear up the fact that ESKULAB claims do exist. smartmaniacs home is a good site and a search on there for eskulab and broken springs will give you a fair few reads, also people with advice on who to speak to, what to say etc.. good luck ;-)
  2. well this thread is a bit of a blast from the past... anyway after all that its quite annoying to hear they class it as a 'recall' now so it would have been done FOC, not like before where its a lottery for the eskulab (having to take it in to be checked, but i couldnt with no tax mot...) i say its annoying as i have had the work done at my home instead..
  3. yeah i just realised how badly worded my post was... i'll post back some sense later, my head is hurting now from all this
  4. out of interest, this seems to be slightly different to the 'normal' mention of court bundles and how they are put together... from this page; (the following in particular) The small claims track 'standard directions' - Typically in small claims track cases, the directions will be these - Quote: Each party must file and serve copies of all documents on which that party intends to rely at the hearing, no later than fourteen days before the hearing. The original documents must be brought to the hearing To comply with these direction
  5. from a few posts up - "T&C's not strictly necessary v Abbey. Only if you need to point to the specific term of contract you allege has been breached, as you do with say Lloyds. As above Abbey readily admit a breach so T&C's not crucial" in abbey's standard defence it does mention breach of contract, so its handy that some people cant find T&Cs for abbey as hopefully they wont be needed...
  6. anyone? really panicking now as i'll need to submit my papers tomorrow, yet i dont seem to be getting replies.. (i've come into work to get this done, what a sunday :-|) also can i just use copies of the statement pages that have charges on? (and leave out the rest? thanks
  7. bump? Also, with the schedule of charges to be submitted this time, should i use the same ones as i submitted from the court claim or the current ones? (by current ones i mean those with th updated 8% interest calculations as obviously the dates will have changed...) thanks
  8. ok, im back.. been away for a little while but now im back and the court date is fast approaching, so i need to get cracking with the court bundle...so i guess there will be more questions soon on the way EDIT - adding this Q.. for the list of settled cases for the court bundle, or 'cases relied upon', im assuming i am using the relevant bank details from this page? if so, i seem to be getting the results in a gif file, fair enough, but the font of the text generated seems hard to read. its like a 'courier new' font, similar to what typewriters produced, but this seems a li
  9. haha, anything to get away from cleaning eh? either that or you love me that much :grin: but seriously i appreciate all the help you have given me
  10. thanks again EDIT - sorry forgot to ask, would it be wise to go through the court bundle stuff now or wait to see if i get a court date?
  11. thanks lula, i had already put 'no' on mine, and given it in, was just wondering as they had put 'yes' on theirs.. what do you think to my previous predicament, about the banks copy having the same name on a draft order... but i corrected it for the courts copy...
  12. any ideas on that one guys? sorry to bug but i cant stop wondering about it... also, i received a copy of abbeys AQ today and have some questions on that; "A - Settlement Do you wish there to be a one month stay to atempt to settle the claim, either by informal discussion or by alternate dispute resolution?" they said yes.... is this simply them stalling, or is it likely they will make an offer? or if they are just wasting more time, can anything be done about it? "D - Case Management Information .....Witnesses So far as you know at this stage, what witnesse
  13. thanks for that robdblynd.. though i have just seen that i have somehow been a real donut i sent off the AQ with its attachments to abbey, but on attachment 2A (draft order), i may have the same name, mine for claimant and defendant for the very first bit... im giving the aq plus attachments into court now, correctly printed, but does anyone know how big a deal this will be? feel so stupid, only hoping the courts' copy is more important....
  14. right, sorted. thank you lula, appreciate the help
  15. again thanks lula, you are a legend.. thats me done, can i simply send the lot to abbey and bring in a copy to the court as it is (as in, do i need to mark it as a copy for each, or will the same thing do for both of them?)
×
×
  • Create New...