MBNA/Restons claimform - old A+L Card **WON+COSTS**

[creditcardmug]

Of course, they will try anything to put a spanner in the works, that's the way these t$$rags work...object to their snide tactics at every opportunity.

 

If their case had any merit they would have no need to resort to showing us that they are lower than a snakes belly:mad:

[fairbyblue]

Heres a corker email, just received !!!!

 

We note the position.

We place you on notice that we reserve the right to seek an order for

costs against you should the hearing be adjourned for the reason of

"insufficient time".

 

Yours sincerely,

MR JT WILD

 

and he copied in Jeremy S Bouhier in on this one whoever he is?

 

Well they gave me 5 days and i replied with my defence and complied that i got it to them with 7 days before court date and thats why they wanted 7 days so you could be forearmed with my statement., why dont Restons work through the night like i had to!!!!!

Not my fault that they cant be bothered to get a statement together.

 

I feel this is threatening and i would like to reply to them. I think they are twitching

Edited March 22, 2009 by fairbyblue

[Craftygirl42]

Good luck on Friday Fairy

[MARTIN3030]

We note the position.

"We place you on notice that we reserve the right to seek an order for

costs against you should the hearing be adjourned for the reason of

"insufficient time".

 

 

Seeking and getting are 2 different things...that would be up to the Judge anyway.

It seems as though they may try to pre-empt an adjournment-but Judges are not stupid.

 

[bazaar]

FB, youve just said it.

'Well they gave me 5 days and i replied with my defence and complied that i got it to them with 7 days before court date and thats why they wanted 7 days so you could be forearmed with my statement., why dont Restons work through the night like i had to!!!!!'

 

If they were not prepared with their case before forcing this through court, thats not your problem.

IE, you could put 'If your case was as water-tight as you would have hoped, then there would be no reason to be wanting extra time. This is also, entirely up to the Honourable Judges' decision, you should show more respect to the court.'

 

Maybe a quick e-mail back to them and copy to court, hopefully judge will see it from your view even more.

[underdog13]

Good luck, Fb:)

[creditcardmug]

Bouchier is his sidekick there as far as i know, ignore their nonsense:rolleyes:

[MARTIN3030]

and he copied in Jeremy S Bouchier in on this one whoever he is?

 

 

Jeremy Stephen Bouchier-is their Solicitor.

[creditcardmug]

Ah, but is he a real solicitor, some on here say not!

[Viscount Stair]

I had dipped into this a few times before and I have now subscribed. I am not fully familiar with the whole history but it interests me (is no-one buying unenforceable MBNA debt any more?) and I have a few thoughts that might be useful.

 

Don't be so quick to ignore the costs threat made against you, for two reasons: 1) they do have a glimmer of a point; 2) two can play at that game.

 

Why do I think they have a glimmer of a point? Because what they mean by "insufficient time" is not how long they have to prepare another statement in reply but how long they asked for for the hearing. If the court has allocated 20 mins for a hearing that is going to last longer than that, then the judge could very well adjourn to another date for a longer slot to be allocated. If you have been "unreasonable" in refusing an adjournment, then you could get costs awarded against you.

 

However, why was only 20 mins allocated? I am assuming that was not a time estimate they agreed with you but what they put in for when they made the application. So, whose fault is it that it turns out to be not as straightforward as they told the court? Between the lines of the correspondence they have sent, they are setting things up to blame you for daring to come up with new arguments in your statement that were not in your defence.

 

Which is a bit rich, because - if I recall correctly - they came up with arguments in their application for summary judgment that were not in their Particulars of Claim.

 

Your defence pled to the PoCs as they had been pled. Your statement replied to the application as it was made. So the fault lies with them not you and you probably want to get that into correspondence now.

 

If you made a Part 18 request for further information or a Part 31 request for disclosure and they did not comply, then remind them of that now too.

 

Why do I say that two can play at the game? Because you can throw out a costs threat of your own.

 

Argue that the statements served to date make it abundantly clear that this is not - even if it ever was - an appropriate case for disposal by summary judgment. Point out that the very fact that they now realise that they need a longer hearing than they told the court shows that there is a case to be argued.

 

Put THEM on notice that, if they proceed with the application for summary judgment in the face of the evidence, you will be seeking the costs of the summary judgment application in any event, not costs in the case.

 

Sorry if that is long winded but it is often easier to write a long post than a short one and I thought it might be useful to spell out the points.

 

A little e-mail back to them making those points a bit more neatly would be useful to have on the record.

[fairbyblue]

and he copied in Jeremy S Bouchier in on this one whoever he is?

 

 

Jeremy Stephen Bouchier-is their Solicitor.

 

He didnt copy him in the other email just that one. I want to email back but cos im not a happy bunny i have to be careful I want to emphasize the fact ive complied to their request of giving them 7 days to look at my statemnt and refer to post 203 where they state "The defendant does not have a realistic prospect of succesfully defending this claim" ( I think i do)

 

and

 

at the end of continuation sheet in post 203 stating i must serve docs and them which i have.

and

 

"in the circumstances i do not believe that the defendant has any realistic prospect of defending the claim and the applicant knows of no other reason why the disposal of the claim should await trial"

 

Anyone got any ideas what i should do?

[fairbyblue]

Cheers Viscount

[Viscount Stair]

Ah, but is he a real solicitor, some on here say not!

 

A solicitor called Jeremy Stephen Bouchier is listed as an employee of Restons Solicitors Limited in the Law Society's Find a Solicitor database.

[fairbyblue]

Any comments please and something about me wanting costs. I want this to go ahead on cos i dont want them doing a 'now you see it now you dont' with anything.

 

 

I note your comments however I feel it is time to direct you in some points that you need to be aware of.

 

 

1. If 'insufficient time' is the reason that an adjournment is granted it is for the record that it is the Claimant ie MBNA/Restons who have asked the court for 20 minutes of allocated time without me being in agreement or even informed that is what you intended to do.
   
2. It transpires that your case is not as straightforward as you believe it to be
   
3. My statement is in response to your application for summary judgement as it was made.
   
4. Therefore it is not my fault you have asked for 20 minutes of court time.
   
5. May I refer you to the letter dated 1/12/08 sent my me to your good selves and marked NRF4 and is in your possession.
   
6. This document was and still is a Request under CPR 31.14 for the disclosure of the documents stated in the letter and that it should be acted upon within the given time limits.
   
7. You have not fully complied with this request
   
8. The statements served to date makes it abundantly clear that this was never an appropriate case for summary judgement.
   
9. The fact that you require more time indicates that there are points to be argued and you have not prepared thoroughly and are wasting court time
   
10. I wish this to be dealt with at the earliest opportunity and is listed for 20th March 2009
     
    

[robcag]

Good luck on Friday Fairy

 

Hi Craftygirl42

 

I called him fairy in my first reply to this thread, but I don't think that's quite right (if you look closely)!

 

Any comments please and something about me wanting costs. I want this to go ahead on cos i dont want them doing a 'now you see it now you dont' with anything.

 

 

I note your comments however I feel it is time to direct you in some points that you need to be aware of.

 

 

1. If 'insufficient time' is the reason that an adjournment is granted it is for the record that it is the Claimant ie MBNA/Restons who have asked the court for 20 minutes of allocated time without me being in agreement or even informed that is what you intended to do.
   
2. It transpires that your case is not as straightforward as you believe it to be
   
3. My statement is in response to your application for summary judgement as it was made.
   
4. Therefore it is not my fault you have asked for 20 minutes of court time.
   
5. May I refer you to the letter dated 1/12/08 sent my me to your good selves and marked NRF4 and is in your possession.
   
6. This document was and still is a Request under CPR 31.14 for the disclosure of the documents stated in the letter and that it should be acted upon within the given time limits.
   
7. You have not fully complied with this request
   
8. The statements served to date makes it abundantly clear that this was never an appropriate case for summary judgement.
   
9. The fact that you require more time indicates that there are points to be argued and you have not prepared thoroughly and are wasting court time
   
10. I wish this to be dealt with at the earliest opportunity and is listed for 20th March 2009
     
    

 

Hi fb

 

It looks like you've got Restons quietly cr@pping themselves!

 

IMHO I think it probably goes without saying that you need to print out 3 copies of all the email correspondence you have been reporting here to take with you to the court, just in case it's needed.

 

Again, IMHO, I think it would be nice if you could include a sentence in your above list which included the words ".... in an attempt to mislead the court (and/or me)....."

 

That always impresses me when I see it, hopefully it would have an effect on the Judge!

 

Cheers

Rob

[fairbyblue]

Will do rob, 3 copies. I've been called worse !!! By the ex who got me in the place in the first place !!!

 

In an attempt to mislead the court; The Claimant stated in their application for summary judgement "The defendant does not have a realistic prospect of succesfully defending this claim" and "in the circumstances i do not believe that the defendant has any realistic prospect of defending the claim and the applicant knows of no other reason why the disposal of the claim should await trial"

 

I so want it to go ahead on friday !!!

[creditcardmug]

Will do rob, 3 copies. I've been called worse !!! By the ex who got me in the place in the first place !!!

 

In an attempt to mislead the court; The Claimant stated in their application for summary judgement "The defendant does not have a realistic prospect of succesfully defending this claim" and "in the circumstances i do not believe that the defendant has any realistic prospect of defending the claim and the applicant knows of no other reason why the disposal of the claim should await trial"

 

I so want it to go ahead on friday !!!

 

 

Like it...dont pull any punches with them!

[fairbyblue]

Cheers CCM. I am so becoming more positve and confident whilst dealing with these people. Thats only 'cos of the help i ve had on here. I would of rolled over and let them stick the invalid default notice right up me but now shall we say, the table has been turned and they should expect a rather large defence file right up theirs !!!!!

[Out4Revenge]

Great thread, well done all, and good luck!!!!!!!!!

[pompeyfaith]

This is disgusting behaviour Fairbyblue seems restons and optima in my case are sailing the same boat

 

PF

[underdog13]

This is disgusting behaviour Fairbyblue seems restons and optima in my case are sailing the same boat

 

PF

 

PF, hope you and Fairbyblue soon turn that boat into a sinking ship;)

[pompeyfaith]

hehe lol you and me underdog it will give me the most great satisfaction.

 

PF

[bazaar]

Maybe ' an apparent attempt to mislead the court and yourself' would be better. This way maybe the Honourable Judge can make his own desision. (far better for Him/ Her to at least have a word in:D)

[fairbyblue]

Its in his inbox as well as the courts !!!!

 

I note your comments however I feel it is time to direct you in some points that you need to be aware of.

1. If 'insufficient time' is the reason that an adjournment is granted it is for the record that it is the Claimant ie MBNA/Restons who have asked the court for 20 minutes of allocated time without ever me being in agreement or even informed that is what you intended to do.

2. It transpires that your case is not as straightforward as you believe it to be

3. My statement is in response to your application for summary judgement as it was made.

4. Therefore it is not my fault you have asked for 20 minutes of valuable court time.

5. May I refer you to the letter dated 1/12/08 sent my me to your good selves and marked NRF4 and is in your possession.

6. This document was and still is a Request under CPR 31.14 for the disclosure of the documents stated in the letter and that it should of be acted upon within the given time limits.

7. You have not fully complied with this request

8. The statements served to date makes it abundantly clear that this was never an appropriate case for summary judgement.

9. The fact that you require more time indicates that there are points to be argued and you have not prepared thoroughly and are wasting court time

10. In an apparent attempt to mislead the court and or myself the Claimant stated in their application for summary judgement "The defendant does not have a realistic prospect of successfully defending this claim" and "in the circumstances I do not believe that the defendant has any realistic prospect of defending the claim and the applicant knows of no other reason why the disposal of the claim should await trial"

11. I wish this to be dealt with at the earliest opportunity and is listed for 20th March 2009

[fairbyblue]

Help. This is what they just said. Apparantly you can serve 2 DN's and admit the first one was non compliant

#What case law can i throw at them.