Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • love the extra £1000 charge for confidentialy there BF   Also OP even if they don't offer OOC it doesn't mean your claim isn't good. I had 3 against EVRi that were heard over the last 3 weeks. They sent me emails asking me to discontinue as I wouldn't win. Went infront of a judge and won all 3.    Just remember the law is on your side. The judges will be aware of this.   Where you can its important to try to point out at the hearing the specific part of the contract they breached. I found this was very helpful and the Judge made reference to it when they gave their judgements and it seemed this was pretty important as once you have identified a specific breach the matter turns straight to liability. From there its a case of pointing out the unlawfullness of their insurance and then that should be it.
    • I know dx and thanks again for yours and others help. I was 99.999% certain last payment was over six years ago if not longer.  👍
    • Paragraph 23 – "standard industry practice" – put this in bold type. They are stupid to rely on this and we might as well carry on emphasising how stupid they are. I wonder why they could even have begun to think some kind of compelling argument – "the other boys do it so I do it as well…" Same with paragraph 26   Paragraph 45 – The Defendants have so far been unable to produce any judgements at any level which disagree with the three judgements…  …court, but I would respectfully request…   Just the few amendments above – and I think it's fine. I think you should stick to the format that you are using. This has been used lots of times and has even been applauded by judges for being meticulous and clear. You aren't a professional. Nobody is expecting professional standards and although it's important that you understand exactly what you are doing – you don't really want to come over to the judge that you have done this kind of thing before. As a litigant in person you get a certain licence/leeway from judges and that is helpful to you – especially if you are facing a professional advocate. The way this is laid out is far clearer than the mess that you will get from EVRi. Quite frankly they undermine their own credibility by trying to say that they should win simply because it is "standard industry practice". It wouldn't at all surprise me if EVRi make you a last moment offer of the entire value of your claim partly to avoid judgement and also partly to avoid the embarrassment of having this kind of rubbish exposed in court. If they do happen to do that, then you should make sure that they pay everything. If they suddenly make you an out-of-court offer and this means that they are worried that they are going to lose and so you must make sure that you get every penny – interest, costs – everything you claimed. Finally, if they do make you an out-of-court offer they will try to sign you up to a confidentiality agreement. The answer to that is absolutely – No. It's not part of the claim and if they want to settle then they settle the claim as it stands and don't try add anything on. If they want confidentiality then that will cost an extra £1000. If they don't like it then they can go do the other thing. Once you have made the amendments suggested above – it should be the final version. court,. I don't think we are going to make any more changes. Your next job good to make sure that you are completely familiar with it all. That you understand the arguments. Have you made a court familiarisation visit?
    • just type no need to keep hitting quote... as has already been said, they use their own criteria. if a person is not stated as linked to you on your file then no cant hurt you. not all creditors use every CRA provider, there are only 3 main credit file providers mind, the rest are just 3rd party data sharers. if you already have revolving credit on your file there is no need to apply for anything just 'because' you need to show you can handle money. if you have bank account(s) and a mortgage which you are servicing (paying) then nothing more can improve your score, despite what these 'scam' sites claiml  its all a CON!!  
  • 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
      • 160 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

Claim Stayed – Due to Unenforceable CCA Test Cases.


Blondie40
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4249 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

Has anyone else come across this in the last week/ten days?

 

Attended Fast Track Trial in respect of Credit Card. Defence is CCA improperly executed - therefore only enforceable on an order of the court, missing prescribed terms and defective DN.

 

DJ at trial surprised it had reached trial as quite clearly the test cases involving unenforceable CCA's has significant bearing on this case.

 

1.Claim is Stayed until further order:

2.Either party may apply to have this order set aside or varied:

3.Any application for order to be set aside or varied and claim shall be transferred to XXX County Court for consideration as test case under His Honour Judge XXXXX QC.:eek::eek::eek:

 

I was under the impression that the cases that had been stayed were only those which involved individuals or Claims Management Companies acting on behalf of behalf of individuals, who had requested courts to rule on whether agreements could be enforced and also in Chester CC.

 

From what DJ said he was suggesting that more (if not all) claims would be being stayed – as County Court system was clogged up with these claims – until after Test Cases heard. DJ made particular reference to one CMC who had over 400 claims currently on-going in one County Court.

Edited by Blondie40
Date removed
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

 

Yes, followed that thread when that was on-going but hadn't seen any activity on it in last couple of months.

 

As I said was under the impression that the cases that had been stayed were only those which involved individuals or Claims Management Companies acting on behalf of behalf of individuals, who had requested courts to rule on whether agreements could be enforced.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing that did occur to me over the weekend was does DJ agree with me that agreement is improperly executed and only enforceable by an order of the court.

 

Claimant has insisted their agreements are properly executed and contain ALL prescribed terms and they can enforce without an order of the court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

from what i remember they had stayed the test cases as they had decided a test case was not needed as there was enough case law to establish rights etc.

OFT debt collection guidance

 

Please remember the only stupid question is the one you dont ask so dont worry about asking the stupid questions.

 

Essex girl in pc world looking 4 curtains 4 her pc,the assistant says u dont need curtains 4 a computer!!Essex girl says,''HELLOOO!! i,ve got WINDOWS!!'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

has anyone brought this to the mods attention as they will know more.

OFT debt collection guidance

 

Please remember the only stupid question is the one you dont ask so dont worry about asking the stupid questions.

 

Essex girl in pc world looking 4 curtains 4 her pc,the assistant says u dont need curtains 4 a computer!!Essex girl says,''HELLOOO!! i,ve got WINDOWS!!'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Will alert the site team for clarification.

 

 

As I understood it there were only a few cases the Judge had set aside and stayed.. not all of them. I am sure there is something on the forums stating this.

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

Here you go, this press release should answer your questions..

 

Thousands of Unenforceable Credit Agreement cases can now be heard

 

 

HTH

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

Got the impression that this was something that had happened within the last week or so. DJ suggested to Counsel for Claimant that if their client had any other cases of this nature that this would also apply to those and he mentioned specific Courts within the County.

 

Seemed to me from what DJ said that any cases that concerned Unenforceable Agreements would now be stayed pending the outcome of the test cases.

Edited by Blondie40
Link to post
Share on other sites

but there are no test cases.

 

I would write to the Judge directly asking where that info came from and giving him a copy of the link CB posted.

OFT debt collection guidance

 

Please remember the only stupid question is the one you dont ask so dont worry about asking the stupid questions.

 

Essex girl in pc world looking 4 curtains 4 her pc,the assistant says u dont need curtains 4 a computer!!Essex girl says,''HELLOOO!! i,ve got WINDOWS!!'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Order says:

 

In the event of any application to have this order set aside or varied this claim shall be transfered to the XXXXX County Court and shall be listed for directions before His Honour Judge XXXXXXX QC on 8 Oct 2009.

 

Now I came away with the understanding that if either party wanted to apply to have Stay set aside, then the case would be put forward as one of those to be considered for the Test Cases. I assume the actual test cases have not been decided yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also note what the link says.

 

From paragraph 2.

 

Any cases that are within the jurisdiction will be heard, and in fact they will now be dealt with expeditiously at the Judge’s request. The Judge has heard our representations and thanked us for our co-operation. The cases that may now be heard in the Commercial Courts – potentially including some of our own cases - are not test cases and will be heard as full trials; the outcome of these cases may be legally significant, but until those cases have been fully heard, we will not know the full ramifications. In the meantime it is business as usual for customers who think they may have a claim.”

from how i read it they must meet the jurisction and must be requested by the judge NOT assigned to him.

 

ALso the case to be heard ARE NOT TEST CASES.

OFT debt collection guidance

 

Please remember the only stupid question is the one you dont ask so dont worry about asking the stupid questions.

 

Essex girl in pc world looking 4 curtains 4 her pc,the assistant says u dont need curtains 4 a computer!!Essex girl says,''HELLOOO!! i,ve got WINDOWS!!'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So the DJ who ordered the stay on the basis of these "test cases" is out of touch.

 

Certainly sounds like it. :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

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

Ok, these are the notes I made at the trial of DJ's comments:

 

 

This case raises a number of issue common to huge number of cases doing the rounds.

 

One CMC with over 400 claims ongoing in one court - Not a sensible use of court's time.

 

Surprised cases got as far as being listed far trial, as staying claims such as this - more practical.

 

Test cases on unenforceable agreements needed to resolve issues.

 

Civil Judges suggest stay pending test cases.

 

Rankine v Various Banks

 

Case to be heard late September which may resolve some issues.

 

Stay case until issues sorted.

 

Counsel – advise client if any more cases similar in this Court they contact Court Manager as this will affect those (also mentioned other courts in the County).

 

So, either something new is going on or he's not up to date.

 

Take it I'll get a better idea when claimant objects to stay.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Blondie

 

I thought the cases that were being transferred to the Commercial Court were ones which all parties (CMCs & credit copmanies) had agreed could be used to set some ground rules for dealing with the large volume of cases brought by CMCs. The case law and staute law are both settled, so there is no need for a 'test case' to determine points of law, as others have said.

 

Could I suggest you phone the court manager and ask him what the judge is on about? I suspect that the DJ is out of touch by about three months or that he wanted an excuse to dump the case (and others) into some other court.

Arrow Global/MBNA - Discontinued and paid costs

HFO/Morgan Stanley (Barclays) - Discontinued and paid costs

HSBC - Discontinued and paid costs

Nationwide - Ran for cover of stay pending OFT case 3 yrs ago

RBS/Mint - Nothing for 4 yrs after S78 request

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I understand it, the only cases referred to the commercial court related to removal of adverse credit references where an agreement was ruled unenforcible.

 

The arguement centres on whether applying defaults where the agreement is unenforcible constitutes enforcement.

 

There are no other cases that I know of. HHJ Halbart stated that relevant case law existed for the majority of unenforcibility cases to proceed.

 

The commercial court cases are due to be heard in October, as far as I recollect.

 

A cagger was there at the Chester court hearing and posted a detailed summary of proceedings, I will try to locate it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Blondie

 

I thought the cases that were being transferred to the Commercial Court were ones which all parties (CMCs & credit copmanies) had agreed could be used to set some ground rules for dealing with the large volume of cases brought by CMCs. The case law and staute law are both settled, so there is no need for a 'test case' to determine points of law, as others have said.

 

Could I suggest you phone the court manager and ask him what the judge is on about? I suspect that the DJ is out of touch by about three months or that he wanted an excuse to dump the case (and others) into some other court.

 

 

I'm with you Docman,

There seems to be a lot of confusion about the 'test case' scenario in the judiciary as well as elsewhere.

I was at the case conference called by HH Halbert in the Chester County court on 19th May 2009 and the barristers representing a number of lenders agreed with the judge and the barristers for the CMC,s that the basic principles of unenforceability of agreements was not in dispute.

HH Halbert stated that these cases which were the great majority would therefore be dealt with in the normal way and scheduled for trial in Chester however he did state that increasing volumes of these type of cases would inevitably cause a delay not by any deliberate policy but merely because of the capacity of the court to deal with increasing numbers.

The cases which were selected to be heard in the commercial court were ones where for whatever reason the barristers representing the opposing sides had a disagreement over a particular point of law and it was threrefore agreed that trials would take place to settle these disagreements.

These disagreements were not about the basic principles of unenforceability but about details and special cases.

One interesting case was one brought by the Bank of Scotland and their argument was that should an agreement be ruled to be unenforceable they still should have the facility to maintain a default on the borrowers credit file.

The CMC's solictors argued if the agreement was found to be unenforceable then how could it have been defaulted on and that the proposed actions of the lender would amount to enforcement by another name on an agreement already ruled to be unenforceable.

I will try to find out whats happening with these cases however the straight forward cases were listed for trial as normal.

One case of mine was listed for trial on the 10th August however on the 7th Aug MBNA lawyers asked for an adjournment on the grounds that they had insufficent time to prepare witness statements and unfortunately the adjournment was granted and I am now awaiting a new trial date.

I had stopped paying MBNA as I was convinced that the agreement was unenforceable and they took action against me starting in February so how come they had not had time to prepare witness statements and in any case what difference would witness statements make in such a case?

I think they are just playing for time now and it is very likely that they will concede anyway as thats what is happening now with many of these cases.

I was told by someone who works for a major bank that they are well aware that the majority of agreements are unenforceable but they simply can not afford to acknowledge or concede this fact.

If they do they will immediately have to write down future losses of many billions, the share prices will collapse and so will the economy probably.

So they will contest every case and rely upon the inability of the court system to process the cases and as far as the banks are concerned the longer everything takes the better.

It will cost them billions in defaults and legal fees but its still preferable to holding their hands up and whilst things drag on they can continue to rip everyone off with ridiculous interest rates and charges and the fat cats will continue to collect their obscene bonuses.

I was told by someone who worked for MBNA that they had copied virtually all their credit agreements electronically and then destroyed the original paper copies.Ironically they seem to be one of the most aggressive lenders when it comes to taking people to court and I was very disappointed that the trial did not go ahead on the 10th.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for clearing that up Docman, Stubie and TD:)

 

Sorry to hear your case has been delayed, TD.. how can they not be ready in time for goodness sakes. I hope you are not going to have to wait too long for them to get their finger out.

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

Thanks for the update TD.

I think the banks and credit companies know they have a BIG issue here and I suspect the amounts involved will have more impact than the bank charges fiasco.

With bank charges, the amounts involved arose just from the charges levied on overdrawn accounts. The banks only agreed to the test case the day before they started to announce their financial results. Collectively, the accounts showed that the banks had paid back or provided for over a billion pounds and thus their argument that it was not worth defending an individual claim on commercial grounds would have been shot to pieces. The FSA would have been the only organisation with prior knowledge of the accounts of ALL the banks and I suspect that when someone did the sums, the truth dawned on the FSA and the government, hence the test case. At the time, many thought the delay caused by the test case (2 to 3 years) would provide enough time for the banks to recover the billion or so.

Well, it has taken over two years to date for the test case but, as we all know, the world has changed (although with the bonus levels clearly bankers haven't). The billion or so set aside to cover bank charges two years ago seems small beer now.

Unenforceable credit agreements are more of a problem though. First, it means the banks cash flow will be affected. They may not have to fund repayments of credit accounts as with bank charges but they will no longer have an income stream from people repaying the credit card accounts and the extortionate interest. Second, I doubt they will be able to count the balances under the agreements as assets in their balance sheets, thus requiring a further injection of capital.

As for the immediate future, I think it’s almost anyone’s guess. The government have removed the cause of the problem for the banks (by which I mean S 127(3) of the CCA) for post Oct 2007 agreements but that is rather like shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted. But that still leaves many pre Oct 2007 agreements unenforceable and remember these agreements were made during the explosion of credit facilities offered from 1997 onwards.

Arrow Global/MBNA - Discontinued and paid costs

HFO/Morgan Stanley (Barclays) - Discontinued and paid costs

HSBC - Discontinued and paid costs

Nationwide - Ran for cover of stay pending OFT case 3 yrs ago

RBS/Mint - Nothing for 4 yrs after S78 request

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I understand it, the only cases referred to the commercial court related to removal of adverse credit references where an agreement was ruled unenforcible.

 

The arguement centres on whether applying defaults where the agreement is unenforcible constitutes enforcement.

 

There are no other cases that I know of. HHJ Halbart stated that relevant case law existed for the majority of unenforcibility cases to proceed.

 

The commercial court cases are due to be heard in October, as far as I recollect.

 

A cagger was there at the Chester court hearing and posted a detailed summary of proceedings, I will try to locate it.

 

Stubie

 

If the cases are going to determine whether defaults registered with CRAs are allowed, surely that is a Data Protection issue. Is the Information Commissioner being called or taking part?

Arrow Global/MBNA - Discontinued and paid costs

HFO/Morgan Stanley (Barclays) - Discontinued and paid costs

HSBC - Discontinued and paid costs

Nationwide - Ran for cover of stay pending OFT case 3 yrs ago

RBS/Mint - Nothing for 4 yrs after S78 request

Link to post
Share on other sites

Blondie

 

 

 

Could I suggest you phone the court manager and ask him what the judge is on about? I suspect that the DJ is out of touch by about three months or that he wanted an excuse to dump the case (and others) into some other court.

 

Will give Court a ring in the morning (being to think the excuse to dump into some other court maybe correct).

B40

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...