Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • It's genuinely amazing how you managed to rebuke pretty much all of my points without giving a single shred of evidence to prove it. When asked for evidence all you claim is that "it's clear cut" but how is anyone here meant to know if you won't show it?   I agree with this. If you can't convince us, how are you going to convince the judges when this inevitably goes to court?
    • This is a ridiculous situation.  The lender has made so many stupid errors of judgement.  I refuse to bow down and willingly 'pay' for their mistakes.  I really want to put this behind me and move on.  I can't yet. 
    • Peter McCormack says he has secured a 15-year lease on the club's Bedford ground.View the full article
    • ae - i have no funds to appoint lawyers.   My point about most caggers getting lost is simply due to so many layers of legal issues that is bound to confuse.  
    • Lenders have a legal obligation to sell the property for the best price they can get. If they feel the offer is low they won't sell it, because it's likely the borrower will say the same.   Yes.  But every interested buyer was offering within a range - based on local market sales evidence.  Shelter site says a lender is not allowed to wait for the market to improve. Why serve a dilapidations notice? If it's in the terms of the lease to maintain the property to a good standard, then serve an S146 notice instead as it's a clear breach of the lease.   The dilapidations notice was a legal first step.  Freeholders have to give time to leaseholders to remedy.  Lender lawyers advised the property was going to be sold and the new buyer would undertake the work.  Their missive came shortly before contracts were given to buyer.  The buyer lawyer and freehold lawyers were then in contact.  The issue of dilapidations remedy was discussed..  But then lender reneged.  There was a few months where neither I nor freeholders were sure what was going on.  Then suddenly demolition works started.   Before one issues a s146 one has to issue a LBA.  That is eventually what happened. ...legal battle took 3y to resolve. Again, order them to revert it as they didn't have permission to do the works, or else serve an S146 notice for breach of the lease   A s146 was served.  It took 3y but the parties came to a settlement.   (They couldn't revert as they had ripped out irreplaceable historical features). The lease has already been extended once so they have no right to another extension. It seems pretty easy to just get the lawyer to say no and stick by those terms as the law is on your side there.  That's not the case   One can ask for another extension.  In this instance the freeholders eventually agreed with a proviso for the receiver not to serve another. You wouldn't vary a lease through a lease extension.  Correct.  But receiver lawyer was an idiot.   He made so many errors.  No idea why the receiver instructed him?  He used to work for lender lawyers. I belatedly discovered he was sacked for dishonesty and fined a huge sum by the sra  (though kept his licence).  He eventually joined another firm and the receiver bizarrely chose him to handle the extension.  Again he messed up - which is why the matter still hasn't been properly concluded.   In reality, its quite clear the lender/ receiver were just trying to overwhelm me (as trustee and leaseholder) with work (and costs) due to so many legal  issues.  Also they tried to twist things (as lawyers sometimes do).  They tried to create a situation where the freeholders would get a wasted costs order - the intent was to bankrupt the freeholders so they could grab the fh that way.   That didn't happen.  They are still trying though.  They owe the freeholders legal costs (s60) and are refusing to pay.  They are trying to get the freeholders to refer the matter to the tribunal - simply to incur more costs (the freeholders don't want and cant's afford to incur)  Enfranchisement isn't something that can be "voided", it's in the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 that leaseholders have the right to.... The property does not qualify under 67 Act.  Their notice was invalid and voided. B petition was struck out. So this is dealt with then.  That action was dealt with yes.   But they then issued a new claim out of a different random court - which I'm still dealing with alone.  This is where I have issues with my old lawyer. He failed to read important legal docs  (which I kept emailing and asking if he was dealing with) and  also didn't deal with something crucial I pointed out.  This lawyer had the lender in a corner and he did not act. Evidence shows lender and receiver strategy had been ....  Redact and scan said evidence up for others to look at?   I could.  But the evidence is clear cut.  Receiver email to lender and lender lawyer: "our strategy for many months  has been for ceo to get the property".  A lender is not allowed to influence the receivership.   They clearly were.  And the law firm were complicit.  The same firm representing the lender and the ceo in his personal capacity - conflict of interest?   I  also have evidence of the lender trying to pay a buyer to walk.  I was never supposed to know about this.  But I was given copies of messages from the receiver "I need to see you face to face, these things are best not put in writing".  No need to divulge all here.  But in hindsight it's clear the lender/ receiver tried - via 2 meetings - to get rid of this buyer (pay large £s) to clear the path for the ceo.   One thing I need to clarify - if a receiver tells a lender to do - or not to do - something should the lender comply? 
  • 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

Brian Carter Court Claim - CCA received


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5259 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

Hi there!,

 

Thought i'd start a new thread. Old thread:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/216291-mint-c-c-court.html

 

Story so far, court papers received from my mate :) all defence sent, allocation questionnair sent.

 

Judge then said B.C needs to submit all info by the 19/11/09.

 

Few days later, CCA arrives and all statements received.

 

CCA contains all key information, terms and is signed by me.

 

B.C is now asking for full payment or an offer of £xx per months. I can not afford £xx...i can only afford half of this.

 

What i'm asking, will he accept my offer and not what he is wanting??

 

Got a feeling this is alllllllllllll gonna go wrong.

 

He wants this in 28days or he will apply to court to stike out my defence.

 

Thanks All!

Link to post
Share on other sites

no, i have not had a default notice or notice of assignment. Looking back through my paperwork, i did state this on my cpr and draft order for direction with my allocation quesdtionnaire....mmmmm

Link to post
Share on other sites

This could be why they are pushing for an agreement at this stage, cos they dont have the right documentation. My own case isnt with BC, but they dont appear to have a default notice, or havent supplied one despite being ordered to by the Court, we are now further along the court process. It did take months for my claimant to complete their AQ and only did it when the court said they would strike it out if they didnt receive.

 

Dont give up yet, and certainly dont give in at this stage, you still have a long way to go before thats an option.

 

If you have submitted your AQ, I am assuming you are waiting for BC to submit theirs

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi there. yes, he has submitted his AQ also (with no info on it).

 

I'm bit confused of what to do now, as he will have to comply to the draft order for directions...won't he??

 

shall i just sit and wait?

Link to post
Share on other sites

back again!!, the court has stated all documents from the CPR must be received by the 19th...my CPR requested: Agreement - Default notice - termination notice and statements.

 

good job i came on here...i was about to start paying him!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

hi there!, an update on this one. Its now one day after the deadline. I phoned the court for an update and my mate Brian has not filed anything complying with the CPR 16.4...the court said this will be struck out without further order.

 

The supervisor at the court confirmed this, so this case is struck out??....does this mean i have won???, bit confused of what to do next?.

 

TA! eggy

Link to post
Share on other sites

If he doesn't comply then yes, the case will be struck out - but keep checking with the court to make sure it does happen. If he complies late, they may let the case move on, so keep in contact. Last thing you want to have to do is pay for an N244 to have it struck out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

UPDATE :confused:

Hi there,

I have phoned the court and they have had no docs' from my mate Brian Carters.

They did say they have received a letter from them saying they are no longer acting on behalf of the defendant.

I'm unsure of what this means?

Also, can I go after costs??

Thank you!

Eggy

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the case was brought by Carter on behalf of the client, I don't think he can wriggle out that easily. He is the agent stated on the claim form - so I think he's responsible. He either discontinues or it's struck out - unfortunately the court won't advise you on this (so, HELP! Caggers).

 

All I can suggest is you call the court and ask them if they will therefore be striking out the claim.

 

When this is sorted, send your costs to Carter - you have submitted a defence, but no track has been assigned, so they're due.

 

Eggy 1, Carter 0 (half-time)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi again - progress report!

Well well. I've been onto the courts, basically annoying them :o) about this. They said they will not confirm in writing that the claim is struck out, as it will take them ages to do for each individual claim.

Not sure where to go from here, do I send a letter to court and to my mate to confirm the claim is now discontinued?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact that BC has withdrawn from the case doesn't mean the case has been discontinued.

It is possible for the claimant to engage another solicitor or even take the case forward themselves (depends who it is I guess).

 

Since you haven't heard anything in writing from the court you must work on the assumption that the case is still live and proceeding. I suggest applying for the case to be struck out, although I'm not knowledgible enough to be able to offer appropriate grounds.

Has a date been set for the hearing? I would ensure you turn up prepared for the case to go ahead just in case the claimant is trying to ambush you.

I really do appreciate all those 'thank you' emails - I'm glad I've been able to help. Apologies if I haven't acknowledged all of them.

You can also ding my gong if you prefer. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact that BC has withdrawn from the case doesn't mean the case has been discontinued.

It is possible for the claimant to engage another solicitor or even take the case forward themselves (depends who it is I guess).

 

Since you haven't heard anything in writing from the court you must work on the assumption that the case is still live and proceeding. I suggest applying for the case to be struck out, although I'm not knowledgible enough to be able to offer appropriate grounds.

Has a date been set for the hearing? I would ensure you turn up prepared for the case to go ahead just in case the claimant is trying to ambush you.

 

hi there, the case has been "struck out without further order of the court"...the supervisor at the court said BC is no longer acting on behalf of the client. (BC has sent a letter to them to state this).

 

No date has been set as it is now struck out.

 

The supervisor has then said nothing else has been reiceved and to leave it this late will not go down with the judge (as they need to set a appointment with the judge to say why they didnt comply with the court order).

 

So will the N244 be the way to go? as I want to close this.

 

Tank ya :cool:

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's it... you've won! In due course the court should write to you to tell you that it has been struck out.

 

Eggface 1, Carter 0 (full time)

 

Now, it's time to go after Carter for your costs. You need to do this quickly so you can revert to the court for help if necessary.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Aah, you didn't mention the struck out bit earlier (or did I miss it?).

 

If you were notified in writing then your home scot free, and you should follow DonkeyB's advice asap. However the any wasted costs would be paid by the claimant, not BC, becuase the claimant is the one lodging the claim against you.

If you're still waiting for written confirmation then, until you receive such confirmation, the case is still 'live' - particularly if you incur further costs that might be chargeable to the claimant.

I really do appreciate all those 'thank you' emails - I'm glad I've been able to help. Apologies if I haven't acknowledged all of them.

You can also ding my gong if you prefer. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...