Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I'm afraid that I'm not especially familiar with the injunctions and orders et cetera that are available in these kinds of buried difficult situations. What I am pretty certain of is that if there is some kind of proceedings began while the partner is still living in the home then that will increase tensions to an intolerable level and also increase any danger. I think this would mean that they would have to be a move to have the abusive partner excluded from the home. How many children are there and why should she be worried that the children might be taken away? I have to say that if the children are living in a situation where they are aware that there is this level of abuse between their parents then it can only be extremely damaging to them and the sooner the matter was resolved and the home became a peaceful and stable environment for them, the better. I think this would absolutely require the removal of the abusive partner. If the police have already been made aware of his abusive behaviour then it seems to me that the presumption will be in favour of her remaining at the home with her children. One thing she should certainly do is start to keep a detailed log of what is going on. She needs to be extremely careful that this log is not discovered and in fact I think that there is an app which maybe allows a log to be kept and is stored off the phone and in the cloud somewhere. I will check it out and come back. I very much hope that there will be others who have experience of this kind of thing either because they have been in this kind of situation or else because they have supported somebody who is in that situation who will be able to come along and give better advice. Can you tell us more about the children please. I think that their well-being might be pivotal to finding a solution to the whole problem
    • Hi All,   Not sure if this is the correct section to post in, please move if it isn't.   During the storm over the last couple of days I noticed a tiled on the shed roof had slipped and opened a hole, on close inspection it turns out they are Asbestos tiles. Nowhere in our survey did it state that and we weren't informed during the sale period.   This is our first house so I had no idea what Asbestos looked like and didn't suspect a thing, we just new the roof looked a little worse for wear and would plan to replace it once settled in etc.   I am assuming this is now going to cost a lot more to have removed and replaced, and we would of factored the cost in when we made the offer on the property.   Is there anything I can do in regards to either the Surveyors or the Estate Agents to have the costs either contributed to or covered ?   Thanks
    • Hi BF,  The other GDPR post relates to a GDPR request on an independent Nissan Car Dealership and not Nissan itself. I have had to make two SAR requests as they are two separate companies.    The SAR request referred to in this post was served to Nissan UK (Head Office) on 09-01-2020. 
    • CENTRAL LOANS LIMITED Company number 04205508
    • And if we plead not guilty, but judge says we are guilty, then it will be worse than accepting the 3 points and £100 fine?   I argue that it’s not dangerous because someone is less likely to walk up and scratch themselves on the sharp bit at back while the car is being driven I.e. moving vehicle , than if car was parked up at home and someone walked behind the car and scratched themselves against bumper.    also it was being driven carefully and not at speed, on the way to get damage fixed?    Wouldn’t a judge accept that all of this is reasonable?
  • Our picks

MONTY

MONTY v CREATION FINANCE

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3190 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

http://s947.photobucket.com/albums/ad315/AVALON970/?action=view&current=131010-DRYDENSPG1.jpg

 

http://s947.photobucket.com/albums/ad315/AVALON970/?action=view&current=131010-DRYDENSPG2.jpg

 

Pleae find attached links to latest missive from Drydens.

 

They have ignored my request for them to identify which 'true' copy their client is now reliant upon. They allege that I have changed my defence which apparently is not acceptable, yet it is perfectly acceptable for them to refer to three different reconstructions allegedly orininating on two different dates !!! ...and now they refer to a 'credit card' where their POC clearly refers to a 'storecard'....this gets better as each letter is received. And Creation are paying for this!?!

 

OK. No more table tennis. This has now got to go to Court.

 

Monty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, shame, you've rattled their cage Monty :lol:

 

The letter is garbage but disguised to make it look credible. I wouldn't enter into any more correspondence with them just get a WS ready to go.

 

Have you heard anything further re. the directions you sent in with your AQ?


Any knowledge I possess or advice I proffer is based solely on my experiences in the University of Life. Please make your own assessment of legality, risks & costs before taking any action.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh, shame, you've rattled their cage Monty :lol:

 

The letter is garbage but disguised to make it look credible. I wouldn't enter into any more correspondence with them just get a WS ready to go.

 

Have you heard anything further re. the directions you sent in with your AQ?

 

No not yet. I really want to report these clowns to SRA. They are trying to intimidate me when they know they have not got a leg to stand on. What do you think?

 

Monty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Their stated 'facts' are incorrect. They have not complied with your lawful request, and the Rankine & McGuffick cases do NOT IIRC say that obtaining a Judgement is not enforcement. Issuing a claim wasn't but obtaining a judgement was.

 

Have you reported Creation to the OFT yet? If not do so now!!

Unless I am mistaken re the above then IMHO they have definitely broken the SRA code with this one.

 

Can I ask what efforts they have made to sensibly negotiate ??


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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Monty,

 

Drydens are using the same tactics on you that Irwin Mitchell here in Scotland tried use in Creations case against me last month, fortunately they didn't succeed:

 

Their POC on my Summons were:

1. I appplied for a card,

2 I was Issued with a Card.

3. I used the card.

4. I made payments on the card.

 

But had they sent me a true copy of the CCA, No they had not and I knew this for a fact but couldnt't say how I knew.

As I said before they tried all the frightening tactics right up too abut 1 hour before the case was called in court. As we waited all morning for it to be called, then when we recessed for lunch,

their solicitor approached me to say he had received a message that he was not to proceed and would I accept a dismissal but fortunately for me SFU had warned me of this and I said it had to absolved, and he agreed without hesitation.

 

I know now it was all threats but at the time I was a bad of nerves I am sure SFU will confirm that.

They are hoping that you back down which I nearly did, had it not been for SFU time and patience.

Cheers

AFW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Their stated 'facts' are incorrect. They have not complied with your lawful request, and the Rankine & McGuffick cases do NOT IIRC say that obtaining a Judgement is not enforcement. Issuing a claim wasn't but obtaining a judgement was.

 

Have you reported Creation to the OFT yet? If not do so now!!

Unless I am mistaken re the above then IMHO they have definitely broken the SRA code with this one.

 

Can I ask what efforts they have made to sensibly negotiate ??

 

OK. Will submit complaints to OFT and SRA this week.

 

Negotiations? Basically, they sent me a letter demanding immediate payment of a sum which represented a discount of less than 10%. I rejected it and if you read my posts basically said 'I will see you in court'

 

Monty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wrote to Consumer Direct this morning:

 

Sir,

I write with reference to the following OFT guidelines and statutes:

1. OFT guidance on unfair relationships and enforcement action under Part 8 of the Enterprise Act.

2. OFT Debt Collection Guidelines

3. Consumer Protection Form Unfair Trading 2008

4. Consumer Credit Act 1974

I also refer to Susan Edwards, Head of Credit and Enforcement, OFT, 2008 letter on the specific requirements of a 'true copy' of a credit agreement.

I am the defendant in a claim for alleged unpaid monies with Creation Finance Ltd. I submitted a requests under s78 CCA 1978 for a true copy of the alleged agreement. To date Creation have cited three different alleged reconstitutions of the purported agreement, each with a different address and no signature.

I know the OFT has publically stated they will take a 'very dim view...' of anyone who misleads debtors in this regard.

I seek you advice and guidance on how I might have the right authority look into this matter.

 

Regards,

 

They responded this evening and I have spoken to them on the phone. I was not instilled with confidence they would do anything. i asked if they would contact Creation and they could not confirm, although they did say my complaint would be given a high priority - whatever that means.

 

I am just compiling my Solicitors Regulating Authority complaint. Based on the Drydens letters I have already posted and referred to, especially post 101, is there anything I should be pointing out to the SRA?

 

Monty

Edited by MONTY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OK. Will submit complaints to OFT and SRA this week.

 

Negotiations? Basically, they sent me a letter demanding immediate payment of a sum which represented a discount of less than 10%. I rejected it and if you read my posts basically said 'I will see you in court'

 

Monty

 

Another offer from Drydens acknowledging that Creation have refunded charges debited to the account and offered to settle at just over £2000.00. Needless to say, I will see them in Court first.

 

Monty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Another offer from Drydens acknowledging that Creation have refunded charges debited to the account and offered to settle at just over £2000.00. Needless to say, I will see them in Court first.

 

Monty

 

having weitten to me on the 4th November giving me 14 days to consider their offer, Dryden wrote to the court on the 12th November saying '...whilst the Claimant has attempted to enter into negotiations with the Defendant,and has made offers of settlement, these have all gone unanswered (not true). The Claimant is anxious to draw the matter to a close before excessive legal costs are incurred and is in the process of finalising an application for Summary Judgement...In the circumstances we would ask that the Court list a final Small Claims hearing on the first available sate after 35 days to allow sufficient time for the Claimant's application to be filed and heard by the Court...'

 

They have short memories. I responded to their first offer rejecting the same, requiring them to identify which of the three different reconstructions is a 'true' copy of the alleged agreement they are relliant upon - they have not responded.

 

The time frame they have set for a responce to theit latest offer has yet to expire (18th November). I can only take it that their letter to the court is a deliberat attempt to mislead the Court.

 

Monty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
having weitten to me on the 4th November giving me 14 days to consider their offer, Dryden wrote to the court on the 12th November saying '...whilst the Claimant has attempted to enter into negotiations with the Defendant,and has made offers of settlement, these have all gone unanswered (not true). The Claimant is anxious to draw the matter to a close before excessive legal costs are incurred and is in the process of finalising an application for Summary Judgement...In the circumstances we would ask that the Court list a final Small Claims hearing on the first available sate after 35 days to allow sufficient time for the Claimant's application to be filed and heard by the Court...'

 

They have short memories. I responded to their first offer rejecting the same, requiring them to identify which of the three different reconstructions is a 'true' copy of the alleged agreement they are relliant upon - they have not responded.

 

The time frame they have set for a responce to theit latest offer has yet to expire (18th November). I can only take it that their letter to the court is a deliberat attempt to mislead the Court.

 

Monty

 

Text of my letter going to Drydens by recorded delivery tomorrow:

 

Dear Sir,

 

Reference: Creation Financial Services-v-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Claim No. xxxxxxxxxx

 

Thank you for your letter of the 12th November copying me into your letter to the Court Manager, Plymouth County Court.

 

I am obliged to point out to you and to the Court several errors in your letter which is blatantly misleading.

 

Firstly, you offers have not ‘…all gone unanswered…’ I draw your attention to my letter of the 11th October 2010 (copy enclosed), which you have failed to fully respond to.

 

As detailed in my letter, I still await for you to indentify which of the three ‘true’ copies of an alleged agreement which you have provide, is the reconstituted copy your client is reliant upon. I note that your clients Particulars of Claim have yet to be amended. I remain therefore confused as to the details of your clients claim.

 

I would remind you that your client has written to me and confirmed that they do not have in their possession any agreement, yet you are still providing different alleged ‘true’ copies of the same. Therefore, the three different copies of the alleged agreement you aver to be ‘true’ are either false or your client has failed in their duty to accurately respond to my Subject Access Request. I would be grateful if you would clarify this matter.

 

Secondly, your latest offer of settlement dated the 4th November 2010, which now reflects a different sum from that detailed in your clients Particulars of Claim, does not require a response until the 18th November 2010. Once you have fully responded to my letter of the 11th October 2010 I will respond to your latest offer of compromise.

 

For the above reasons I feel that your letter is yet another example of your misconduct in this matter and a obvious disregard of the Solicitor’s Code of Conduct. You will be aware that I have already drawn the matter of your conduct to the attention of the Solicitor’s Regulation Authority (SRA). For completeness, a copy of your letter of the 12th November 2010 will now be forwarded to the same.

 

 

Yours faithfully,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done Monty, put them in their place!

 

I suspect that this letter is for your 'benefit'. Love this bit:

 

and is in the process of finalising an application for Summary Judgement...In the circumstances we would ask that the Court list a final Small Claims hearing on the first available sate after 35 days

 

Since when did the courts set aside hearing dates on the pretext that a claimant MAY submit an app? Put your money where your mouth is, Messrs Dryden. Either apply for an SJ or don't but don't think statements like this are anything but threats. Cheeky bs!!


Any knowledge I possess or advice I proffer is based solely on my experiences in the University of Life. Please make your own assessment of legality, risks & costs before taking any action.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Text of my letter going to Drydens by recorded delivery tomorrow:

 

Dear Sir,

 

Reference: Creation Financial Services-v-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Claim No. xxxxxxxxxx

 

Thank you for your letter of the 12th November copying me into your letter to the Court Manager, Plymouth County Court.

 

I am obliged to point out to you and to the Court several errors in your letter which is blatantly misleading.

 

Firstly, you offers have not ‘…all gone unanswered…’ I draw your attention to my letter of the 11th October 2010 (copy enclosed), which you have failed to fully respond to.

 

As detailed in my letter, I still await for you to indentify which of the three ‘true’ copies of an alleged agreement which you have provide, is the reconstituted copy your client is reliant upon. I note that your clients Particulars of Claim have yet to be amended. I remain therefore confused as to the details of your clients claim.

 

I would remind you that your client has written to me and confirmed that they do not have in their possession any agreement, yet you are still providing different alleged ‘true’ copies of the same. Therefore, the three different copies of the alleged agreement you aver to be ‘true’ are either false or your client has failed in their duty to accurately respond to my Subject Access Request. I would be grateful if you would clarify this matter.

 

Secondly, your latest offer of settlement dated the 4th November 2010, which now reflects a different sum from that detailed in your clients Particulars of Claim, does not require a response until the 18th November 2010. Once you have fully responded to my letter of the 11th October 2010 I will respond to your latest offer of compromise.

 

For the above reasons I feel that your letter is yet another example of your misconduct in this matter and a obvious disregard of the Solicitor’s Code of Conduct. You will be aware that I have already drawn the matter of your conduct to the attention of the Solicitor’s Regulation Authority (SRA). For completeness, a copy of your letter of the 12th November 2010 will now be forwarded to the same.

 

 

Yours faithfully,

 

Letter sent today and a copy hand delivered to the court

 

Monty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Letter sent today and a copy hand delivered to the court

 

Monty

 

I have been of-line for a while and by way of an update - Drydens responded about a month ago. Predictably, they do not agree their letter to the Court was misleading. They have confirmed that 'the passage of time (and subsequently transfer) has understandably placed our client in some difficulties with regard to documentation...that being said, we believe you have now been provided with documentation sufficient to meet (S78) requirment...'

 

The SRA have acknowledged receipt and are investigating my complaint.

 

A hearing has been set for March 2011 provided the Claimant pays a hearing fee of £300 by 20.12.2010 'The original documents shall be brought to the hearing..' Now that will be interesting, considering the original agreement does not exist (as they have already admitted).

 

Drydens have written 'As our client's offers of settlement have gone unanswered, we would invite your own proposals for settlement of the claim by return...' I am tempted to respond along the lines that as they have already admitted their client's claim is seriously flawed and they should drop their claim and I will not persue them for costs. This of course would be without prejudice to my SRA complaint against Drydens.

 

Monty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like a fair offer to me Monty.


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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO, wait until the 20th. If they don't pay the hearing fee, go for a strike out immediately or it will probably just get stayed pending their messing about.

 

If they pay the hearing fee, write your 'settlement' letter. Nothing ventured etc.

 

BTW, don't rely on a DJ insisting on originals at any hearing no matter what it says on the court papers.


Any knowledge I possess or advice I proffer is based solely on my experiences in the University of Life. Please make your own assessment of legality, risks & costs before taking any action.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IMO, wait until the 20th. If they don't pay the hearing fee, go for a strike out immediately or it will probably just get stayed pending their messing about.

 

If they pay the hearing fee, write your 'settlement' letter. Nothing ventured etc.

 

BTW, don't rely on a DJ insisting on originals at any hearing no matter what it says on the court papers.

 

How do I apply for a strike out, is it N224?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

N244 monty


Any knowledge I possess or advice I proffer is based solely on my experiences in the University of Life. Please make your own assessment of legality, risks & costs before taking any action.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
N244 monty

 

The hearing fee has been paid.

 

I intend sending the following:

 

Dear Sir,

 

Reference: Creation Financial Services-v-xxxx xxxxxxx Claim No. xxxxxxxx

 

Thank you for your letter of the xxx December 2010, the contents of which I note.

 

I am aware of District Judges xxxxx listing and note that it requires that the original documents be brought to hearing.

 

You have confirmed that your client does not hold the original documents required by District Judge xxxxx. Further, you have previously confirmed that you cannot produce a true copy of any alleged agreement and/or default notice or reconstitution of the same.

 

I have already pointed out to you the requirements of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and Office of Fair Trading guidance on the provision of properly reconstituted agreements and related information. The sanction under the Act for non-compliance with an information request is unenforceability of the credit. Where there is such a failure, the courts have no discretion to allow enforcement.

I have asked you to bring to your clients attention Regulation 5 of the Consumer Protection From Unfair Trading and Office of Fair Trading debt collection guidance (Final guidance on unfair business practices) July 2003 (updated December 2006).

 

I note from your clients Allocation Questionnaire section G has been completed and that costs of £3500-£4500 will be claimed. This seems particular high considering this case is allocated to the small claims track. However, this is a matter for your Client and the Court. As a litigant In Person I will be claiming a similar amount to two thirds that being claimed by your client and asking the Court to consider Wulfsohn v Legal Services Commission in this regard. I will also be asking District Judge xxxxx to consider CPR 44.3.

 

I have repeatedly pointed out the errors and flaws in your client’s case. I now offer your client the opportunity to discontinue their claim and avoid any further costs and wasting more of the Courts time.

 

The above offer is made without prejudice to current considerations being made by the Solicitors Regulation Authority with regard to your conduct and behaviours in this matter.

 

Yours faithfully,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMHO, you need to make your offer clearer. i.e. you are offering a no costs opportunity for them to withdraw.

 

You could/should also use BOS -v- Mitchell to ram home your point - In BOS v Mitchell the bank caved in at the last moment on a simple matter of Law (actually a similar matter to yours but less blatantly obvious) and the Judge stung BOS for indemnity costs of £20k IIRC £15+ payable on account and the rest to be assessed


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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with gh, monty. The above looks a bit waffley & therefore weak. You are in a postion of strength, use it!


Any knowledge I possess or advice I proffer is based solely on my experiences in the University of Life. Please make your own assessment of legality, risks & costs before taking any action.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

seeing as what has already been ccd to the Court, I would seriously think about sending that offer in as well (once it is properly sorted with the standard non-admission phrase as well)

 

I know you are not supposed to ... but as a LiP, you are bound to make these little 'mistakes' ;)


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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
seeing as what has already been ccd to the Court, I would seriously think about sending that offer in as well (once it is properly sorted with the standard non-admission phrase as well)

 

I know you are not supposed to ... but as a LiP, you are bound to make these little 'mistakes' ;)

 

How is this:

 

Thank you for your letter of the xxx December 2010, the contents of which I note.

 

No debt to your client is acknowledged. However, I would like to offer your client a no cost opportunity to withdraw their claim.

 

I am aware of District Judges xxxxxxx listing and note that it requires that the original documents be brought to hearing. You have confirmed that your client does not hold the original documents required by District Judge xxxxxx. Further, you have previously confirmed that you cannot produce a true copy of any alleged agreement, its terms and conditions and/or default notice or a true reconstitution of the same.

 

I have already pointed out to you the requirements of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and Office of Fair Trading guidance on the provision of properly reconstituted agreements and related information. The sanction under the Act for non-compliance with an information request is unenforceability of the credit. Where there is such a failure, the courts have no discretion to allow enforcement.

 

I note from your clients Allocation Questionnaire section G has been completed and that costs of £3500-£4500 will be claimed. As a litigant In Person I will be claiming a similar amount to two thirds that being claimed by your client and asking the Court to consider Wulfsohn v Legal Services Commission in this regard. I will also be asking District Judge xxxxxxx to consider CPR 44.3. I would also draw your attention to Bank of Scotland v. Mitchell (2009).

 

I have repeatedly pointed out the errors and flaws in your client’s case. I now offer your client the opportunity to discontinue their claim and avoid any further costs and wasting more of the Courts time.

 

For clarity, I am offering a no costs opportunity for your client to withdraw their claim. This offer is open for acceptance only until 4:00 PM Wednesday 18th January 2011 after which date it is withdrawn.

 

The above offer is made without prejudice to current considerations being made by the Solicitors Regulation Authority and the Office of Fair Trading with regard to your conduct and behaviours in this matter.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

And yes I will copy the Court in to the final letter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's worth noting the dubious, if allegedly legal, practices that Creation resort to. I got a laptop from an electrical dealership last month, with a deposit and apparently interest free credit for the remainder, over 6 months. A simple, straightforward transaction, you may think. The retailer's financial agents are Creation Consumer Finance. Having spoken to Creation about paying this on time, they eventually wrote to me with their bank details, over TEN days after I requested it. They did not include the monthly payments I needed to make in order to evade punitive interest charges, as they explicitly said they would do. I rang them again, and they said that it 'isn't company policy' to include the payment rate, but the call is being recorded so it can be considered as evidence. Evidence they might conceivably 'lose' if the situation warrants it. In other words, they don't give you documentary evidence in case they claim you haven't paid the full amount on time, and interest subsequently kicks in. Anyway, I worked it out with them over the 'phone, and instructed my bank to make the staggered payments to the full amount payable well before the last date for the 6-month period. I also asked my bank to give me a copy of this transaction for future reference. So, be careful, as they may try to get you to breach your agreement; they're not very helpful, not very customer-friendly in recent experience, and they also charge a £25 'administration fee' (code for a freebie to them) for the customer settling the transaction on time and in full! It sems to me that they operate in a very irregular and manipulative way to squeeze as much as possible out of the hapless and, in some cases, less than knowledgeable customer. Be careful ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How is this:

 

Thank you for your letter of the xxx December 2010, the contents of which I note.

 

No debt to your client is acknowledged. However, I would like to offer your client a no cost opportunity to withdraw their claim.

 

I am aware of District Judges xxxxxxx listing and note that it requires that the original documents be brought to hearing. You have confirmed that your client does not hold the original documents required by District Judge xxxxxx. Further, you have previously confirmed that you cannot produce a true copy of any alleged agreement, its terms and conditions and/or default notice or a true reconstitution of the same.

 

I have already pointed out to you the requirements of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and Office of Fair Trading guidance on the provision of properly reconstituted agreements and related information. The sanction under the Act for non-compliance with an information request is unenforceability of the credit. Where there is such a failure, the courts have no discretion to allow enforcement.

 

I note from your clients Allocation Questionnaire section G has been completed and that costs of £3500-£4500 will be claimed. As a litigant In Person I will be claiming a similar amount to two thirds that being claimed by your client and asking the Court to consider Wulfsohn v Legal Services Commission in this regard. I will also be asking District Judge xxxxxxx to consider CPR 44.3. I would also draw your attention to Bank of Scotland v. Mitchell (2009).

 

I have repeatedly pointed out the errors and flaws in your client’s case. I now offer your client the opportunity to discontinue their claim and avoid any further costs and wasting more of the Courts time.

 

For clarity, I am offering a no costs opportunity for your client to withdraw their claim. This offer is open for acceptance only until 4:00 PM Wednesday 18th January 2011 after which date it is withdrawn.

 

The above offer is made without prejudice to current considerations being made by the Solicitors Regulation Authority and the Office of Fair Trading with regard to your conduct and behaviours in this matter.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

And yes I will copy the Court in to the final letter

 

I will assume all is OK with the text of this letter and send it off tomorrow unless there are any further comments from caggers?

 

Monty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

don't put in the deny the debt bit as it just annoys people - just leave it out completely - actually leave out the 2nd para completely

 

put in a time limit, but not the withdrawing bit

 

otherwise looks ok

 

Good luck

:D


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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...