MBNA county court Summons " Help Please

[diddydicky]

it is admissable in court AFTER the court has made a judgement.

 

if you reply to a "without prejudice " letter and you forget to endorse it as such- then provided the content of your letter is clearly in reference to matters raised in their without prejudice letter- then it is still covered by WP privelege even if not endorsed so.

 

the purpose of WP is to allow the parties- without admissions- to seek to settle the matter out of court but you must confine yourself to the arguments contained

[Chipmeister]

it is admissable in court AFTER the court has made a judgement.

 

if you reply to a "without prejudice " letter and you forget to endorse it as such- then provided the content of your letter is clearly in reference to matters raised in their without prejudice letter- then it is still covered by WP privelege even if not endorsed so.

 

the purpose of WP is to allow the parties- without admissions- to seek to settle the matter out of court but you must confine yourself to the arguments contained

 

If that is the case is Dizzy better off not replying to that letter? From what I can see Restons are only going over old ground in it. What can they be up too?? Or am I just an old cynic?

[DizzieDiva2010]

Thankyou all for your input, I really don't know what to do, I can't afford to end up with huge costs not when I'm struggling to pay this debt at the balance it is today!

 

All advice very much appreciated.

[DizzieDiva2010]

'WP' only covers documents that are genuinely trying to seek/offering a settlement.

 

The idea is that the document can then not be used against them to show that they are willing to accept less etc.

 

WPSATC basically means that the doc can be produced when it comes to deciding costs and can show whether one

 

 

 

party has tried to act reasonably or not - if you lose and were offered a reasonable deal before, you could get seriously stung when it comes to costs.

 

You do not have to head replies with WP as the WP covers the whole 'conversation' if it is indeed wrt negotiating an offer putting WP on a letter that is not a genuine offer to settle means nothing... it can still be used - there is caselaw to back that up somewhere

 

just my understanding following lots of research on the subject

 

Have I been offered a reasonable offer though; they wanted £500 upfront & would then allow me to pay by installments of £20 per month via Tomlin Order. I was willing to sign a Tomlin Order but I would have to borrow the £500 to make the upfront payment, of which my local advise centre advised against as they do not advise borrowing and getting into more debt! I am on ESA £148 fortnighly and have to contribute to my mortgage and this is an unsecured debt only £2500 of which £550 is made up if interest and charges. They have been unreasonable throughout. I cannot agree to a charging order as my ex partner is on the mortgage and I believe it is unfair to my other creditors who have been reasonable.

[DizzieDiva2010]

That was my thinking too, you have nothing to hide Dizzie, send an open response accordingly.

 

From reading on here it seems that they just try to force your hand and it's really not fair!

 

BTW, I have yet to see any DN's sent 1st class, perhaps

that's why the letter is WP! That's one porky pie, perhaps there are others within?

 

Hi Dotty, your right I have nothing to hide I have told the truth throughout and considering my financial and personal circumstances I have always tried my best to pay them what I could afford, also bearing in mind that I had to appeal for my ESA. Iv been trying my best to get my life back on track after my long abusive relationship and I could have done without all this as whilst I am stressing about this whilst being off sick with depression this has only brought me down further, I could have been alot further in my recovery and working. I'm not a person that deals with stess very well and can find it difficult to pick myself up out of it. I really don't know where iv found the fight in me. It's seems very daunting and never ending.

[gh2008]

it is admissable in court AFTER the court has made a judgement.

 

if you reply to a "without prejudice " letter and you forget to endorse it as such- then provided the content of your letter is clearly in reference to matters raised in their without prejudice letter- then it is still covered by WP privelege even if not endorsed so.

 

the purpose of WP is to allow the parties- without admissions- to seek to settle the matter out of court but you must confine yourself to the arguments contained

 

Genuine WP correspondence is not admissible at any time (there are few exceptions and these are covered by case law) hence the relatively recent innovation of 'Without Prejudice Save as to Costs' which is admissible after Judgement.

The idea of this is to show whether one party has acted 'unfairly' by not accepting a 'reasonable' offer prior to trial. The WPSATC correspondence can then be used to show the behaviour and if one party was found to be unreasonable then the Courts have powers to 'punish' that party

 

IF the correspondence is not seeking a genuine settlement, then it is admissible at any time as just labelling it WP does not automatically make a document privileged.

[Chipmeister]

Genuine WP correspondence is not admissible at any time (there are few exceptions and these are covered by case law) hence the relatively recent innovation of 'Without Prejudice Save as to Costs' which is admissible after Judgement.

The idea of this is to show whether one party has acted 'unfairly' by not accepting a 'reasonable' offer prior to trial. The WPSATC correspondence can then be used to show the behaviour and if one party was found to be unreasonable then the Courts have powers to 'punish' that party

 

IF the correspondence is not seeking a genuine settlement, then it is admissible at any time as just labelling it WP does not automatically make a document privileged.

 

So would I be correct in thinking that, as an example only, if I wrote to Restons offering a reasonable payment plan (i.e. something they had agreed to in the past but I had not been able to commit to), enclosing all back up documentation from them relating to the history and why I could now agree to this payment plan, and I didn't label it WP, Restons wouldn't be able to reply marked "WP" and stop me producing such a letter in court, should they turn my request down and proceed to trial? I.e, they couldn't make my reasonable offer WP by replying to it with correspondence marked "WP"??

 

I hope that makes sense...!!

[MandM]

So would I be correct in thinking that, as an example only, if I wrote to Restons offering a reasonable payment plan (i.e. something they had agreed to in the past but I had not been able to commit to), enclosing all back up documentation from them relating to the history and why I could now agree to this payment plan, and I didn't label it WP, Restons wouldn't be able to reply marked "WP" and stop me producing such a letter in court, should they turn my request down and proceed to trial? I.e, they couldn't make my reasonable offer WP by replying to it with correspondence marked "WP"??

 

I hope that makes sense...!!

 

As far as I'm aware, any correspondance relating to a reasonable attempt/s to settle a dispute between the parties will automatically have the benefit (or not!) of being deemed WP. There's no reason why a trail of correspondance cannot be considered WP retrospectively if the aim was 'settlement' or 'agreement'.

 

If your case did escalate to court, perhaps it would be sensible to repeat your earlier offer and head it 'WP Save as to costs' as GH has already pointed out so that you can at least use it to determine the issue of costs.

 

 

I.e, they couldn't make my reasonable offer WP by replying to it with correspondence marked "WP"??

In other words - yes they can, although really they don't even have to mark it WP.

 

 

M

[gh2008]

No, your original letter would become privileged however yu could disclose it as long as it does not compromise any privileged communication from the other side.

 

WP/privilege is there to 'protect' you in that case, in other words if you admitted the debt and offered to pay in a WP and then went to trial denying the debt the other side couldn't use the admission against you. BUT if you wanted to show you had been reasonable, then yes, no reason why you can't disclose your letter (even if headed WP ..)

[diddydicky]

if you went to trial denying the debt and then produced a letter making an offer to settle it (unless it was made clear that the offer was in no way an admission of the debt) it would look odd!!

 

there are so many pitfalls i would suggest the debtor employs the KISS principle

 

always mark offers to settle WP and avoid the confusion

[Chipmeister]

if you went to trial denying the debt and then produced a letter making an offer to settle it (unless it was made clear that the offer was in no way an admission of the debt) it would look odd!!

 

there are so many pitfalls i would suggest the debtor employs the KISS principle

 

always mark offers to settle WP and avoid the confusion

 

Certainly in my case all I've ever wanted to do was offer a reasonable amount each month until my circumstances changed, as I knew they would for the better sooner or later.

 

The KISS principle?! What's that please?!

[Dotty50]

The KISS principle: The traditional expansion of this acronym is Keep It Simple Stupid.

One of the all time great acronyms, and so true. A motto and reminder that simplicity works - in communications, design, philosophy, relationships, decision-making, meetings, management and life generally. Apply and promote KISS to any situation to deter unnecessary complication, excuses, bureaucracy, red-tape and management bull****, and to encourage no-nonsense communications, integrity, truth, beauty, and honesty.

 

 

What would we do without Google!

[DizzieDiva2010]

Confused.com what shall I do?

 

My understanding WP means if I write an offer via letter the letter cannot be used as evidence in court but can after a judgement is given?

 

I'm already making payments of £20 per month so what shall I do?

 

1) Reply to this letter offering £20 per month via Tomlin Order.

2) Accept Judgement

3) What happens if I don't reply?

4) Im confused as what action to take next?

 

I'm not denying the debt but I don't believe it is enforceable in court. They still have not produced the executed agreement for the current account number and are relying on an old one dated 15 Nov 2000 which has a different account number. They will not give me statements going back further than when this new account number came into force as this will show that the old account number was closed with a nil balance most probably way before the new account number was in force. Iv asked them for these statements on 3 occasions and they reply that it is normal procedure to change the account number relating to the same agreement?? Why is this??

 

What do you think are their reasons for sending me this letter as they are going over old grounds here?

Edited January 30, 2011 by DizzieDiva2010

[diddydicky]

think of the overriding principles- which basically is to avoid the use of the court system if at all possible- and settle disputes outside of the court system

 

in order to prevent one side saying "look" he offered to settle so he is showing guilt - the use of WP allows the parties in the case to make offers and counter offers to settle the matter without fear of the other side using this against them in the trial

 

 

when the verdict is given (and therefore nothing in the |WP correspondence can influence the judges decision- there then remains the question of costs

 

 

 

where one side has made an offer of settlement during the course of WP correspondence- which turns out to be more beneficial than the finding of the court- THEN that party may reveal to the court that they made an offer to settle the matter but the other side refused it and therefore suggest to the court that the winner should not be able to claim the full amount of costs he is claiming..............on the basis that had he accepted thje offer the further costs would have been avoided

 

hence the expression "save as to costs"

[DizzieDiva2010]

think of the overriding principles- which basically is to avoid the use of the court system if at all possible- and settle disputes outside of the court system

 

in order to prevent one side saying "look" he offered to settle so he is showing guilt - the use of WP allows the parties in the case to make offers and counter offers to settle the matter without fear of the other side using this against them in the trial wen the verdict is given (and therefore nothing in the |WP correspondence can influence the judges decision- there then remains the question of costs where one side has made an offer of settlement during the course of WP correspondence- which turns out to be more beneficial than the finding of the court- THEN that party may reveal to the court that they made an offer to settle the matter but the other side refused it and therefore suggest to the court that the winner should not be able to claim the full amount of costs he is claiming..............on the basis that had he accepted thje offer the further costs would have been avoided hence the expression "save as to costs"

 

Diddy what would you do in my position because I'm not understanding this at all I'm sorry. I never wanted this to go to court in the first place and have always kept contact with them whilst continuing to make payments when i recieved my benefit. I have made them a reasonable offer, an offer that i can afford considering the amount of income i currently have, what more can i do i ask?

Edited January 30, 2011 by DizzieDiva2010

[diddydicky]

in normal circumstance i would advocate "calling their bluff" and flusing out what they have however ...............

 

 

to be honest dizzy- because you have difficulty understanding this- i would suggest you would be better seeking legal advice on the matter or perhaps CAB or CCCS since i am concerned that you may act on adice on the thread which you dont really understand

 

if that makes sense!!

[DizzieDiva2010]

I have my other court case on the 24th February 2011 and I have the same Judge as my MBNA case!

[diddydicky]

that could be good or bad then!!

[DizzieDiva2010]

in normal circumstance i would advocate "calling their bluff" and flusing out what they have however ...............

 

 

to be honest dizzy- because you have difficulty understanding this- i would suggest you would be better seeking legal advice on the matter or perhaps CAB or CCCS since i am concerned that you may act on adice on the thread which you dont really understand

 

if that makes sense!!

 

I will see if i can find a solicitor to assist me a local charlity law firm thanks diddy.

[diddydicky]

are you represented in your feb case?

[DizzieDiva2010]

that could be good or bad then!!

 

Thats exactly my thought, good i would find out how fair the Judge is, i really dont want the same Judge to be honest.

[DizzieDiva2010]

are you represented in your feb case?

 

No im representing myself, im going to tell the truth and state the facts thats all i can do!

[diddydicky]

you got a thread on that then?

[DizzieDiva2010]

you got a thread on that then?

 

Edited January 30, 2011 by DizzieDiva2010

[DizzieDiva2010]

in normal circumstance i would advocate "calling their bluff" and flusing out what they have however ...............

 

 

to be honest dizzy- because you have difficulty understanding this- i would suggest you would be better seeking legal advice on the matter or perhaps CAB or CCCS since i am concerned that you may act on adice on the thread which you dont really understand

 

if that makes sense!!

 

Do you mean ignoring that recent letter from Restons and waiting for the trial?