mjt2013
-
Posts
488 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Post article
CAGMag
Blogs
Keywords
Everything posted by mjt2013
-
If you want expert advice then pay a qualified lawyer to give it, we're just doing our best to help you for free.
-
Advice against the police over false evidence!!
mjt2013 replied to Lucky7even's topic in General Legal Issues
Yes, I'm not sure what purpose this thread really serves as the OP just seems to be venting. -
So they have agreed to pay it all themselves?
-
I thought you had earlier said you would pay half?
-
I would hope she'd be competent enough to address this in her report.
-
I suppose that's why he's an expert and we're not
-
If you don't pay then your claim will be struck out but the counterclaim will proceed, it won't win automatically though and will still have to be proved.
-
So is the expert working off of a photocopy of the guarantee then?
-
Will my name appear on Court Listings?
mjt2013 replied to concerned.citizen's topic in Financial Legal Issues
Well, it's not a defence to the claim in any event. Even if they have to reserve the documents that's as far as the address issue will take the OP, although he's obviously replied to the claim because he says a defence has been filed. As for publicity, your name will not be published anywhere save for the actual list at court that day so unless someone happens to be in court and look at it they'll never know. -
How to transfer CPR 8 proceedings to CPRpart 7
mjt2013 replied to mike howie's topic in General Legal Issues
Yes, I don't really understand why the OP isn't prepared to answer that question but it must be understood that no actual case specific advice can be given without it. -
Frankly, I'm still struggling to understand what your defence is but it may be that I'm simply failing to understand. Maybe others will comment on whether or not they understand it and we can see if the problem is with me or the statement!
-
You may wish to remove your full name on the version posted online.
-
How to transfer CPR 8 proceedings to CPRpart 7
mjt2013 replied to mike howie's topic in General Legal Issues
CPR 8.1(3) gives the court the power to change from Part 8 to Part 7. I'm not sure why you would need to do this though, what are the facts here? I can't imagine there are many cases where it's necessary to formally change. -
31.14 is one of the Rules within Part 31, you can check the complete thing online
-
As for the clash with your exam, make an application to adjourn on Form N244 and include evidence from the exam board confirming that you have to sit an exam that day.
-
I imagine it means a witness statement? Is there an order of the court you can type out so we can see exactly what was said?
-
One more thing, don't say that you have evidence. Take copies and attach them to your application, bring the originals to the hearing. It's no good producing documents on the day that haven't been seen previously or, even worse, not producing the documents and all and just saying "you can see them later if you want".
-
Having only read your witness statement, just like the judge at the set aside hearing, I don't really understand why you say you have a defence. Is it that they said it was an overdraft and you say it's not? You also seem to say it's not a current account either, what was it? Also, don't accuse the solicitor of not having read the papers. All that will do is annoy the judge and make it seem like you have nothing of more substance to say in your defence.
-
To be fair if the request was from a malicious third party and they have all of your info away I imagine you'd not be very pleased that they acted on the basis of a letter that anyone could have written. At least a signature helps them discharge their duty to safeguard your info.
-
Don't start mud slinging and trying to discredit people's character, just stick to the issues.
-
The use of the word 'man' seems to be simply employing greater precision than 'person'. I wonder if you could rephrase your second paragraph as I'm not sure I follow what the loophole would be?
-
I imagine because the actual bailiff who takes walking possession can only be a 'man' (which in law is always construed to include both the masculine and the feminine, except where it is obviously not intended to) rather than a 'person' because the latter could be for example a limited company which plainly cannot enter into walking possession.
-
It seems that the default judgment was set aside without notice and therefore the order contains the usual provision allowing an affected party to apply to set that order aside. The application therefore is, confusingly, to set aside the order which set aside the default judgment!
-
I'm not sure where you've got this £500.00 limit from but what Andyorch says about that is right. I wonder if someone was thinking of the bankruptcy limit of £750.00?
-
No problem, a lot of lawyers seem to not understand that particular point so I'm sure as a LiP you'll get no stick from a judge for it. In fairness to the court staff they'll just stick things on the file, they're not legally trained so don't have the power to decide what does or doesn't need to be seen by the judge.
Latest
Our Picks
Reclaim the right Ltd
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS