Locked in car park

[Patma]

 

Princess Leia as 'Carrie' or am I getting confused there?

You're not confused and that's pretty good casting. Put a pair of specs on her. LOL.

 

Which will, of course, impress (and terrify) the howling pack of Media Hacks waiting outside the Court when you do this when Fred wins!

 

P.S. don't wear a frock!

 

Cheers,

BRW

 

No frock, got it I'll remember.

[Annoying Twit]

 

And in a few seconds you will have completely forgotten that we agreed not to rely on the caution as evidence in our case.

[Bookworm]

:lol: OK well if she won't do how about Meryl Streep she's about the right age and she doesn't do regional accents (don't think)?

 

Not regional, but international. My goodness, haven't you heard her? Australian in "A cry in the dark", Polish in "Sophie's Choice", etc, etc... At one point, there were rumours that she only took a role if she could "do" another accent, lol.

 

Ok, if we're into confessions, then my role as a barrier may be a bit of a stretch, for starters, I have TWO arms, none of them broken. Also, lifting me would definitely take more than one hand, try a couple of middle-size cranes.

 

I have the bulk to be the ton of bricks to fall on their heads though.

 

 

PS: About Roald Dahl. Little know fact is that he also is the author of porn novels. Always be VERY careful when picking a book for the kids!!!

Edited August 25, 2009 by Bookworm
Added trivia

[banker_rhymes_with]

Hello Bookie!

 

Ok, if we're into confessions, then my role as a barrier may be a bit of a stretch, for starters, I have TWO arms, none of them broken. Also, lifting me would definitely take more than one hand, try a couple of middle-size cranes.

 

There's another problem, to be the barrier requires someone to be a right plank (of wood) so, perhaps, that role should go to the opposition!

 

We need to keep you back for a more prestigious role.

 

Cheers,

BRW

[Patma]

TLD you've got email.

Lots to see.

[Annoying Twit]

TLD you've got email.

Lots to see.

 

My prediction: Things just got weirder

[Patma]

Got the info you wanted now TLD

[Patma]

Pm sent TLD

[Patma]

Sent you another pm TLD:)

[Toulose LeDebt]

Well they've evaded responding to the order

 

 

 

It is also okay for Lyons-Davidson to change their case so drastically at such a late stage but apparantly it's now not okay for the defendant to amend their case in response to the new POC because it's too near the hearing date. (Fred filed his apps within 24 hours of receiving the latest POC from the Court).WTF are they on?

 

The rest is just a mixture of blubbing and untruths.

Edited August 28, 2009 by Toulose LeDebt

[Patma]

It looked to me that they were saying they hadn't seen his defence. If that were the case though wouldn't you think they'd have thought to mention it at the Directions Hearing?

Sent you another quick pm TLD btw, sorry......

[Annoying Twit]

Surely anything sent to LD or PCAD from now on will be sent recorded delivery. If it wasn't before.

[Toulose LeDebt]

It looked to me that they were saying they hadn't seen his defence. If that were the case though wouldn't you think they'd have thought to mention it at the Directions Hearing?

Sent you another quick pm TLD btw, sorry......

 

Sorry Patma you are of course quite correct it's the original defence they claim not to have seen. Very odd that this would not have come up before now but then didn't the Court make the most unholy cockup of the initial stages of these proceedings?

 

(Ignore much of what I wrote in the pm's then. )

[Patma]

No worries TLD. Loking forward to hearing what you make of the rest of it.

Will get back to you later as have to nip out.

[Toulose LeDebt]

I've gone through the pleadings from Lyons-Davidson Patma. It's a tragicomedy work of art. Notably they don't actually bother addressing any of the issues raised by the applications as ordered but then we know that would be rather difficult for them don't we. 30 minutes isn't very long to allocate to an apps hearing you have to wonder if HH has already made his mind up on some of the issues, be hard for him not to have done considering the weight of evidence.

 

The last few paragraphs almost had me in tears.... but I was peeling a bag of very strong onions at the time.

 

Basically they've tried very hard to get them dismissed but the Judge has refused to dismiss them and wants them adddressed.

 

In summary I'd have to say 'Very much in Freds favour' and quite obviously not at all what the claimant wanted .

 

And if I were being pedantic I'd add 'Still struggling with the concepts of truth and fiction in places'.

Edited August 28, 2009 by Toulose LeDebt

[bedlington83]

What's an apps hearing? Presumably its an abbreviation of applications so I guess my question should be what's an applications hearing? Is it to deal with the various documents that Fred has been sending to the court that resulted in the court ordering LD to respond? If so when is it, or will it be heard at the same time as the claimant's hearing on the second?

[Toulose LeDebt]

What's an apps hearing? Presumably its an abbreviation of applications so I guess my question should be what's an applications hearing? Is it to deal with the various documents that Fred has been sending to the court that resulted in the court ordering Lyons-Davidson to respond? If so when is it, or will it be heard at the same time as the claimant's hearing on the second?

 

 

A few weeks ago in response to the claimants amendment of case application Fred submitted some applications of his own.

Obviously he applied to file an amended defence particularised to respond to the new drastically changed POC he is defending.

Lyons-Davidson don't seem to think he should be allowed to amend his defence to cater for the new POC.

Fred also raised concerns about the accuracy of certain statements and provenance of certain evidence.

Lyons-Davidson don't seem to think there are any issues.

Fred applied as fully entitled under CPR that the claimants POC be amended to reflect the agreement made between all parties and the judge on 1st July.

Lyons-Davidson seem to ignore the existence of this agreement yet clearly remember Freds app for a stay being refused (upon the basis of it).

Lyons-Davidson have complained about the costs involved, the time involved, the timing of the apps, the merit of the apps, the manner in which the apps should be dealt with etc. etc. They've called the apps 'unwarranted', 'unfortunate', stated they should have been given the opportunity to address them directly, said 2 weeks (4 weeks shurely) is not enough notice, blah, blub, blah, blub.

 

The letter from Lyons-Davidson is a blubfest of staggering proportions and does not actually cover any of the points ordered by the court, concentrating as it does on portraying Fred as the villain and themselves as victims....... But then the Court has almost a whopping 50 pages more evidence in support of any allegations made by Fred than the claimant has so is perfectly able to see who plays which part in proceedings to date.

 

The judge has ignored all their protests, all their attempts at belittling Fred or the issues and ordered a hearing to be held immediately prior to the small claims hearing in order that these applications may be addressed.

 

Fred wants them addressed, the claimant quite patently does not so we have to take this as a small preliminary victory and a point in the bag.

 

So now there are two hearings planned for tuesday. This doubles the chances of Fred winning and the second hearing could prove very interesting if say for example Fred were to blurt out his 'little secret' in the first hearing....

Edited August 28, 2009 by Toulose LeDebt

[Annoying Twit]

What a result!!!!!! Congratulations to all involved in getting this far.

 

Now for the home straight.

[Bookworm]

Gosh, I wish I could get to Plymouth for the hearing. :-|

[foolishgirl]

Gosh, I wish I could get to Plymouth for the hearing. :-|

 

I think a lot of CAGers feel the same! Maybe we should make up a charra?

[labrat]

make sure you wear the "free the plymouth one" tshirts that were designed a while ago

[buxie34]

I also wish it wasn't so far away.. I'd love to go watch. Can't you sneak a camcorder in?

[bedlington83]

Thanks for the update TLD

So now there are two hearings planned for tuesday. This doubles the chances of Fred winning and the second hearing could prove very interesting if say for example Fred were to blurt out his 'little secret' in the first hearing....

Lol. Can't wait to learn what the little secret is

[heliosfa]

Lol. Can't wait to learn what the little secret is

 

Neither can I! All this cloak andd dagger is adding to the reasons why I can't wait for Fred to win this one

 

H

[Toulose LeDebt]

Neither can I! All this cloak andd dagger is adding to the reasons why I can't wait for Fred to win this one

 

H

 

It's very tempting to reveal the 'little secret' on this thread at about 1:45 pm on tuesday just 15 minutes before the hearing is due to start. Just leaving them enough time for a panic call to the barrister but heck let them find it out at the application hearing when it's too late to withdraw.

 

The truth is all the pertinent facts were there before them but either they failed to pick up on it or more likely simply chose to ignore and/or deliberately suppress it.