Jump to content


Locked in car park


Patma
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4570 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

Nothing at the moment Mr Shed. We're still waiting to hear the results of the last applications and in fact are going to drop into the court tomorrow to see if we can find out why the delay.

The police too are being slow and at the end of last week we sent them quite a stiff letter to let them know we won't wait indefinitely and reminding them we can always lodge a complaint with the IPCC.

Lyons Davidson are maintaining their silence too.

The corking letters I hinted about though have been completed and will be posted tomorrow. As soon as I know they've been safely delivered I'll spill the beans.:)

 

So, Patma,

 

Have the 'corking' letters arrived at their destinations yet and can you tell us about their contents?

 

This thread has me on the edge of my seat and, as I have said before, I am on holiday the day before this is all due to come to court so I am going to have to log in while I am away to find out what happens!!

 

Feebee_71 :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I am on holiday the day before this is all due to come to court so I am going to have to log in while I am away to find out what happens!!

 

quote]

 

Set the DVD recorder! :D

Any knowledge I possess or advice I proffer is based solely on my experiences in the University of Life. Please make your own assessment of legality, risks & costs before taking any action.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone well.

I know that at least one of the "corking letters" has arrived at it's destination, which was none other than the Principal of Plymouth College of Art herself.

With the situation that Lyons Davidson have ceased answering correspondence and the problem of false statements made on behalf of Plymouth College of Art, it was the bright idea of our very own TLD that the time had come to communicate directly with the Principal.

We don't know how much she would have ben informed of the proceedings so far, but I can assure you she will know a whole lot more now.

It can't have been comfortable reading for her either.

 

The letter itself is pretty long and every matter raised is backed up with evidence which is enclosed for her perusal.

I could imagine coffee cups flying out of windows yesterday morning when the post was opened :eek::D:eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites

An update!!:D

 

Withdrawal symptoms abated!

 

All hail the informative one!!

 

Your greeting is gratefully received, middenmess.

Your enthusiasm has really cheered me up, thankyou.:D:D

 

I must admit that all this waiting is getting to me too, but hey it can't go on forever can it??:shock:

Link to post
Share on other sites

As everyone will have realised by now the Police are dragging their feet, after having been very helpful to start with.

Last week we sent them a stiff letter informing them that Fred won't wait forever before escalating his complaint to the IPCC among other optons.

Unfortunately to date they haven't responded, so we will begin the process of complaining to the IPCC early next week.

Instead of doing it directly we're considering asking Fred's MP to submit the complaint.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good.

 

They've had long enough.

 

But who is to say your MP wont drag their feet as well? They are having their own little difficulties as well, at the mo. ;)

That's very true. LOL

The approaching election may just bring out a helpful streak in even the most smug politician though.;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just heard from Fred that he's received 2 letters this morning.

One is an order from the court, dated 15th October, in response to his 2 applications of 1st October, and the second one is a letter from Lyons Davidson, also dated 15th October,written in response to this same court order. Their letter is posted second class and franked 15th.

This therefore means that they either received their copy of the order before Fred did or they already knew about it some other way.

 

The order reads as follows:-

"Upon considering two applications from the defendant, it is ordered that both applications be dealt with by the District Judge as a paper exercise.

The claimant is to respond with any representations by 4pm on 2nd November 2009"

 

One of the applications referred to was worded as follows:-

I intend to ask the court for an order to put the claimant to strict proof of the existence of a Police caution on which they wish to rely in court and which the court allowed to be introduced.

If the claimant is unable to produce a true copy from Police records of the existence of a caution within 14 days, of being so ordered, then all reference to a caution be removed from their statement of case. If the claimant is unable to provide strict proof that the defendant was cautioned by the Police, I further intend to to ask the court to order the claimant to pay all additional costs which the defendant has incurred as a result of an unproven caution being introduced by the claimant as a result of the applications which the defence has submited to address the introduction of a caution.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

The second one was worded as follows:-

 

I intend to ask the court to strike out the claimant's response and defence to my Part 20 claim dated 9th September 2009, as the claimant has failed again to file a detailed defence to any and all the allegations set out in my Part 20 claim. I apply to the court to order the claimant to FILE A DETAILED DEFENCE to all the allegations set out in my fully particularised Part 20 claim.

 

1) I rely upon the whole of the CPR 16.5 as the rules pertaining to the content of a defence.

2) The defendant has supplied the claimant with two copies of his fully particularised Part 20 claim by first class post on 14.8.09 and 24.9.09. I also sent an attached copy to the court with my application of 7.8.09 for which we have an itemised receipt. The court was therefore obliged to serve my application with fully particularised part 20 claim attached, upon the claimant, together with the subsequent court order.

3) The defendant was ordered by District Judge ..... to file a detailed defence to the claimant's POC in April 2009, otherwise it was ordered that judgement would be ordered against him. We rely upon the principle of "Equality of Arms" and as such I respectfully expect the claimant to be finally ordered to file a detailed defence otherwise judgment be entered against them.

4) The defence avers that the claimant is attempting to continue avoiding the issue of filing a detailed defence by consistently relying upon the false excuse they have not received the fully particularised Part 20 claim.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is what the gem of a letter from Lyons Davidson says :rolleyes::rolleyes:.......

 

"We refer to the Court order dated 15th October . We are prepared to request a transcript of the Directions Hearing in which you admit you received a caution for causing criminal damage to the claimant's barrier, on the basis that you are prepared to incur half the cost of that document.

Please confirm that you are prepared to pay your contribution towards the cost of the transcript and we will contact the court in order to obtain it."

 

It is signed by undecipherable squiggle.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Unfortunately this latest order will not be decided until after the date by which we will have to send in our court bundle for the hearing.

 

A third application is still awaiting a response and that one is to ask the court to accept Fred's amended defence which he submitted immediately in response to the claimant's amended POC. As things stand currently, the amended defence application isn't due to be decided till the Applications Hearing of 17th November, which takes place immediately before the final hearing:eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what the gem of a letter from Lyons Davidson says :rolleyes::rolleyes:..... ..

 

"We refer to the Court order dated 15th October . We are prepared to request a transcript of the Directions Hearing in which you admit you received a caution for causing criminal damage to the claimant's barrier, on the basis that you are prepared to incur half the cost of that document.

Please confirm that you are prepared to pay your contribution towards the cost of the transcript and we will contact the court in order to obtain it."

 

If I hadn't been following this thread I'd say you were making this up!!!!

 

But it just follows on from everything else that they do.

 

They really are muppets!:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

They really are amateurs.

 

Let me get this right. They want Fred to pay half so they can prove him wrong.(but he never admitted it anyway)

But if Fred refuses to pay half they are not going to bother.

 

This is why office juniors dont make very good Lawyers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what the gem of a letter from Lyons Davidson says :rolleyes::rolleyes:..... ..

 

"We refer to the Court order dated 15th October . We are prepared to request a transcript of the Directions Hearing in which you admit you received a caution for causing criminal damage to the claimant's barrier, on the basis that you are prepared to incur half the cost of that document.

Please confirm that you are prepared to pay your contribution towards the cost of the transcript and we will contact the court in order to obtain it."

 

If I hadn't been following this thread I'd say you were making this up!!!!

 

But it just follows on from everything else that they do.

 

They really are muppets!:D

And I wouldn't blame you for thinking I was making it up, middenmess. When Fred was reading it out to me over the phone, I couldn't stop laughing.:D

Just to prove it's genuine,as soon as I get my hands on the the letter, I'll post it for any sceptics out there.;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

They really are amateurs.

 

Let me get this right. They want Fred to pay half so they can prove him wrong.(but he never admitted it anyway)

But if Fred refuses to pay half they are not going to bother.

 

This is why office juniors dont make very good Lawyers.

 

Errr yes:lol::lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

And I wouldn't blame you for thinking I was making it up, middenmess. When Fred was reading it out to me over the phone, I couldn't stop laughing.:D

Just to prove it's genuine,as soon as I get my hands on the the letter, I'll post it for any sceptics out there.;)

 

Surely under CPR the claimants are required to provide and pay for any and all documents they are relying on as "proof"?

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please confirm that you are prepared to pay your contribution towards the cost of the transcript and we will contact the court in order to obtain it."

 

Scraping the barrel springs to mind.

PUTTING IT IN WRITING & KEEPING COPIES IS A MUST FOR SUCCESS

Link to post
Share on other sites

now they are trying to say FRED said he had a Caution ,

 

so what they are trying to say FRED must have had a caution because we think we heard him say he had one, where infact they were the first to state Fred had been Cautioned and had that in their original documents, oh dear oh dear, what a febble attempt to cover their screw up,

 

once again trying to twist the facts,

 

Its up to them to prove their claim "Fred was CAUTIONED for CRIMINAL DAMAGE"

 

they want the details from the Court then they have to pay, all FRED has to do is present that letter as further evidence in that they are once again trying to move the goal posts,

NEVER FORGET

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Help Our Hero's Website

 

http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/

 

HIGHWAY OF HEROES

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bear-garden/181826-last-tribute-our-lads.html

 

Like Cooking ? check the Halogen Cooker thread

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bear-garden/218990-cooking-halogen-cookers.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4570 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...