County Court action by ex friend

[diddydicky]

No BD

But basically my defence and denial of owing any money what so ever was not the best move because I clearly have

 

you did not deny (at least i hope you did) that you did not owe her any money whatsoever

#

what you were advised to do was to deny owing her £23,000 as claimed- and to ask for proof of the £1214b that she alleges she lent you in smaller amounts and/or details of what the purchases were that she alleged she made on your behalf

 

you may not get this as i appear to have been banned again

[Bigdebtor]

No but there has been some bad advise given and the fact is by denying everything that is owed even though there is money owing the court will not award me costs because the claim will be part won by the claiment. My defence should have been that i did recieve 21,000 and there is 2,500 owing but deny the amount claimed and then if i had of won that part i denied imight have been awarded costs but as it stands now even if she can not produce evidence of 23,000 being paid in it will still show a balance owing to her which i will most probable get stung for her and my costs because the claim has been totally denied. and defended as such.

 

Indi

 

Indi

 

You seem to have a tendency to "cherry pick" bits and pieces and to deal with this in a piece meal manner - which is why it took so long to establish the loan wasn't from her limited company and we had to reverse down this and some other blind alleys. I suspect the same manner has led you to get the "advice" that is making you panic about not getting costs?

 

PT2537's post indicates there may be a pro-rata allocation of costs - if you actually owe £2.5k but are being sued for (say) £10k then I would say the most you would have to pay would be 25% of the costs since you would actually only owe 25% of the amount claimed by her. I seem to recollect you did offer to pay £100 per month towards what you did actually owe - so surely that's not denying there was ANY debt - and should be interpreted as a reasonable attempt at mediation by you? If so, surely that lets you off the hook for ANY costs?

 

As DD says you have been accused of owing £23k lent to you (when?) and £1214 - and you have simply asked her for evidence of this - which her clever lawyer is side stepping because you haven't yet done so in totally the correct (legally enforecable?) manner. You've been given the oinfo on the correct way to do this if you want to do so on your own. However I'm not sure you should continue on your own.

 

I strongly advise (as a layman) that you print off EVERYTHING you have from the Claimant and everything you have put in writing to her lawyer and the Court so far. Then print off a list of things not yet put to the other side but which MAY help your case or paint a picture of the claimant (no witnesses present when you signed the CC statement - although she claimed there were 3 - then 2 witnesses, the words being added later, your ex being cited as a witness - then approached in street - now he's frightened, her practice to lend money and then get the debtors to "work it off" - thus avoiding employer's NI, Income Tax etc., the extra hours you HAVE worked towards paying the debt off before getting fired etc.etc.).

 

Take ALL of this (leaving out NOTHING - no matter how irrelevant or sketchy YOU might feel it is) to a LAWYER and get him to review the ENTIRE bundle and advise you on what to do next. l would also explotre with him corresponding with the other lawyer - hopefully to get things dropped PDQ and a deal to repay the actual amount still owing (less YOUR costs?) at say £100 per month. IMHO any sensible lawyer seeing the risk of his client being charged with perjury should jump at this sort of offer.

 

If you go down this route then it might be prudent to have "radio silence" for the interim - but if so, please just post up to tell us that is what is happening and then let us know outcome.

 

If you decide to continue on your own - then fair enough - but please put everything you intend to do up on the thread so we can give our (inexpert but based on life experience) views.

 

Good luck!

 

BD

[indianamachno]

because if you were daft enough to disclose your bank statements- showing £23,000 paid into it- then they would not have to provide the evidence themselves- since you have then admitted receipt of the funds and the argument as to where it came from is irrelevant and if they don't want anyone to know which account it came out of- you would have played into their hands

 

it is for HER to prove by way of documentary evidence that £23,000 was paid into your account - you have to keep her on the back foot- there is clearly some reason why they don't want to produce evidence of where the money came from IMO

 

 

although it is tempting it is not your place to say "i have only received £21,000" you simply have to deny that you have received the amount claimed in the POC and let her prove otherwise

 

with a bit of luck - or if she does not have the bank statements to get the proof from - then she may not even know that the amount is only £21,000- in which case she is stuffed because as i said - it is not for you to say how much you received- but for her to say and PROVE how much you received.

 

if she can use the argument that she cant yet get her bank statements- so cannot prove exactly how much you received then you can use the same argument in return.so you dont know how much you received either - and since the burden of proof is on her not you- she would be in a bit of a pickle

 

at this rate- she'll be owing you money!!!

 

Yes I have denied being paid 21,000 as i was advised all along...as with my defence it has been denied i had 23,000 but neither does it admit that i recieved 21,000 which is where i will as advised by a solicitor i will become unstuck as when you enter a defence it should be what you deny and what you admit so then i would only have been fighting part of the claim which is incorrect and might have had costs.

 

Regards Indi

[indianamachno]

Indi

 

You seem to have a tendency to "cherry pick" bits and pieces and to deal with this in a piece meal manner - which is why it took so long to establish the loan wasn't from her limited company and we had to reverse down this and some other blind alleys. I suspect the same manner has led you to get the "advice" that is making you panic about not getting costs? The only info i had on the company was a ltd one. The advise now being given is by a solicitor

 

PT2537's post indicates there may be a pro-rata allocation of costs - if you actually owe £2.5k but are being sued for (say) £10k then I would say the most you would have to pay would be 25% of the costs since you would actually only owe 25% of the amount claimed by her. I seem to recollect you did offer to pay £100 per month towards what you did actually owe - so surely that's not denying there was ANY debt - and should be interpreted as a reasonable attempt at mediation by you? If so, surely that lets you off the hook for ANY costs? Apparantly not as my defence which is going to court does not admit anywhere that i owe part of the money it is all denial and asking for her to proove it which i have now been advised was not the right way.

 

As DD says you have been accused of owing £23k lent to you (when?) and £1214 - and you have simply asked her for evidence of this - which her clever lawyer is side stepping because you haven't yet done so in totally the correct (legally enforecable?) manner. You've been given the oinfo on the correct way to do this if you want to do so on your own. However I'm not sure you should continue on your own. I have done all that i was advised as far a i am aware.

 

I strongly advise (as a layman) that you print off EVERYTHING you have from the Claimant and everything you have put in writing to her lawyer and the Court so far. Then print off a list of things not yet put to the other side but which MAY help your case or paint a picture of the claimant (no witnesses present when you signed the CC statement - although she claimed there were 3 - then 2 witnesses, the words being added later, your ex being cited as a witness - then approached in street - now he's frightened, her practice to lend money and then get the debtors to "work it off" - thus avoiding employer's NI, Income Tax etc., the extra hours you HAVE worked towards paying the debt off before getting fired etc.etc.). Done All this but most is not proveable bd and as pointed out before by others the judge is not going to be interested in one bit as it is mainly my word against hers i am afraid

 

Take ALL of this (leaving out NOTHING - no matter how irrelevant or sketchy YOU might feel it is) to a LAWYER and get him to review the ENTIRE bundle and advise you on what to do next. l would also explotre with him corresponding with the other lawyer - hopefully to get things dropped PDQ and a deal to repay the actual amount still owing (less YOUR costs?) at say £100 per month. IMHO any sensible lawyer seeing the risk of his client being charged with perjury should jump at this sort of offer. I am taking advise now which is why i have posted up about the issues i am now facing..

 

If you go down this route then it might be prudent to have "radio silence" for the interim - but if so, please just post up to tell us that is what is happening and then let us know outcome.

 

If you decide to continue on your own - then fair enough - but please put everything you intend to do up on the thread so we can give our (inexpert but based on life experience) views.

 

Good luck!

 

BD

 

Thank you BD

[Bigdebtor]

Indi

 

I repeat what I said in post 556. I am glad to see you are (apparently?) taking professional legal advice now. I hope it IS someone well versed in this type of law (like PT2537) and not just any "generalist" with an LLB! Can you please ensure he has seen ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING you have - and anything you have not put in writing to the other side that may also be relevant - so he can make a FULLY INFORMED judgement and advise you based on FULL KNOWLEDGE of the ENTIRE case?

 

As a layman, as I see it - she has claimed you have been lent £23k (paid out of her bank account) along with £1214 in various cash payments - unspecified and unrecorded - so how does she know it's exactly £1214? AND she is charging you a commercial rate of interest! It is up to her to PROVE she is entitled to claim all of this - and to provide such evidence as the Court may require (but you need to alert the Court to what you want from her).

 

Incidentally I wonder if she declared the amount of interest she has charged you during the Tax Year ending 5 April 2010 on her tax return - which must have been submitted by 31 January 2011?

 

You seem to be panicking - and lashing out at those who have tried to help you all the way along.

 

Please calm down and see if you can comply with my suggestions in post 556?

 

Remember the burden of proof is on the Claimant - and you do not have to make her job easier for her (as her lawyer does not have to make yours easier unless compelled to do so by Law - which I don't think you've done yet? If you panic then you'll come across as not being a credible defendant and make the "balance of probabilities" move in her favour! She and he rLawyer also know this and will bait you as much as they are allowed to do in Court.

 

Keep cool - let your lawyer take the heat - provided he's not only qualified but EXPERIENCED in this type of thing.

 

Good luck!

 

BD

[indianamachno]

Indi

 

I repeat what I said in post 556. I am glad to see you are (apparently?) taking professional legal advice now. I hope it IS someone well versed in this type of law (like PT2537) and not just any "generalist" with an LLB! Can you please ensure he has seen ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING you have - and anything you have not put in writing to the other side that may also be relevant - so he can make a FULLY INFORMED judgement and advise you based on FULL KNOWLEDGE of the ENTIRE case? This is being done

 

As a layman, as I see it - she has claimed you have been lent £23k (paid out of her bank account) along with £1214 in various cash payments - unspecified and unrecorded - so how does she know it's exactly £1214? AND she is charging you a commercial rate of interest! It is up to her to PROVE she is entitled to claim all of this - and to provide such evidence as the Court may require (but you need to alert the Court to what you want from her). I put in a directions order to the court with my aq and it was totally ignored so not sure what other order i could use.

 

Incidentally I wonder if she declared the amount of interest she has charged you during the Tax Year ending 5 April 2010 on her tax return - which must have been submitted by 31 January 2011?

 

You seem to be panicking - and lashing out at those who have tried to help you all the way along. I am not panicking at all bd far from it and i am not lashing out at all i am just pointing out that people seeking advise need to be aware that it may not be correct and to be carefull as my defence that has been put in may now have to be changed and i will have to bare the costs for this. I am gratefull to everyone who has come forward on here and have always said so.

 

Please calm down and see if you can comply with my suggestions in post 556? As i have said I am calm

 

Remember the burden of proof is on the Claimant - and you do not have to make her job easier for her (as her lawyer does not have to make yours easier unless compelled to do so by Law - which I don't think you've done yet? Not sure what else i could have done as we are up to discloser of document stage now.If you panic then you'll come across as not being a credible defendant and make the "balance of probabilities" move in her favour! She and he rLawyer also know this and will bait you as much as they are allowed to do in Court.

 

Keep cool - let your lawyer take the heat - provided he's not only qualified but EXPERIENCED in this type of thing.

 

Good luck!

 

BD

 

Thank you again

[Bigdebtor]

Indiana

 

See PT's recent post about how costs will be allocated. If the Creditor had come clean and shown bank statements that showed £21k (and not £23k) then you would have been able to say - "yes but....... work off, offe rto pay pe rmonth etc." She didn't - she has persisted to claim it was £23k without producing evidence - and you KNOW it wasn't £23k - so I don't see what's wrong with saying "NO - strict proof please".

 

If their lawyer is not complying with properly made and legally enforceable demands for evidence then YOUR lawyer needs to get on to this PDQ. When you now say "not sure what else to do" - EASY - ASK YOUR LAWYER!

 

I suspect part of your (perceived) anxiety may well be fuelled by your lawyer who, as a professional, will be highly sceptical of "well meaning amateurs".

 

Fair enough - but he should now be focussing on "what needs done now" - NOT "what might have been done wrong before" - if anything!

 

I still think there is merit in discussing the "work off" arrangement with your lawyer - that COULD be used to "explain" (if any needed) why you didn't "come clean" about the £21k on day one - also do you have anything IN WRITING about your offer to pay so much per month?

 

Finally if she had gone after the TRUE amount still due then it would have been within the confines of the Small Claims Court - with very low costs - so I don't see why you should be risking anything other than small claim levels of costs on the amount you actually still owe - but that's based on common sense and not knowledge of THE LAW. Again - have you discussed this issue fully with your Lawyer?

 

BD

[Peterbard]

in a nutshell- simply deny any debt to the claimant if the claimant is not the person/company that lent you the money

 

go onto companies house website- recent dissolutions and get the company details and when/how it was dissolved as you can use this information if the claimant were then stupid enough to follow this action through

 

Hi

 

Really sorry about this,wish i would have come accross this thread earlier.

As you said in your earlier post advice given on here should always be taken only with supporting evidence.

 

Peter

[diddydicky]

the advice you have quoted was 100% correct and was early on when the OP was suggesting that the money allegedly loaned to her by her employer in person- was actually loaned from a limited company account which had since been disolved

 

later the OP changed various accounts of the transactions and admitted that she had borrowed £21,000 but not £23,000 and allegedly knew nothing of the £1214 made up of smaller loans

 

from that point she was advised to deny receiving "£23,000 from her ex employer and to demand evidence of the £1214 that was alleged to have been loaned to her by virtue of smaller purchases on her behalf,

 

she was advised to deny any responsibility for the interest on her employers personal credit card

 

she has had virtually no advice from me since she recevied court papers and every piece of advice above is sound.

 

she has NEVER been encouraged by me to deny being loaned £21,000

 

thank you

[debbbbsy]

I think the advice given has been sound based on the information given by Indiana. All along what has been emphasised is that the burden of proof is on the claimant to provide all relevant documents to support this claim, help & advise has been given on how to get this information, & when the solicitor failed to respond in accordance with these requests, it was suggested you submit an embarrassed defence, "You neither admit or deny the claim ".

 

The advice given is based upon the information YOU have given to the forum.

 

You are lashing out, and assuming that this new advice given is correct. I paid a solicitor £1000 because he told me he understood my case, I got absolutely nothing from him, after 6 months , he told me , actually you don't have a case. Give me another £900 and maybe I can reconsider...... Just because you are being charged for advise, don't assume that it is better than the advise & support you have recieved from the forum.

Afterall, it was you who posted & asked for help.

[pt2537]

Content of defence

 

16.5

 

(1) In his defence, the defendant must state –

(a) which of the allegations in the particulars of claim he denies;

 

(b) which allegations he is unable to admit or deny, but which he requires the claimant to prove; and

 

© which allegations he admits.

 

 

(2) Where the defendant denies an allegation –

(a) he must state his reasons for doing so; and

 

(b) if he intends to put forward a different version of events from that given by the claimant, he must state his own version.

 

 

The difficulty is that according to the White Book and Blackstones it states in circumstances where part of the claimants case is conceded, then the Defendant ought to giving consideration to CPR 16.5 (see above) admit to the parts of the Claim which he or she concedes and defend on the basis of the parts he wishes to defend.

 

 

The rule of costs is costs follow the event,

so, if the Claimant wins on part of the claim she will be entitled to costs of that and there are more than enough authorities that say there is no basis for a percentage costs order, if the Claimant wins on one part and loses on three then they are arguable entitled to the full costs of the Claim or a large percentage of those costs.

 

 

I do take the view that an admission ought to have been made if not on the N9 form then in the Defence setting out the grounds of the denial of the £23k and a positive averment as to the facts of the situation. The Defence advanced denied everything and thus the Claimant will be entitled to costs of the action

 

 

The same followed with Harrison where we had one of the UKs best costs advisor advising on costs and the same circumstances arose there and the exact same advice followed as while we lost on a couple of points we still recovered costs

[indianamachno]

Thank you PT.

 

I am not going to get into a heated discussion on here with regard to whats been advise but i suggest that peeps do read back on what they have advised and not simply deny that they have not.

 

DD you have advise me all along and for that I am gratefull to you and everyone but to say you have not advised me not to deny owing the money is wrong please read back all your posts including the defence you wrote me and other letters to send in.

 

Debs you are correct i did like many people come here for advise because i am not entitled to legal aid because of equity in my property but i also like many others cant afford a solicitor so feeling very vunerable and in unknown territory I took the advise from others on here.

 

It seems to me that People on here who have advised my to speak to a solicitor for proffessional advise on this case do now not like being told that maybe that their advise might be wrong or out of date because like you said YOU are not experts so in that case if some thing is brought to everyones attention that maybe advise given may be incorrect and might cost the person who is being advised a huge sum of money then it should be taken seriously and not accuse that person of lashing out because at the end of the day if they lose their case the people who have advised are not the ones who will bare the loss .

 

I have brought this to everyones attention to help others in the future as the solicitor who has advised me is a very well respected in civil litigation

[frettful38]

Great advice from PT and I can understand how you feel to indi.

Edited March 14, 2011 by frettful38

[diddydicky]

Thank you PT.

 

I am not going to get into a heated discussion on here with regard to whats been advise but i suggest that peeps do read back on what they have advised and not simply deny that they have not.

 

DD you have advise me all along and for that I am gratefull to you and everyone but to say you have not advised me not to deny owing the money is wrong please read back all your posts including the defence you wrote me and other letters to send in.

 

Debs you are correct i did like many people come here for advise because i am not entitled to legal aid because of equity in my property but i also like many others cant afford a solicitor so feeling very vunerable and in unknown territory I took the advise from others on here.

 

It seems to me that People on here who have advised my to speak to a solicitor for proffessional advise on this case do now not like being told that maybe that their advise might be wrong or out of date because like you said YOU are not experts so in that case if some thing is brought to everyones attention that maybe advise given may be incorrect and might cost the person who is being advised a huge sum of money then it should be taken seriously and not accuse that person of lashing out because at the end of the day if they lose their case the people who have advised are not the ones who will bare the loss .

 

I have brought this to everyones attention to help others in the future as the solicitor who has advised me is a very well respected in civil litigation

 

as i have said- my advice to you was based on what you told us on the forum- and the only time i have advised you to deny all of the claimants claim is when you averred that the money had NOT come from the person who was claiming repayment of it.

 

 

even then, you will recall (pre litigation) that the purpose of the denial was to force your opponent to reveal- by way of disclosing the payments into your bank- where the money had come from

 

had it been shown that she did not pay the money to you- then the matter would never have gotten to litigation as she would have been stopped in her tracks

 

whereas if you had simply said to her " you lent me £21,000 not £23,000- she would simply have checked her facts, amended her claim and you would still not have the proof of where the money came from until after she started proceedings.

 

the whole idea was to prevent proceedings by forcing her to admit the money had come from the limited company which no longer existed.

 

you WERE advised to demand proof of the various items she alleged totalled £1214 and to DENY totally any suggestion that you were responsible for the interest or charges on her personal credit card

 

you will note that there is also an extensive disclaimer on the bottom of my posts- it is advice NOT instruction

 

 

we all learn as we go along and i admit i should have "gone with my first instincts" on this one and refrained from advising at all

i wish you well with your case

Edited March 13, 2011 by diddydicky

[MARTIN3030]

"It seems to me that People on here who have advised my to speak to a solicitor for proffessional advise on this case do now not like being told that maybe that their advise might be wrong or out of date"

 

 

Yes you seem to have grasped something which is thought true by many.

[diddydicky]

even a solicitor will have difficulty in giving the right advice .if the person asking for the advice keeps changing their "story"!

 

i intend to now unsubscribe from this thread

[Bigdebtor]

"It seems to me that People on here who have advised my to speak to a solicitor for proffessional advise on this case do now not like being told that maybe that their advise might be wrong or out of date"

 

 

Yes you seem to have grasped something which is thought true by many.

 

Martin

 

I am sorry you felt motivated to make such a comment. Surely if that is genuinely thought by "many" (and not just one or two who are nursing a grievance) then the Site Team or the Owners should ensure there is a more prominent "Health warning" along the lines of "

CAUTION - MANY POSTERS ARE SIMPLY BLOWING HOT AIR AND BOOSTING THEIR OWN EGOS - BUT WE CAN'T (WON'T?) TELL YOU WHICH ONES" ????.

 

Indi - you are now admitting we did tell you to seek legal advice. Perhaps it's your recent manner - lashing out at those who have tried to help - that we don't like?

 

Unlike some recent posters I have been with this thread all along and agree with the sentiments expressed by diddydicky and others who have also been trying to help Indi all along the way. However I reluctantly suggest Indi has not helped herself as much as she could - initially stating the money came from the Employer as a Limited Company, not confirming what her P60 etc. stated as to who WAS her official Employer (sole trader or Limited Company?), failing to confirm if she had ALL HER OWN bank statements and could PROVE the exact amounts paid into it, failing to get the evidence needed from the Claimant as to the exact amounts paid and from which bank account(s), being reluctant to get her ex to testify to being approached to pervert the course of justice, not totally clarifying why, when and where the credit card statement was signed and whether the damning statement of what was owed was added before or after she signed it, failing to exploit the differences in the claims made in the original and subsequent correspondence from the claimant, stating the oral agreement was she could just pay the money back "as and when she could afford to" or alternatively she was to be allowed to "work off" the remaining debt (but she now seems reluctant to put this forward as part of her defence????). Depending on how much unpaid work she did she may well have paid off the entire loan - but we have not been given any hard info on this - and surely this must also be worth investigating as a defence strategy? Again this sort of practice by her employer is certainly not "best practice" and possibly could be seen as evasion of Income Tax and Employer's NI etc.

 

I have also raised the fact that her employer should have declared any interest charged on her recent Tax Return and that should surely be a relatively powerful weapon as failing to do so is either tax evasion or an admission she had not intended to charge this interest (assuming she was actually entitled to do so - which seems unlikley?). It is irrelevant if it was paid or not - the Claimant is suing for it so clearly believes it was "earned" and thus it should have been declared as earnings.

 

I really hope (as she says) her lawyer now knows the WHOLE story - and is as experienced in this type of case as she believes. I still think a strong lawyer should be able to get this settled out of court as the Claimant has a lot more to lose than Indi by going ahead - and I have advised Indi long ago to seek professional advice with the objective of getting things settled out of court. I do not recollect any CAGGERs disagreeing with such advice - so any blame for any delay in Indi seeking legal advice cannot be laid at our door.

 

I have been at pains all along NOT to advise her on what to say regarding the court case itself as I have always managed to avoid things getting that far and advice given was based on the successful tactics I have used in this strategy. Perhaps Indi could not have achieved the same outcome due to the vindictiveness of the Claimant but it would certainly have helped had she ensured the accuracy and completeness of the briefings she gave us and pursued her arguments more promptly and confidently with the Claimant's solicitors.

 

I have learned a valuable lesson here - focus on helping CAGGERS against the big faceless OC's and DCA's - and DO NOT get involved in cases where there is a personal element in the dispute.

 

In summary I truly believe the CAGGERs who tried to help Indi did so with the best of motives and gave her the best advice they could based on the information made available to them. They therefore IMHO have nothing to feel sorry or guilty about, although I am sure we will all be sorry for Indi if she is not successful as I do not believe the claimant deserves to win.

 

I shall no longer be contiributing to this thread but wish Indi well and once again implore her to ensure she has told her Lawyer EVERYTHING, letting him judge its relevance or potential effect on her case.

 

I really hope she wins as I do believe her former employer has acted extremely badly and hope she will post the result on here in due course.

 

BD

[diddydicky]

"It seems to me that People on here who have advised my to speak to a solicitor for proffessional advise on this case do now not like being told that maybe that their advise might be wrong or out of date"

 

 

Yes you seem to have grasped something which is thought true by many.

 

short re visit by request.................

 

It would be a good idea if all posters (including site team members) were required to add a footer to their posts as to their legal or other relevant qualifications- or alternatively an admission that they have none.

 

It is easy for people who have not contributed to a thread to then become "wise after the event"

 

i would remind you that the following appears on every post i submit

 

pity others do not follow suit!

 

even more of a pity when folk reading the post stop reading when it suits them!

 

 

 

I am not legally qualified, all opinions and advice are based on personal experience and common sense and are used at your own risk.

 

I have a high post count- does that mean i know alot or just talk alot?- Dont assume!

[citizenB]

dd, I think nearly all the site team have a disclaimer in their signature. But even if others were to claim qualifications in theirs.. it wouldnt necessarily mean that they were a true fact. Also how would anyone be able to confirm those as all posting is done anonymously !

 

At the end of the day, it is up to the OP to accept or not, the information and advice given.

[diddydicky]

dd, I think nearly all the site team have a disclaimer in their signature. But even if others were to claim qualifications in theirs.. it wouldnt necessarily mean that they were a true fact. Also how would anyone be able to confirm those as all posting is done anonymously !

 

At the end of the day, it is up to the OP to accept or not, the information and advice given.

 

thanks cit B- thats what i was getting at

 

i feel pretty narked that i tried to help this lady and others have twisted the context of the advice

 

ill get over it

[MrZ]

I realise many original contributers to this thread may no longer be subscribed, but I just want to say thank you. I had no interest in the subject matter of this thread in and of itself. I happened across it after a site search regarding options available in dealing with some bank related issues that I have. Rather than taking a single post from the search result and applying it to my situation, I started reading from the beginning. I stayed up through the night until I couldnt see anymore to read. I have been following slowly along since then, and have now come to the end.

 

I started reading because I needed to know which form I needed to file to the court for a dispute with my bank. But given the "drama" of the case and its intrigue from the start, I was hooked. It almost read like a mini novel. I was eager to see how things progressed from day to day. All along I was gaining valuable insight as to many areas of negotiating, dealing with court claims, examples of how to format and prepare documents etc. Aside from the "plot of the story" I was gleaning as much information as I could. Much of it is totally irrelevent to the search that brought me here. But I made alot of notes for if and when I need them.

 

I like the original poster, am a foriegner to much of the rights we have and know very little about how things work in court. Regardless as to this threads particular case, it is full of very useful information. At one point as I was reading along, I thought it should be a sticky. Simply because of all the useful information about HOW to respond to solitiors and the courts, when to respond, how to find information, how to use some of the options available to us, etc. I realise that nothing in this thread is neccessarily going to apply to my issues but I have learned alot and now feel not only comfortable but confident in dealing with the issues I face.

 

Its unfortunate that the thread seems to have ended on a sour note. I honestly think there is incredible value in so many ways. My appeal to the dramatic wants to know how this all turns out. As I said its a very dramatic story to say the least. But regardless of that, the well thought and insightful information contained in many of the posts will no doubt be the source of answers to many caggers to come.

 

I appreciate the contributions of everyone in the this thread. I applaud it and the spirit in which it was given. Your contributions to the thread have equipped me in ways that are helping me to turn a chapter. For this I am grateful. As we all get older and wiser, I hope that it will be a short span of time until we can all see things in the 20/20 vision that hindsight is always faithful to give.

 

Thanks again to everyone.

 

To the original poster,

 

I hope that your case has a positive outcome. I am sure after this experince you will be equipped to face challenges you never knew you could. We will all have learned from your case. In the unfortunate case that you dont get the outcome you desire, you will no doubt feel more confident and equipped by the entire experince. Certainly you will know how to deal with similar issues in the future, whether on your own or with any advice.

 

 

I have also learned the value of spellcheck when dealing with the courts Thanks to this thread. Please forgive me if my internet spellcheck has missed anything.

Edited April 9, 2011 by MrZ
Spellcheck

[indianamachno]

Glad it has helped you. My case is now with a solicitor and has now got to the stage that we are asking the courts for case management as the claimant is bringing more and more into the claim and their claim is a bloody Joke to say the least but is also very dangerous due to the lies, including having fake witnesses and money that they have behind them to throw at a case based on bitterness and wanting revenge.

 

Where this will end I dont know....good or bad I think it will depend on the judge and if he can see what this claim is really based on.

[Bigdebtor]

Indi

 

I do hope your Lawyer has ALL the facts - and is prepared to "fight dirty" to match the other side's tactics. Have you advised him of the existence of this thread - as he may well get some info you have since forgotten (or misinterpreted or misunderstood) from it?

 

For example - WHO actually lent you the £21k - as far as I can see this have NEVER been established on this thread so far. Was it the claimant in a personal capacity - or as a sole trader - or was it the Limited Company? If the Claimant was NOT the legal entity who lent you the £21k then you would have been CORRECT to deny it - but I believe you were actually advised to do an embarrassed "neither admit nor deny" defence - pending the evidence of pazyments requested from the Claimant.

 

WHO was YOUR employer - this might well be relevant - since if your employer was the Limited Company then it would be reasonable to assume THAT was who had lent you the money - in the absence of any proof or evidence to the contrary. What does your P60, P45 or Contract of Employment say? I have already asked such questions but have not been given any answers.

 

Did the claimant declare the interest she believes she had "earned" from your "debt" in any period from 6 April 2009 until 5th April 2010 in her Tax Return which she would have submitted by 31 January 2011? It doesn't MATTER if this was PAID by you or not. - or even if she was ENTITLED to charge it or not. If she is CLAIMING it in court then she MUST BELIEVE she is due it - and should have declared it either as earnings or for bad debt relief.

 

I do wish you well and would countenance you to ENSURE your Lawyer has EVERYTHING you can give him - no matter how irrelevant it may seem.

 

It may well be this case will rest on how the Judge views the veracity or otherwise of the statements made by both sides.

 

Good luck!

 

BD

[Bigdebtor]

Indi

 

Any news?

 

BD

[indianamachno]

I am in court next week.