Jump to content


Help Please Re: CCJ From Northampton CCBC - ***DISCONTINUED***


Misterzeus
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4551 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Thanks citizenB - a star as always :)

 

Thanks Martin :) No application to the Courts for wasted costs, only the letter to the solicitors.

 

Thanks Viscount Stair :) Yes, Mr Z has decided to accept their offer, don't want to risk losing what they have offered or the chance that he may end up owing them money :eek:

 

Yes, I think that accepting their offer with conditions that they drop the matter is the way to go. Thank you for your offer to advise what Mr Z should write, very kind of you, no rush as the solicitors want a reply within 14 days.

 

Thanks pt2537 :) I like this part!

 

you could however invite them to consider giving you an undertaking not to pursue the debt any further ( you would have then under Promissory estoppel then) as long as they make a promise to forgo their legal rights

 

Thanks to all again for taking the time to reply

 

Regards

 

Mrs Z :)

 

Central London Property Trust Ltd v. High Trees House Ltd [1947] 1 KB 130. Denning J stated, "In my opinion, the time has now come for the validity of such a promise to be recognized. The logical consequence, no doubt is that a promise to accept a smaller sum in discharge of a larger sum, if acted upon, is binding notwithstanding the absence of consideration:”

Denning J relied upon the judgment of the House of Lords in Hughes v Metropolitan Railway Co (1877) 2 App Cas 439 to support this view that a person could not go back on a promise to waive strict legal rights where it would be inequitable to do so. The House of Lords confirmed the existence of promissory estoppel in Tool Metal Manufacturing Co. Ltd v. Tungsten Electric Co. Ltd [1955] 1 WLR 761

 

The doctrine of promissory estoppal has developed limitations since the High Trees case; there must be a promise to waive the legal right for promissory estoppal to engage. In Combe v.Combe [1951] 2 KB 215 the doctrine can only be used as a shield not as a sword where a strict legal right has been waived . There must be an act in reliance. But Detrimental reliance is not a requirement of promissory estoppel. It only needs to be established that the promisor has changed their position. W. J. Alan & Co. v. El Nasr [1972] 2 All ER 127 and as shown in Tool Metal Manufacturing Co. Ltd v. Tungsten Electric Co. Ltd [1955] 1 WLR 761 the doctrine will generally operate to suspend legal rights but may extinguish them in certain situations.

 

 

The above was taken from an old law essay i wrote a while ago on the subject of promissory estoppel, basically, if they promise to forgo the legal right to pursue any outstanding balance, that is accrued , then they would not be able to come back after you on a later date and if they did you could rely upon promissory estoppel

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 291
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Citizen B, you will have to stop using my name in threads - you will wear it out! ;)

 

I haven't read the whole thread yet, so what am I being asked to do?

 

Thank you both VS and Paul for looking in.

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a think about this and we need to be a bit savvy.

 

Making a counter offer normally supersedes the original offer - although I can't remember if that applies to Calderbank offer (the nickname for offers made without prejudice save as to costs, which is a bit of a mouthful). However, it is not worth getting into a situation where it even becomes arguable.

 

So, what is needed (I think) is a Without Prejudice letter along the following lines:

 

Your costs were entirely reasonable (and, if anything, on the low side) but you will consider the offer in the interests of finality (closure, if you want to be touchy-feely).

 

However, it would be so much better for both sides if there was complete finality.

 

They would require permission from the court to commence another set of proceedings.

 

They would be breaking the OFT Debt Collection Guidelines and the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations if they pursued the matter any other way.

 

You would have no hesitation in accepting an offer of 2/3 of your costs if it were accompanied by a suitable assurance that the matter was entirely concluded but, in the absence of such an assurance, you will need to think about it.

 

If that doesn't work, you should still have the option of accepting their offer or you can take a chance and make your own Calderbank offer.

 

Before I turn that into a letter, what do others think of the plan?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds pretty good to me, VS.:D

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you angel_1! Wishing you all the best too :)

 

Thank you again Paul for your futher input, much appreciated :)

 

Thank you very much Viscount Stair, we really do appreciate your help :)

 

I think we will go with the "finality" - we have no desire to be touchy feely with that shower - lol!!!

 

Another big thank you to CitizenB too :)

 

Mr Z says a big thank you to everyone that has helped

 

Regards

 

Mrs Z :)

Edited by Misterzeus
correction
Link to post
Share on other sites

OK. Sorry I got waylaid but here goes:

 

Dear Sirs

 

Without Prejudice save as to the costs of any detailed assessment proceedings

 

I acknowledge receipt of your letter dated X.

 

I note that your clients are seeking a sizeable discount in relation to the costs they would be required to pay me following the discontinuance of the proceedings that they chose to bring against me.

 

The amount of the costs that I claimed in my letter of X is entirely reasonable and, if anything, it was based on conservative estimates of the time that I had to spend defending the proceedings.

 

I remain confident that I would recover most (if not, indeed, all) of the amount claimed.

 

I do recognise, however, the benefits to both sides of drawing a line under these proceedings and, for that reason, I am prepared to consider your clients' offer in relation to costs.

 

However, there would be even greater benefits to both sides if complete finality could be achieved.

 

As I am sure you are aware, having discontinued proceedings, your clients would require permission from the court in order to commence proceedings again. Any application for permission will be opposed.

 

Whilst I note what you have said about your clients seeking to pursue payment by other means, I am at a loss as to what such other means your clients could legitimately employ.

 

If they were to pursue payment by other means, it would involve them breaching the Office of Fair Trading's Debt Collection Guidelines and committing offences against the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008. It could also potentially involve them committing offences against the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 and becoming liable for damages under section 3 of that Act.

 

If your clients were prepared to undertake not to pursue the matter any further, then I would have no hesitation in accepting the reduced offer they have made in relation to my entitlement to costs.

 

However, as matters stand, I will need to consider their offer very carefully before deciding whether to accept it, to make a counter-offer or simply to proceed to detailed assessment.

 

If your clients wish to make a revised offer, I should be obliged to hear from you. Otherwise, I shall revert in due course in relation to their current offer.

 

Yours faithfully

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

OK. Sorry I got waylaid but here goes:

 

Dear Sirs

 

Without Prejudice save as to the costs of any detailed assessment proceedings

 

I acknowledge receipt of your letter dated X.

 

I note that your clients are seeking a sizeable discount in relation to the costs they would be required to pay me following the discontinuance of the proceedings that they chose to bring against me.

 

The amount of the costs that I claimed in my letter of X is entirely reasonable and, if anything, it was based on conservative estimates of the time that I had to spend defending the proceedings.

 

I remain confident that I would recover most (if not, indeed, all) of the amount claimed.

 

I do recognise, however, the benefits to both sides of drawing a line under these proceedings and, for that reason, I am prepared to consider your clients' offer in relation to costs.

 

However, there would be even greater benefits to both sides if complete finality could be achieved.

 

As I am sure you are aware, having discontinued proceedings, your clients would require permission from the court in order to commence proceedings again. Any application for permission will be opposed.

 

Whilst I note what you have said about your clients seeking to pursue payment by other means, I am at a loss as to what such other means your clients could legitimately employ.

 

If they were to pursue payment by other means, it would involve them breaching the Office of Fair Trading's Debt Collection Guidelines and committing offences against the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008. It could also potentially involve them committing offences against the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 and becoming liable for damages under section 3 of that Act.

 

If your clients were prepared to undertake not to pursue the matter any further, then I would have no hesitation in accepting the reduced offer they have made in relation to my entitlement to costs.

 

However, as matters stand, I will need to consider their offer very carefully before deciding whether to accept it, to make a counter-offer or simply to proceed to detailed assessment.

 

If your clients wish to make a revised offer, I should be obliged to hear from you. Otherwise, I shall revert in due course in relation to their current offer.

 

Yours faithfully

 

 

 

Thank you very much for the letter template Viscount Stair, very much appreciated :)

 

 

Just one question if I may, the following taken from your letter doesn’t apply to Mr Z. I think that was mentioned earlier in the thread, but it was taken from someone else’s thread IYSWIM!

 

Should we state the following but change the first bit from:

 

Whilst I note what you have said about your clients seeking to pursue payment by other means, I am at a loss as to what such other means your clients could legitimately employ.

 

To:

 

Should your client seek to pursue payment by other means, it would involve them breaching etc?

 

Brilliant letter though!

 

Thanks very much

 

Kind Regards

 

Mrs Z :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for such a quick response Viscount Stair!

 

I will get it typed up and get it off to the solicitors on Monday.

 

Heres hoping it gets the desired response!!

 

Thanks again

 

Kind Regards

 

Mrs Z :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good morning all,

 

Mr Z has today received a letter from the solicitors this morning in response to the letter sent (thank you Viscount Stair).

 

It is headed WITHOUT PREJUDICE SAVE AS TO COSTS OF THE DETAILED ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS

 

They say as correctly stated, as their client has discontinued Court proceedings, they would need permission from the Court to bring a further claim.

 

They say their client confirms that they will not be requesting the Court's permission to start recovery proceedings against Mr Z in relation to Account Number **** **** **** ****. I have checked that the account number they've stated is correct and it is (perhaps I'm paranoid but I wouldn't put it pass them to alter it slightly, deliberately!)

 

They then ask if Mr Z is prepared to accept their client's offer.

 

Am I correct in assuming that this latest letter from them is enough to prove that this will be the end of the matter, more importantly because they have headed the letter the way they have, could we use it against them if they renege?

 

Mr Z is happy to accept their client's offer, should he head his letter the same as they have when replying?

 

Any advice/opinions gratefully received, we are going away on Monday and won't be back until the 12th May, so time is of the essence, we would like to get a reply posted off before we go.

 

Kind Regards

 

Mrs Z :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

If Mr Z accepts, then the fact that letter was headed WP etc becomes irrelevant. The heading protects it if Mr Z does not accept but once accepted the exchange of correspondence can be used as evidence of the agreement.

 

By agreeing not to ask for permission to start fresh proceedings that is enough protection in that aspect.

 

They are not agreeing not to pursue the matter by other means, which is a little pathetic but there is not really anything else they could do legitimately anyway.

 

You do need to be aware of that wrinkle but, if it were me, I would acccept and draw a line under the matter but keep the papers very safe but readily accessible.

 

Do others agree?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If Mr Z accepts, then the fact that letter was headed WP etc becomes irrelevant. The heading protects it if Mr Z does not accept but once accepted the exchange of correspondence can be used as evidence of the agreement.

 

By agreeing not to ask for permission to start fresh proceedings that is enough protection in that aspect.

 

They are not agreeing not to pursue the matter by other means, which is a little pathetic but there is not really anything else they could do legitimately anyway.

 

You do need to be aware of that wrinkle but, if it were me, I would acccept and draw a line under the matter but keep the papers very safe but readily accessible.

 

Do others agree?

first thing that sprang to mind VS was promissory estoppel:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your quick response Viscount Stair!

 

Should Mr Z head the letter with "WITHOUT PREJUDICE SAVE AS TO COSTS OF THE DETAILED ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS" still though or is there no need?

 

Thank you pt2537, does that mean if they reneged on the matter we could use promissory estoppel against them?

 

Thanks again

 

Kind Regards

 

Mrs Z :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your quick response Viscount Stair!

 

Should Mr Z head the letter with "WITHOUT PREJUDICE SAVE AS TO COSTS OF THE DETAILED ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS" still though or is there no need?

 

Thank you pt2537, does that mean if they reneged on the matter we could use promissory estoppel against them?

 

Thanks again

 

Kind Regards

 

Mrs Z :)

Yes, they have made a promise to waive a strict legal right, that would leave them struggling to overcome the promissory estoppel issues.

 

atleast thats what my memory on the subject of prom estoppel seems to point to, long time since i did it at law school mind

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...