How far does an unfair relationship extend?

[Dougal16T]

Good morning everyone,

I am wondering if the provisions relating to an 'Unfair Relationship' (S.140) as far as the financial world is concerned extend and include the following:

 

When taking any financial case to court (i.e.: suing your bank/ lender), a litigant in person is immediately (usually) placed in an 'unfair relationship' because the defendant will usually instruct Counsel.

 

If this does not fall within the definition as above then is it contrary to the European Convention on Human Rights?

 

Any thoughts on this?

 

As always,

 

Best wishes,

 

Dougal

[gaz2006]

interesting thought but dont know the answer though you can pay for council if u can afford it !!

[scoring_guru]

You're welcome to test it in court - and good luck to you.

[MARTIN3030]

Yes this is something that has been discussed before.

[Dougal16T]

Yes this is something that has been discussed before

 

Evening all,

 

I accept that (by the way what was the result??) - but I still believe that the fact that in a court case involving a Consumer Credit matter, then for the defendant bank to instruct Counsel is a deliberate act by the defendant to gain 'the upper hand', by placing the claimant in a position where they are at an unfair disadvantage. The defendants being unfairly advantaged by their action of instructing Counsel - especially for small claims.

 

I am confident that an application to the European Court to stop defendant banks taking this step would be upheld on the basis that the claimant's rights were infringed by the defendant's action.

 

I am I still crazy........? (Answers on a postcard!...)

 

Best wishes to one and all,

 

Dougal

[michellej1]

Good point