Jump to content

Showing results for tags 'appearance'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • The Consumer Forums: The Mall
    • Welcome to the Consumer Forums
    • FAQs
    • Forum Rules - Please read before posting
    • Consumer Forums website - Post Your Questions & Suggestions about this site
    • Helpful Organisations
    • The Bear Garden – for off-topic chat
  • CAG Community centre
    • CAG Community Centre Subforums:-
  • Consumer TV/Radio Listings
    • Consumer TV and Radio Listings
  • CAG Library - Please register
    • CAG library Subforums
  • Banks, Loans & Credit
    • Bank and Finance Subforums:
    • Other Institutions
  • Retail and Non-retail Goods and Services
    • Non-Retail subforums
    • Retail Subforums
  • Work, Social and Community
    • Work, Social and Community Subforums:
  • Debt problems - including homes/ mortgages, PayDay Loans
    • Debt subforums:
    • PayDay loan and other Short Term Loans subforum:
  • Motoring
    • Motoring subforums
  • Legal Forums
    • Legal Issues subforums


  • News from the National Consumer Service
  • News from the Web


  • A Say in the Life of .....
  • Debt Diaries

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start




Found 7 results

  1. Hi, Can anyone recommend a SE based solicitor to represent me in court against Hoist, I have up to now represented myself with some success but I feel that now I may be a little out of my depth. Thanks
  2. I am helping an elderly relative (91) with a court claim. Wer are getting the witness statement ready as there are only 3 weeks until the court date. He received a letter in december and should have paid his hearing fee in february. Its new to me, but I think the court will strike out the claim. He is unsure if he paid it, if he has not what is the worst case?
  3. My friend is in rent arrears but is paying them off her housing association has served her with a Notice of Seeking Possession and now she has received a letter to attend court. The letter outlines the amount of rent to be paid weekly and their desired outcome is Eviction. Her current arrears is £1800 but she is paying this off weekly however as she is self-employed there are times when she is unable to pay anything. My friend is very worried about what will happen and wonders whether she is able to make an agreement at court or will it be straight eviction. She does intend to pay off alot of this before the hearing but is still worried. As I have never been through this process I cannot advice her. Any advice please ??
  4. Seems to be a trend on here and other website help forums, to ignore and even laugh off threats from CEL. Fortunately I have kept all correspondence and have been fighting this for my daughter since May 2016. Now she has been referred to the County Court Business Centre Northampton issue date 07/04/2017. In May 2016 my daughter had an appointment at a doctors surgery with her baby for injections. She is adamant she entered her car number plate on the screen inside the surgery but for some reason did not register. When the first letter arrived from CEL she approached the surgery to have it dismissed but was advised to be just out of time. As the letter came to my address she then emailed CEL with her new address and attached a letter with the appointment time from the surgery. This email was ignored I emailed CEL and informed them to refer to her change of address. Apart from getting a reply saying that I need permission from my daughter to act on her behalf, they still send letters to my address [ car registered there at the time ]. Looking for advice here for the best way to deal with these court papers. I understand parking needs to be governed but this seems unfair on my daughter whom the surgery were expecting. CEL Statement All visitors must register for a permit on a touch screen inside reception. If you park without obtaining a valid permit, you agree to pay £100. To deter abuse of this car park, these terms apply at all times. Additional costs will be incurred if payment is not received within 28 days. Arrival 10.53 20 Departure 11.12.37. Bill is now £327.04 including legal fees
  5. Hello I'm appearing in magistrates court imminently because the now defunct First Capital Connect (FCC) are pursuing prosecution for a failure to produce a valid ticket at Finsbury Park station. I'm pragmatic about this and have attempted to settle with FCC without success, various parts of what happened leading up to the court date make little or no sense.. So here in brief. I travel once or twice monthly from and to Finsbury Park overground station. Travelled to Finsbury Park with valid ticket, exited train on newly built platform which had no ticket barriers unlike the other 4 platforms at the station. Discarded ticket because no barriers to put it in to, walked down two seperate flights of stairs to exit station, one FCC staff member at street entrance to station asks for ticket. I explain I discarded it and offer to go back and get it, staff refuses offer and says I cannot go back to get it. Staff asks for name and address which I give, he verifies it writes out missing ticket pad slip, I ask for copy of missing ticket pad slip, he declines to give me, I ask how can I pay, staff says they will post bill to me (no offer to allow me to pay there and then). FCC send court summons asking for any mitigating circumstances - I reply with above and ask them to check records of purchase for 1.5 hour period on day when I bought ticket, apologise profusely, make clear offer to meet their costs and pay for ticket to bring matter to a close. They write back asking me to contact them in light of my response to resolve matter. I email, telephone and write to the contact info given, after no response I start requesting they call email or write to me. I continue to try to make contact receiving no response for 6 weeks.. Get court summons 9 days before hearing asking court to award for £100 approx and cost of ticket £15 approx, I plead guilty by post outlining the above, apologising and pointing out I just don't want to waste anyones time. Court date passes, I receive letter from court stating they have adjourns matter to allow "prosecution to review", I've heard nothing from the prosecution (FCC ceased trading on 14th September this year) I contacted court to ask if hearing going ahead, they advised me yes and court staff said always best to attend, I will go because I want this matter to end, although I've already pleaded guilty by post and submitted mitigation with the guilty plea. I would laugh if it weren't for the fact this is serious and I respect the law, its stressed me for months and I'm going to court for the first time in my life - I'm no spring chicken. The date of birth on my summons is incorrect, I think this is irrelevant but am no solicitor. What I am keen to know is where the "compulsory ticket area" is at Finsbury Park station and most importantly could anyone give me any pointers on what I should do or say at court. As I've said I was happy enough to pay whatever to make FCC happy and still am, yet I have no means of contacting them since they don't respond to any normal channel and have now ceased to exist. I've been putting off looking at this but it's happening in a couple of days.. Any advice very welcome.
  6. Can someone please advise if it is normal for a Magistrates Court to make it a condition for someone who is fighting the Council Tax cuts and who has requested to be heard by a District Judge, they must supply a copy of their defence to the local authority and the Court 14 days before the hearing? The magistrate actually stated "we will not allow anyone to ambush the local authority with a legal argument, therefore you must present a defence to the court and the local authority 14 days prior to the hearing". When questioned about whether this puts the individual at a disadvantage the reply is "No". Is this correct? Here are my notes from memory of what happened today: Council Tax Summons Appearance - 6 August 2013 1) About 150 people turned up and were told by a council official to go to the One Stop shop to arrange a payment plan. They were not advised they had a right to challenge the charges in fact they were told the Liability Order would be granted regardless of whether they went to the One stop shop or went into the court room. This is clear mis-information and "Contempt of Court" because they are effectively saying the outcome of a supposedly impartial hearing was pre-determined. They also neglected to tell people by making an arrangement to pay they forfeit their legal right to challenge unfair charges in court and accept the charges as applied by the local authority. 2) Everone is entitled to a "Mckenzie Friend" and all courts are open to the public. However people were not being made aware of their legal right to sit in the Public Gallery. As such they were denied the legal right to moral support and counsel. 3) Local authority Officers were wearing name badges but when questioned the name badge was different from the name they supplied. 4) People were being taken into a side room and naturally presumed they were speaking to an advocate. However in truth it was another officer of the council who wanted to know what they were going to say to the court so the council officers could prepare an adequate defense in order to "prove" the liability order should be enforced. 5) Because I had spoken out I was kept until last, along with another individual who supported me. This was clearly a form of intimidation. (let them cool their heels mentality etc) 6) The letter issued as a summons does not carry a court seal and does not state under which law, legislation or regulations people are being prosecuted. 7) There was no court recorder in attendance to document the proceedings 8) The council officer presenting the prosecutions to the Magistrates confirmed she was an officer of the council but was not legally qualified. 9) The council failed to answer when questioned how many people had been summonsed on the day. 10) The council failed to produce documents specific to the case. As such "No Case To Answer" became the defence but this was ignored by the Magistrates. 11) The matter continued and turned to the failure to have a Public Consultation when reducing the Council Tax Benefit as required under the Sustainable Communities Act 2007 12) Additionally the Council has failed in its Duty of Care towards its vulnerable residents. The costs are punitive and there is no right to appeal in order to contest the costs. Attempts at arrangements to pay prior to the court appearance failed. They insisted costs would still be applied which is unreasonable. 13)Presented to the Bench - The Council is guilty of procedural ultra vires (acting beyond its powers) 14) resented to the Bench - The council is failing to consider the relevant facts of individual cases in order not to act in an unreasonable manner (Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation [1948] 1 KB 223. The coucil has acted unreasonably by its application for a liability order. 15) Presented to the Bench - The council appears to be prepared to act beyond its powers by placing budgetry considerations above the Common Law Duty of Care owed to this community and the individuals within it. 16) The court advised "This is not the correct place to discuss this". When pressed they agreed the matter should be sent before a District Judge in order to preserve the legal right to be heard and have a fair trial. 17) The case was adjourned to appear before a District Judge on 03 Sept 2013 9:45am (Court 6) A condition was placed by the Magistrates all defence documents must be submitted to the Local Authority and to the Court 14 days prior to the hearing.
  7. Dear All I started a business up just as the country fell over: I'd wanted to own a bar for 20 years, and when I did I started at the worst possible time. Things went well for a while but I soon fell on hard times. My company (LTD) folded 2 months after being unable to pay a supplier over £20K, I switched to another for the last 2 months and paid cash. I'm not proud of owing this company; there is just nothing I can do. I have no job and no assets in which to pay them back. My one and only gripe is that our credit limit was £6k so why did they let us get to over £20k? However, my problem is that despite all the suppliers invoices being in the name of the LTD company, they have continued to take me and the other director to court in our personal names. We have pointed this out to them and they have continued regardless. The Court ordered on 1st October 2012 (this was listed as part of the order) a standard disclosure by list to reach ALL parties by 1st Dec 2012, they have not sent this and we sent ours by recorded delivery, we pointed this out and they once again ignored our email. Today the standard disclosure by list dropped (completed by their solicitor) through my door dated 17th Jan 2013; do I have any right to suggest that they have not adhered to the order made on the 1st Oct and have the case stricken out? Also why would they continue this in my personal name when ALL their documented evidence shows the goods delivered to the limited company? Surely they should be taking the LTD company to Court not me? Many thanks for any help or suggestions
  • Create New...