ok great thank you x

I have a quick question. My credit file is showing a heading called Public Information Removed. A Court judgement was removed from your May 2020 report. I have checked trust online and nothing is present. I had this claim withdrawn. How do I go about have this completely erased from all credit agencies so no information relates to this on my credit file?

.1 is the cause of action on a statute bar the default notice or the last payment / acknowledgment of the debt? Ie the start date? Default Notice: 20/10/2011 Date of Claim: 13/07/2018 Time between dates: 6 years, 8 months no acknowledgement of debt. Or 20/11/2012 Last payment/acknowledgment of the debt Date of Claim: 13/07/2018 Time between dates: 5 years, 7 months which would win at Court? thk you

thank you andy

I have issued a summons to a builder who has damaged my property. He appointed a firm of solicitors and I will be representing myself. All paperwork has been filed and the court hearing is scheduled in two weeks. I received this morning from the defendant a Notice of Change of Legal Representative, whereby now the defendant shall be acting in person. I just wanted to check with the experts, whether the defendant is able to file such two weeks prior to hearing and is this compliant with court procedures. I have a strong case, it just odd at the last minute his solicitors are terminated when they have been acting on his behalf and filed his defence paperwork and featured in all communications. thank you

thank you dx, does that mean that the clamant can only now legally enforce the deduced payment amount, which they stated in writing, would be acceptable?

I understand. I am interested in the legality and the enforcement of the CCJ when a reduced offer letter has been issued to the defendant. What is meant by the Court saying that the CCJ is not registered? maybe this is the enforcement part? The claimant would need to pay for the Courts enforcement and when undertaken, I hold a letter from the claimant confirming that they would accept a 50% lower value. There was no statement on their letter stimulating that I must accept the lower value within a certain time or such offer, would be forfeited or withdrawn. Suppose they make the payment for enforcement and when I am contacted, I write back with a copy of the reduced payment letter, would this not frustrate the enforcement process and stop it dead in the water. Is it possible to seek the full value or enforce a CCJ when a deduced offer letter has been provided by the claimant? can the Court lawfully pusue any payment?

Thank you for all your input. Yes the CCJ was issued and yet speaking with the Court; they advise it will not affect my credit file, as it has not been registered. I am unsure of the meaning of this registered part. I was wondering how they would enforce all of the debt, when they have already agreed a part settlement and how this plays out should they seek the enforcement.

I was wondering if someone could kindly help clarify this position. I have a CCJ against me dated for value £2k. The Claim was issued in April 2011 and awarded in July 2012. I understand from speaking to the Court that the judgement has not been registered. The claimant has offered me the opportunity to pay £1k and confirmed on receipt of the payment that they will not object to me making the Court payment of approx. £150 to remove the judgement. The questions are. .1 How would you expect the claimant to proceed? In other words, let us suppose they register the judgement and seek enforcement, Is it legal for them to seek the full value of £2k or would they have to seek the lower value of £1k, which they offered as full settlement. .2 Does Statute barred come into effect from when a Claim is issued or from the date of the judgement? Can Statute barred be actioned, when you have been communicating and rejecting the claimants’ case for payment over many years? This is a dispute with a company who has acted dishonestly.

I apologise for the long delay its just mad busy for us during august. The views are essential for the marketing of our rooms. All views are over the sea and the little sailing boats below. We market our property as having these wonderful views. Now with the BT cables, we have these running directly through the waterline and the boats below. It has taken months to motivate BT to look into the issue and I would have thought unreasonable for BT to seek a striking out of any claim based upon time restrictions. So are you saying issue a summons?

Thank you for all the input. So what is the next suggested steps I need to undertake? I was considering an injunction issued in the county court? The poles have always been in place. The lines obstructed my view 30th March 2014 whereby an objection together with photographic evidence was submitted immediately to BT. This triggered heaps of communications, whereby the matter was escalated to the high level BT directors. Openreach outsourced the matter to a third party company for a solution which was found. A pro forma invoice duly arrived for £1,800 to resolve the issue which I am resisting. Its a form of racketeering. Obstruct a view and charge to fix the issue. Its unacceptable. So in reply to the questions raised. Install was 30th March 2014. Objections were raised the same day. The cables do not pass over my land, but interfere with our business views. I would simply like the lines rerouted. I would imagine BT would claim that a phone line doesn't obscure a view significantly enough to affect trade. Yet our whole business hinges on our panoramic unobstructed sea views. What do I need to issue to get a district judge to view all documentation and form an opinion? or should I issue a summons for say £9k and see which way the ball bounces at court?

Thank you for all the suggestions. As mentioned, I believe, BT Openreach has breached the Telecommunications Act 1984 Chapter 12, Schedule 2, The Telecommunications Code, Paragraph 10, Power to Fly Lines. Power to fly lines 10 (1) Subject to paragraph 3 above and the following provisions of this code, where any [F38 electronic communications apparatus] is kept installed on or over any land for the purposes of the operator’s [F39 network], the operator shall, for the statutory purposes, have the right to install and keep installed lines which— (a) pass over other land adjacent to or in the vicinity of the land on or over which that apparatus is so kept; (b) are connected to that apparatus; and © are not at any point in the course of passing over the other land less than 3 metres above the ground or within 2 metres of any building over which they pass. (2) Nothing in sub-paragraph (1) above shall authorise the installation or keeping on or over any land of— (a) any [F38 electronic communications apparatus]used to support, carry or suspend a line installed in pursuance of that sub-paragraph; or (b) any line which by reason of its position interferes with the carrying on of any business [F40 (within the meaning of section 6 of this Act)]carried on on that land. The important clause is 10/2/b “any line which by reason of its position interferes with the carrying on of any business”. I would like to think that most District Judges would apply the Law of common sense and agree that BT has breached this clause as the lines interfere with our business. The Ombudsman has said that Openreach is not a participating company; therefore they are unable to help. BT shelters Openreach in many ways and its taken months just to be able to poke at the appropriate higher level directors. Yet they all adopt an arrogant stance of come and get us. BT has over 200 legal staff in London and yet I cannot obtain one reply to letters. I explained to one member of BT Staff who visited the site that The Duchy of Cornwall has many holiday properties in Cornwall. When I asked whether BT would ever fly cables in front of any of the Prince of Wales holiday properties, I was unsurprised when he said “BT wouldn’t dare!” It unacceptable. I am seeking the suggested method to bring BT to court, so hopefully a district judge would agree that BT has breached the law. Do the legal experts on here, having read the above act, believe a judge would agree that BT has breached the law? I had a feeling this would be contentious issues.

BT has installed flying cables outside my hotel, whereby the sea views have been severely obstructed. I have exhausted all the higher complaint levels within BT and written to both the private secretary and CEO twice via recorded delivery. They fail to reply. I need now to pursue a legal course of action. I believe BT has breach the Telecommunications Act 1984, whereby there is a clause which prohibits BT flying cables which interferes with the carrying on of any business. Our whole business hinges on our views which are now obstructed and guests are complaining. I could issue a writ for say £9k under the £10k limit, whereby I would not be pursued for legal cost should I fail to win such case. On the other hand, I might lose, simply because I may find it hard to justify such financial losses. I understand how to issue a writ for the claim of monies, but how do I go about getting a District Judge to rule that BT has acted unlawfully? What Court process options can I adopt? Thank you

i was seeking some help and guidance with the below Claim issued from lowells for £11k I sent the CPR request and s77/78 requests. I filed a defense. I received draft directions which had nothing of interest other than they were happy to proceed with mediation. I submitted my draft directions to the court and with a copy to lowells seeking. .1 copy of the Credit Agreement .2 Copy of the Default Notice .3 Deed of assignment Should the Claimant fail to comply with the order, the claim will be struck out. I have received nothing from lowells. Today I received Standard Order for the stay for settlement with consent of all the parties. DJ orders that the claim is stayed until 8th September 2014 to enable the parties to attempt settlement. I spoke to a girl in the claims debt at Northampton. She says as I have not received any of the paperwork from lowells I could now file an N244 seeking that the stay is lifted and that the claim is struck out. Could be a heads up or the wrong advise. Here is what I am thinking. File the N244 with the payment of £50.00 ordering that lowells has 14 days to provide the documents or the claim is struck out. Or should I simply go for the strike out? or something else? thank you