Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Now that is an interesting article which adds afew perspective that I hadn't thought significant - but on reflection of the perspectives offered ... Now Starmer is no Blair, however 'blairite he may be perceived, but the Tories aren't tories and aren't even remotely liberal   The fast 'unannounced and unexpected election call from sunack may well be explained by the opinion linked that he hoped reform would be unprepared and effectively call a chunk of Farages largely empty bluster - making him look even more of a prat, leave scope for attacks on shabby reform candidates and mimimise core vote losses to reform - while throwing the 'middle ground' (relative) tories TO THE DOGS - and with the added bonus of likely pacifying his missu' desire to jogg off to sunny cal tout suite somewhat   thumb in the air - I expect about 140ish tory seats, but can hope for under a hundred Reform - got to admit the outside possibility of 1, maybe 2 seats with about 8% of the vote - but unlikely. I think projections of over 10% of the vote for reform is nudged and paid for speculation - but possible with the expected massive drives from Russian, Chinese and far right social media bot and troll prods targeting the gullible.
    • Commentary June 2024 WWW.ELECTORALCALCULUS.CO.UK Interesting article about just how bad it could be for the Tories.  Also Tories could be hoping on Reform not having candidates in many seats, as they were not ready.  
    • Even a Piers Morgan is an improvement and a gutless Farage Piers Morgan calls for second Brexit referendum WWW.THELONDONECONOMIC.COM Piers Morgan and Nigel Farage have faced off over Brexit and a second referendum in a heated reunion on BBC Question Time.   “Why don’t we have another referendum about Brexit?” he questioned. “I seem to remember when 2016 came around we were told there was going to be control of our borders and it was going to be economically beneficial to this country. And eight years later we have lost complete control of our borders… and economically it seems to have been a wilful act of self-harm.”   ... Piers missed off : after all somebody said a 48/52 decision would be "unfinished business" by a long way - was that person just bul lying (again)  
    • when did they (who) inform you there was a 'police case' and when was this attained? i will guess the debt is now SB'd as it's UAE 15yrs. have you informed the bsnk ever by email/letter of your correct and current address? you can always ignore anyone else accept the bank,  Block and bounce back all emails. Block any text messages  Ignore any letters unless it's: - a Statutory Demand - a Letter Of Claim - a Court Claimform via Northants bulk.  
    • I left Dubai 8 years ago and intended to return. However a job prospect fell through. I’d been there for 15 years. I decided to pay my credit card and the bank had frozen my account. There is no means to pay the CC so completely unable to pay when I wanted to other than the bank advising me to ask a friend in the UAE to pay it on my behalf!  fast forward bank informs there is a police case against me for non payment. Years later IDR chased me and after months/ years they stopped. Now Judge & Priestley are trying their luck. Now I have received an email in English and Arabic from JP saying the bank has authorised them to collect debts. Is this the same as IDR although I didn’t receive anything like this from them. Just says they are authorised?
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Claim Form DLC/Hillies old-MBNA credit card *** Settled by Tomlin Order***


Alloyz1
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3667 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 301
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

claimant stated that they will not oppose set aside (unless they now change their mind!)? so, forthcoming hearing is to confirm the set aside and then re your strike out app'n which they will oppose? if no strike out, then should continue as norm? unless J decides things otherwise?

each parties WS can be addressed.

check with andy :)

Edited by Ford
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

Just a few questions after a little thought and discussuon:

 

The Notice of hearing of Application states "The hearing of the defendants application for judgement to be set aside will take place at......." No mention of my strike out application. Is that an important omission?

 

Would this hearing possibly continue on to consider the claimants original claim, or would that be a seperate hearing, as currently we have not filled out the DQ and I have not seen any additional evidence from the claimant except the agreement, T&C and DN so would be hard pressed to respond without being able to consider their evidence?

 

If the claimant is not opposing the set aside, could the DJ go against that and let summary judgement stand?

 

Many thanks

 

A

Edited by Alloyz1
Link to post
Share on other sites

No it's not an important omission and nothing to worry about as long as your application asks for a strike out.

 

The judge will probably give directions for filing DQs etc at the hearing if he doesn't strike out the Claimant's claim.

 

There's no way to predict what will happen so best be as prepared as possible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Appreciate that Ganymede, I think I have everything in order but would appreciate someone having a look at my WS to make sure there is no obvious errors.

 

I have submitted my WS as evidence to support my application to set aside and strike out, but we have not got to the DQ or disclosure stage yet in the original claim, so presume I could alter it as it has not been submitted in response to the original claim?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Appreciate that Ganymede, I think I have everything in order but would appreciate someone having a look at my WS to make sure there is no obvious errors.

 

I have submitted my WS as evidence to support my application to set aside and strike out, but we have not got to the DQ or disclosure stage yet in the original claim, so presume I could alter it as it has not been submitted in response to the original claim?

 

 

 

Sorry when is your application being heard?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok so you have a few weeks.

 

You can't really amend the WS served with the application but as a LiP you could just play dumb and serve a new WS on the Claimant and the Court as soon as possible if that's what you want to do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Responding to your PM Alloyz.

 

I see Gany has clarified your queries.

 

Regards

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

alloyz

have a look for eg at cpr rule 3.4 and associated practice direction 3a, which is the basis of your SO application. if they negate that ie show 'reasonable grounds' for bringing their claim, then J wouldn't ordinarily strike out their claim?

Edited by Ford
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi ford

 

The set aside is the main part of the application, if I got strike out as well that would be a bonus! I will submit my WS proves they have no case.

 

I don't expect to get SO to be honest, but you never know and at least it makes the claimant work for it!

 

A

Link to post
Share on other sites

" I will submit my WS proves they have no case."

 

Your WS should prove that you have a defence not that they have no case...they obviously have a case they have an agreement.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

The word Court conjures up visions of wigs/gowns and witness boxes....think of it more of a room with chairs and tables.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

Set aside and strike out hearing next week.

 

I submitted my WS to support my application to SA and SO.

 

The claimant has now produced a fully compliant set of T&C which addresses every aspect of my WS....... This set has never been produced in 4 years of dispute.....

 

My WS was based around the T&C they had previously produced? They have confirmed twice a different set were in place, until they recieved my WS and now these?

 

Further the OC has confirmed a totally different set were in place...

 

Any advice?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Was this document disclosed at Standard Disclosure N265? pre judgment...have they permission to introduce it as evidence?

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

We have not reached Standard Disclosure as yet.

 

They went for SJ and attained it. I did not recieve any application or supporting evidence at that stage, just a DO stating SJ.

 

I filed application to SA and SO and supported this with my WS.

 

Only after I filed this has this new compliant set of T&C been included

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mmmmm I see .....as I have stated earlier in your thread Alloyz defences based on T&C or Default Notices are a gamble and weak...It may have been wise to accept their offer of settlement when they broached it.

 

REgards

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

I sent a letter OC with the T&C claimant is relying on (or was relying on) asking if these were in force at the time of signing.

 

They have replied with 'no' and supplied the set in force at the time of signing (the OC set have never been provided by the claimant! and is not the claimants first or new set!)

 

I may need to change a few things with my defence I think

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologies, the above post is a bit of a panicked ramble...

 

I have this morning emailed the claimant a copy of the letter I have from the OC confirming which T&C were in force at the time the agreement was signed. The letter included the T&C the OC refers to.

 

The letter therefore confirms none of the T&C the claimant relies on are the correct ones.

 

Further, the T&C stated by the OC as the ones in force at the time I signed the agreement are not compliant with CCA74.

 

Lets see what I get back.... Very interresting Monday morning ;)

 

A

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...