Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Firstly, I would like to thank everyone for their help in this matter. Since my last post I have received a reply from Plymouth Council Insurance Team concerning my wife’s accident (please see enclosed letter and photo of the offending Badminton post) which they deny any responsibility for the said accident. I feel that the Council is in breach of their statutory duties under the following acts: The Leisure Centre was negligent in its duty of care and therefore, in breach of the statutory duty owed under section 2 of the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957. Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 (the Act) to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of all their employees, and others who might be affected by its undertaking, e.g. members of the public visiting the Leisure Centre to use the facilities. The Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 that requires employers to assess risks (including slip and trip risks) and, where necessary, take action to address them. The Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations (PUWER) require the risk to people’s health and safety from equipment that is used at a Leisure Centre be prevented or controlled. I would like some advice to see if my assumptions are correct and my approach to obtaining satisfactory outcome to this matter are accurate. Many thanks   PLM23000150 - Copy Correspondence.pdf post docx.docx
    • Talking to them does not reset the time limit, although they will probably tell you it does, they'd be lying. Dumbdales are the in-house sols for Lowlife, just the next desk along. If Lowlifes were corresponding with you at your current address then Dumbdales know your address. However, knowing that they are lower than a snake's belly, you would be well advised to send them a letter, informing them of your current address and nothing else. Get 'proof of posting' which is free from the PO counter, don't sign it, simply type your name. That way then they have absolutely no excuse for attempting a back door CCJ.   P.S. Best course of action, IGNORE them, until or unless you get a claim form......you won't.
    • A 'signed for' Letter of Claim has been sent today so they have 14 days from tomorrow... Lets wait and see what happens but i suspect judging by their attitude they wont reply 
    • I am extremely apprehensive about burning our files.... I do not know why, so it is becoming an endless feedback loop. Scared to pull the trigger to speak in the desire not to mess up my file. 
    • Hi All, So brief outline. I have Natwest CC debt £8k last payment i made was 7th November 2018 Not a penny since. So coming up to the 6 year mark. Can't remember when i took out the  credit card would be a few years before everythign hit the fan. Moved house 2020 - updated NatWest as I still have a current account with them. Then Lowells took over from Moorcroft and were writing to me at my current address. I did get a family member to speak to them 3 years ago regarding the debt explained although it may be in my name I didn't rack it up then went contact again. 29th may received an email from overdales saying they were now managing the debt. I have not had any letter yet which i thought is odd?  Couple of questions 1. Does my family member speaking to lowell restart statute barred clock? 2. Do you think overdales aren't writing to me because they will back door CCJ to old address even though Lowells have contacted me at current address never at previous? ( have no proof though stupidly binned all letters  ) Should I write to them and confirm my address just incase? Does this restart statute barred clock? 3. what do you think best course of action is?   Any help/advice is appreciated I am aware they may ramp up the process now due to 7th December being the 6 year mark.   Many Thanks in advance! The threads on here have been super helpful to read.  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Shakespeare62 - v - a NastyBank


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4738 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

Ok the attached directions were served on the Respondent at 10:24 hrs today by Special Delivery and also filed in Court.

Draft Directions ID REMOVED.doc

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law and litigation privilege

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

My nominated expert(ID removed)

 

I filed his CV in Court yesterday and on the Respondent this morning with Draft Directions.

Edited by shakespeare62
edited grammar

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law and litigation privilege

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

The experts role is to act impartially and produce an independent report - I'll apply for permission on Monday to instruct him.

 

All comments welcomed..he should fit the bill..

Edited by shakespeare62

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law and litigation privilege

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello S62!

 

I filed his CV in Court yesterday and on the Respondent this morning with Draft Directions.
That will do nicely!

 

I bet Arsemex will pay through their nose for an Expert of their own (no doubt USA based), mainly to try and duck the issue via a diametrically opposing Expert view in an effort to buy a stalemate on the document's authenticity.

 

Bring it on.

 

Cheers,

BRW

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello S62!

 

That will do nicely!

 

I bet Arsemex will pay through their nose for an Expert of their own (no doubt USA based), mainly to try and duck the issue via a diametrically opposing Expert view in an effort to buy a stalemate on the document's authenticity.

 

Bring it on.

 

Cheers,

BRW

i seriously doubt they will produce an expert witness,firstly they must produce the guy who constructed this document under cross examination i dont think the bank will enter a courtroom knowing what they know brw

patrickq1

Link to post
Share on other sites

He sounds fab, S62. In a fight he's on my side. :D

 

With that CV I think you would have even more grounds for an appeal if the judge refuses permission, but I really don't think they will.

 

I know we are all rooting for you, so please try and do something nice this weekend and relax.

 

DDxxxxx

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Patrickq1!

 

i seriously doubt they will produce an expert witness,firstly they must produce the guy who constructed this document under cross examination i dont think the bank will enter a courtroom knowing what they know brw
I'm not disagreeing with you. Just suspect they could try the unexpected out of shear arrogance.

 

Another, probably more likely, possibility is they will bribe some minion to fess up to having made a huge error. The thing was indeed a re-creation, intended to portray what their Agreement would have looked like, had they not elected to destroy it.

 

The minion will no doubt say they misinformed their Global Securities Department, who in turn advised their slippery lawyers, in good faith, that the thing was original.

 

It was all a dreadful mistake, ever so sorry, it won't happen again, honest!

 

They are going to squirm and snarl, and whimper, then get snotty and say it would've looked like this anyway so, what's the problem.

 

I'm taking bets, winner donates to CAG!

 

Cheers,

BRW

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, BRW, if that scenario is correct, what do you think happens to S62, and to those of us who are (or will be) challenging our agreements because they are reconstructions?

 

And if they say it's never going to happen again, how can they ever do it again (at least not to caggers!!!).

DDxx

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Patrickq1!

 

I'm not disagreeing with you. Just suspect they could try the unexpected out of shear arrogance.

 

Another, probably more likely, possibility is they will bribe some minion to fess up to having made a huge error. The thing was indeed a re-creation, intended to portray what their Agreement would have looked like, had they not elected to destroy it.

 

The minion will no doubt say they misinformed their Global Securities Department, who in turn advised their slippery lawyers, in good faith, that the thing was original.

 

It was all a dreadful mistake, ever so sorry, it won't happen again, honest!

 

They are going to squirm and snarl, and whimper, then get snotty and say it would've looked like this anyway so, what's the problem.

 

I'm taking bets, winner donates to CAG!

 

Cheers,

BRW

 

Yep agree this'll be the more likely path they follow, would expect them to apologise to the court and try and introduce the manchester rulings and reconstructions allowable for enforcement.

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep agree this'll be the more likely path they follow, would expect them to apologise to the court and try and introduce the manchester rulings and reconstructions allowable for enforcement.

 

S.

 

I think that it has long gone past the point where an apology to the Court for such an 'error' would be an end to the matter.

 

If saying 'sorry' for committing perjury and/or attempting to pervert the course of justice is deemed acceptable by the Judge then it would be a very sad day for the our oft reverred legal system.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Patrickq1!

 

I'm not disagreeing with you. Just suspect they could try the unexpected out of shear arrogance.

 

Another, probably more likely, possibility is they will bribe some minion to fess up to having made a huge error. The thing was indeed a re-creation, intended to portray what their Agreement would have looked like, had they not elected to destroy it.

 

The minion will no doubt say they misinformed their Global Securities Department, who in turn advised their slippery lawyers, in good faith, that the thing was original.

 

It was all a dreadful mistake, ever so sorry, it won't happen again, honest!

 

They are going to squirm and snarl, and whimper, then get snotty and say it would've looked like this anyway so, what's the problem.

 

I'm taking bets, winner donates to CAG!

 

Cheers,

BRW

 

my money is on a late withdrawal and generous settlement with a gagging order

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello MM and DD...and the other DD!

 

I think that it has long gone past the point where an apology to the Court for such an 'error' would be an end to the matter.

 

If saying 'sorry' for committing perjury and/or attempting to pervert the course of justice is deemed acceptable by the Judge then it would be a very sad day for the our oft reverred legal system.

I could not agree more. The problem being, you need to allow for the unbelievable arrogance of the Claimant/Lawyers in this issue, and the strokes they will pull to get what they want.

 

IOW, don't ever underestimate the games they will play. I'm quite sure they are not yet out of ideas.

 

My bet is on a cringe making apology of such depth and desperation they may well be allowed to get away with it, however insincere it sounds.

 

This is also an option for them too...

 

my money is on a late withdrawal and generous settlement with a gagging order.
If so, S62 deserves every penny. Only shame will be they will get away with it but, money is money, and the bribe to S62 could be big enough to solve many other problems for him. IOW, despite the disappointment, nobody here must hold that against him.

 

Cheers,

BRW

Link to post
Share on other sites

My bet is on a cringe making apology of such depth and desperation they may well be allowed to get away with it, however insincere it sounds.

 

An honourable Judge would never accept such an apology as it would be seen for what it was.........

 

BUT

 

such an apology if accepted by the court would save 'NastyBank' many,many tens of thousands of pounds in the future and would condemn other claimants completely.

 

The other alternative,compensation and gagging order.....

 

Although money wouldn't do it for me as I need a clear conscience I can quite understand if that is the way this case ends and would not apportion any blame to S62 as he is the man who has stood up against them and not us.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i am one of those ,who once crossed my principles overtake logic,to accept monies i could nt i am very unforgiving its like tunnel vision and would only see them as every letter every threat that crossed my mind the sleepless nights and all the worry I WOULD WANT MY DAY IN COURT ,but i would not blame s62 one iota if he accepted appropiate funds as compensation ,otherwise the bag of silver could nt compensate the past worries and stress caused by what they see as simple little lies to us were a mountain

get off me soap box

patrickq1

Link to post
Share on other sites

They did that with Monty in Scotland, I think, and his thread was discontinued.

 

Personally, I would like to think that I would refuse any such offer on a point of principle, but I wouldn't. My life is absolute hell financially, and if they offered me a generous settlement I would take it.

 

Sorry, everyone, I'm just being honest. Would I lose my house on a point of principle? No. I think anyone who would do that would be an absolute saint and I would have nothing but total respect for them, but I couldn't do it.

 

However, I'm a bit confused about why it would necessarily stop others from challenging them in the same way if they tried it again. They are so arrogant I believe that even if they did apologize they wouldn't be able to resist trying it again. Not everyone is on CAG. They'd just probably stop proceedings immediately as soon as this forensic expert issue is raised, and say a mistake had been made.

 

The problem is that the very best thing would be publicity for what they have done and public shame. It would be nice if a judge could see that.

 

DD

Link to post
Share on other sites

Despite having had a brush with a deeply unpleasant character myself today - I was introduced to Broon on his visit to Camp Bastion - I imagine it is as nothing compared to the unsavoury combination of Amex/Pishcon.

 

I'd be inclined to quote Horatio Caine to Pishcon: "If I find out you did this, I'll get you!"

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll report back after tomorrow's hearing, may not be till a few hours later - but it should be interesting.

 

(BTW good luck Scarlet Pimpernel - wondered where you'd got to !)

Edited by shakespeare62

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law and litigation privilege

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good luck for tomorrow - I'm sure it will be interesting whatever happens .....

If you find my advice helpful - please click on my scales

<<<<<< - they're over there!

Well, it's a funny black star now ...

The small print - any advice I give is freely given on the understanding that I am a layman and am not legally qualified in anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

All the best for tomorrow.

 

seconded:)

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

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

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

Hello S62!

 

Obviously, keep your wits about you, and be ready for some desperate new tricks in Court. Likewise, I can't imagine them not trying to dump something new and confusing on you either just outside the Courtroom, or handed to you just as you walk in. The latter designed to keep you busy reading it, while they go for broke on what ever verbal acrobatics they have dreamt up for the Hearing.

 

It will indeed be interesting. Best of luck, I hope the Judiciary do not play any silly games or exhibit any sudden and suspicious changes in direction since the last Hearing.

 

If you can, it may be a good idea to take any observant friends or family along with you, and ask them to make detailed observations and related notes while sitting in the background as informed spectators.

 

Cheers,

BRW

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...