Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder

lamboboy

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    82
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by lamboboy

  1. Gotcha! Just for the record; It's all amicable between everyone so I'll let her know. Thank you
  2. It's our problem if we have to shoulder the entire debt isn't it?
  3. There's an ADD button?! Ok, we'll do that and return our dq and wait for mediation. Thank you
  4. Yes. Originally they both got individual paperwork but with the same claim number. Cag advised to acknowledge both and defend both which we did. Now SW have picked up the baton; they are now apparently only pursuing my partner!
  5. Hi Yes! She initially had identical paperwork in her own name! Our history shows the claim, acknowledgement, defence and now dq. Hers shows the same but no dq
  6. But how can they drop a defendant in the process?! As Bekki said.... the details need to be correct surely!? It's frustrating it got this far in the first place without now assuming all responsibility. I will just have to bring it up if and when it goes to mediation and/or court.
  7. I'm too confused now! Shulmans issued this claim in the first instance and after we filed our defence, Shulmans notified of a change to the claim to indicate Southern Water were stepping back in. We then got a letter from Southern Water reducing the liability to remove what was SB to which CAG advice was to ignore it as the claim appeared to be stayed. Now we have this DQ under the original claim number which is now pursuing just my partner an '1 other'. To summarise: was Shulmans; 2 defendants; now Southern Water, 1 named defendant!; and us completely lost!
  8. Thanks everyone. So... should we leave this and use it in a defence or should we do something now? This is not Shulmans error but Southern Water. Shulmans have been relieved at this point, hence the new claim. Can I ask what your defence has been please Bekki? We sound like we're in the same boat!
  9. Sorry Andyorch but we have only received what I've put up on this thread. Is any of that the DQ Please?
  10. Hi Andy Is this ok to send the Solicitor please? Thank you for your reassurances. I can announce my intention to withdraw the claim subject to reassurances that the production of the legal documentation, in form of a V5 will be available upon collection of the vehicle. This is in light of the correspondence I hold from the DVLA which states that legal ownership had reverted back to your client.
  11. Thank you. Will send asap. We are worried he won't have the v5 paperwork. If he doesn't; should we still take the car?
  12. Ok. We will compose an email and get you to glance over it if you don't mind please
  13. Ok thank you. Do we need to mention about the paperwork as we have a letter from DVLA stating that ownership had reverted back to the dealer?
  14. Hi Andyorch Our friend has responded as follows: You have not been properly advised. Liability does not arise after track allocation. Regardless, my client has not once indicated that they would seek costs against you. May I also remind you that as a Solicitor my first duty is to the Court and not to my client. Accordingly, I must not mislead. What you are intimating is 'sharp practice' and that in some way I, or my client, would seek an order that you pay costs once you have discontinued. I refute any inference of malpractice. For the record, the offer was open and plain – my client to bear their own costs and you to collect the vehicle. That was (and remains) an open offer which can be referred to if this case does now continue. Could we please put this matter back on track and continue with the terms agreed? In other words, you are invited to once again discontinue the claim and then collect the vehicle. Once that is done then this matter is put to rest and we can all move on. I look forward to hearing from you. ..think we've upset him??
  15. Hi Andyorch Nearly verbatum.... is this ok please? "Further to your email of xxx , I am unable to discontinue the claim until it has been allocated to track to avoid any liability of the Defendants costs. Given that the Defendant won’t release the vehicle until the claim is discontinued and the fact that there is no trust between the parties, I have been advised NOT to discontinue at this stage. However, in the interest of both parties and in bringing this matter to a conclusion; the Defendant can make application at his cost to stay the proceedings to which I will consent. With the claim stayed, permission to collect the car with change of ownership documentation and providing the vehicle is to my satisfaction, I will be delighted to discontinue the claim.... however, this could be avoided if a little trust was exercised from your side."
  16. Thank you. We'll collaborate tomorrow! Watch this space!
  17. Thank you. We will scribe a response based on your direction and will show you before we send it, if that's ok?
  18. Hi Andyorch We have contacted the court and they have said that they do not use an N157 and at present it is awaiting a mediation appointment. If mediation is then unsuccessful, it gets a court allocation. Any ideas please?
×
×
  • Create New...