Dissecting the Manchester Test Case....

[nick20045]

The court "may" give relief not "WILL" give relief

 

You talking dirty again??? :razz:

[angry cat]

In regards to new members the point being that we must ensure that they fully understand that all cases are different

 

So in general terms what is the substance of their case?

 

The substance must be an unfair relationship.

 

If we can steer new members to fully understand this we have play our part however can they get this across in court if it goes that far.

 

Many, are also way out of their depth re: defending claims!

 

Remember, it is open season on LIP's.

 

Therefore, I agree with Lilly;

we must ensure that new members understand exactly what they are doing and;

if they do not understand, then they should obtain specialist legal advice.

[pedross]

I think that it is quite obvious that some do not fully comprehend quite what they are getting themselves into.

 

I will probably get shot down in flames for making the above comment.

 

I agree but I think at the moment that most are unaware or unsure of the exact process.

 

I believe that producing a defence by cutting and pasting the information on the site reads quite well and gives caggers confidence. The problem is that many caggers do not completely understand the potential arguments that they can face in court which could dismiss the defence statements.

 

However, by understanding what could influence the court and covering the issue in advance as others have suggested on occassions could make a big difference.

 

For example we know that Manchester could be brought up so we need to establish exactly what and how to deal with it. The best example of my point is the judge who made a decision based on CPR 6.26 when a defence claiming that it could not apply because the Interpretation Act overides could have seen a different result.

 

Easy in hindsight I know but thats my point, we have plenty of hindsight now if we all work together.

 

Pedross

[lookinforinfo]

Remember, it is open season on LIP's.

 

As some Judges may have a downer on LIPs,[ though I haven't found that myself] it might be advantageous when filling out one's defence to declare that as a LIP you will be aiming to lay out your best possible defence exactly as you would have expected a barrister to do for you. Hopefully then that should get that objection out of the way.

[nick20045]

Many, are also way out of their depth re: defending claims!

 

Remember, it is open season on LIP's.

 

Therefore, I agree with Lilly;

we must ensure that new members understand exactly what they are doing and;

if they do not understand, then they should obtain specialist legal advice.

Been saying that for ages. One of my repeated comments is that some just learn parrot wise and if it comes to anything they do not know how to answer.

[stripper]

Does 'a rock and a hard place' spring to mind regarding this latest thinking.

What to do?

Stripper:confused:

[nick20045]

What to do?

Stripper:confused:

Read, learn, ask, challenge if need be, put your way of thinking and expect to be challenged and corrected, do not just cut and paste but modify to your need/case, put things forward and see if anybody agrees or points you to any mistakes, create your own case/defence and ask for it to be challenged

 

Then when you are in court you know what you are talking about.

[PriorityOne]

My comment was precipated by concern about some naieve members, who appear to be under the impression that, as you put it;

defending in court, is a walk in the park.

 

They start off by making a S77-79 request, without also making a SAR, it's not always necessary to make a SAR... I've only ever made one and that was only because the DCA was telling lies. I managed to catch the DCA out quite nicely this way.... also clearly not fully understanding the Act;

template letters are used;

do they really fully understand the content of these letters?

Many do not. I agree, but after reading around the site and asking questions... the content will be clearer.

 

Next step, they move on to the CPR's and; No. Only if a creditor/DCA starts court proceedings. They often don't and none of mine have. One was going to but called off their sols. after I pointed out that they had nothing remotely enforceable in a court.

the issuing county court claims re: unenforceable credit agreements;

many are way out of their depth! If you mean a consumer beginning court action as a Claimant, I agree... and have said time and time again that this is a very near-sighted thing to do.

 

If this carries on we could see a situation, where a precedent is set:(

 

Dread the thought of such occuring.

 

In my opinion, a stage is reached when people are just simply;

out of their depth and in unfamiliar territory;

that is the point at which they need to seek professional legal help. I don't really see why anyone would necessarily need professional help... unless they had a morbid fear of entering a court and talking in front of a Judge. People either have the choice to defend or the choice to do nothing and experience a CCJ by default.

 

Please be assured that I am not having a 'Go' at anyone, just trying to assist.

 

[pedross]

Does 'a rock and a hard place' spring to mind regarding this latest thinking.

What to do?

Stripper:confused:

 

Do what nick is getting at - learn the answers.

 

Too late nick has just posted that.

 

But the claimants solicitors are not always any more knowledgeable than we are, just maybe better prepared (sometimes) so its not that bad really.

 

We just need to fine tune.

[brooooooooooce]

Perhaps a list of decent, 1st rate solicitors would be helpful?

[Laura Cooke]

Read, learn, ask, challenge if need be, put your way of thinking and expect to be challenged and corrected, do not just cut and paste but modify to your need/case, put things forward and see if anybody agrees or points you to any mistakes, create your own case/defence and ask for it to be challenged

 

Then when you are in court you know what you are talking about.

 

 

I think these are wise words it`s all a learning game if you can it`s best not to rush if you have time on your side and to digest the information and adjust templates to your own needs is how it should be done I don`t understand half of the legal jargon but seem to be wising up with the good advice and different pieces of information just as I should imagine equally the creditors are doing!!!

[nick20045]

Perhaps a list of decent, 1st rate solicitors would be helpful?

I have said this before as well. The only thing a solicitor is really interested in is his wallet and bank account.

 

And.......... have said this before as well, if you file a complaint with the Solicitor Complaints service what you are actually told is "You have to realise that you cannot expect an excellent service but only a decent service".

 

So go and pay them £180 an hour + VAT and expect only a decent service.

[nick20045]

Here is an argument being put forward. See if you agree with it or submit your contentions.

 

It involves writing to the bank contesting the documents sent. Bank replies with usual bla bla bla. Debtor notifies bank that will be seeking assistance from the FOS. Because the FOS will not get involved until there is a Final response from the bank, he needs to get this from the bank. He writes to the FOS. While waiting for a reply bank defaults him/her.

 

The banks know that the FOS has something like a 6 month backlog.

 

Can this not be used as Unfair Relationship? i.e. Knowing the FOS has a backlog and knowing that the debtor was writing to the FOS (which is a goverment appointed body to control the banks) I would take this to be an Unfair Relationship.

 

Comments welcome.

[brooooooooooce]

There was a post by Baggio on this thread or another one which kind of implied he knew who the 'first rate' solicitors were (not the '4th rate' ones) but he wouldn't say who they were because of the CAG rules.

 

What exactly are the rest of us interested in? Not our wallets and bank accounts? There have been plenty of posts suggesting that the outcome of cases might have been different if the claimant hadn't been a LIP. For me, there is no way I would be a LIP - I would need a solicitor. Whether that be CFA or £180 p/h (let the solicitor get in the queue alog with everyone else) I could'nt care.

 

Reading some of the posts I do wonder who's done the most damage - the CMC's or the LIP's.

[diddydicky]

My comment was precipated by concern about some naieve members, who appear to be under the impression that, as you put it;

defending in court, is a walk in the park.

 

They start off by making a S77-79 request, without also making a SAR, also clearly not fully understanding the Act;

template letters are used;

do they really fully understand the content of these letters?

Many do not.

 

Next step, they move on to the CPR's and;

the issuing county court claims re: unenforceable credit agreements;

many are way out of their depth!

 

If this carries on we could see a situation, where a precedent is set:(

 

Dread the thought of such occuring.

 

In my opinion, a stage is reached when people are just simply;

out of their depth and in unfamiliar territory;

that is the point at which they need to seek professional legal help.

 

Please be assured that I am not having a 'Go' at anyone, just trying to assist.

 

i agree

 

as far as SAR goes though, personally i prefer to wait until termination etc otherwise if you apply too early you wont get any info on subsequent issue of DN's their internal write offs etc which means that you may then have to make a second request later on!

 

at 10 pounds a pop it's expensive if you have multiple cards

[nick20045]

 

£180 p/h (let the solicitor get in the queue alog with everyone else) I could'nt care.

 

You do know that most solicitors (unless they have known you for a long time) work on payment up front? Also you do know that a solicitor is entitled to charge you 8% interest if you do not pay his bill? You do know that a solicitor can sharpish get a Court order if you do not pay?

[brooooooooooce]

So where is a list of 1st rate solicitors? The ones who will tell you if you don't have a case and work on a CFA if you do.

[diddydicky]

youv'e got google on your browser?

 

youve got one spare finger?

 

then get typing and dont be so lazy:D

[brooooooooooce]

Thank you DD for that very (un) helpful post. It is not about Google or my index finger but about someone saying 'ooooooooooooooh I've used Dickhead and Co and they are thoroughly recommended.'

[PriorityOne]

This thread is getting a tad ridiculous.... mountains and molehills spring to mind.

 

[haggis1984]

You do know that most solicitors (unless they have known you for a long time) work on payment up front? Also you do know that a solicitor is entitled to charge you 8% interest if you do not pay his bill? You do know that a solicitor can sharpish get a Court order if you do not pay?

 

Many solicitors will give you an initial consultation for no fee in my experience.

[diddydicky]

Thank you DD for that very (un) helpful post. It is not about Google or my index finger but about someone saying 'ooooooooooooooh I've used Dickhead and Co and they are thoroughly recommended.'

 

just a little ribbing hence the smiley

 

 

chill

 

peeps are not allowed to recommend them on the forum

[diddydicky]

Many solicitors will give you an initial consultation for no fee in my experience.

 

and tell you what you already know- that they don't know too much about the CCA- that'll be 120 quid please,

 

ker-ching!!

[brooooooooooce]

Hi Haggis. Thanks for that.

 

Trouble is how do you work out who knows their arse from their elbow - unless someone with personal experience has told you they do?

[nick20045]

Many solicitors will give you an initial consultation for no fee in my experience.

30 minutes. And remember that the first thing a solicitor learns is to hear a lot, ask a lot but not give a lot. And you will find that in those 30 minutes you have basically gathered nothing.

 

Then again, solicitors also make mistakes and there are ways of getting round paying them. (Well does not work all the time but I have had it work twice for me).

 

Edit: Darn that diddydicky. Beat me to it.