Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • hey don't throw in the towel yet..moneybarn are inept atleast and make and interpret rules as they go along.   how many pages are we looking at here in total?
    • Who sang 'Suspicious minds' Was it Elvis.   I was caught out and appealed firstly to CPM.  Surprise surprise, Rejected.  Then IAS surprise surprise, Dismissed.   If it is of any help.  The video posted by Squirlyline on 9th Oct 2019 shows that there are NO barriers on the entry to Trinity Park. If you Google Map the Trinity Park postcode the entry to Trinity Park clearly shows that there WERE barriers erected and that is dated Oct 2018.   If it is Private Land.  WHY were the barriers removed.   Sing up Elvis
    • Hi. I have received the SAR today. Looks like they did send a default notice, looking at it neither me or my husband remember ever seeing the letter. However, I know we cannot prove this like they can and have.... I guess there is nothing more I can do?  Thanks for all your help 
    • Dx thank you so much for all of your help this year you really are an angel you are a credit to this site and I’m sure 1000’s more would agree with me in saying that you are a perfect example of why nobody should lose hope in humanity the way society is starting to look today. I really can’t find the words to express my gratitude for your gumption. I really can’t apart from say thank you from the bottom of my heart. 
    • In terms of the result, in hindsight, I think that the manifesto possibly went too far.  I think nationalisation of utilities, railways and royal mail is a good thing due to the fact privatisation sucks money out of the system, and things end up being paid for several times over.   I'm not sure nationalisation of BT was such a good thing.  Our network is pretty rubbish and leaving infrastructure projects to private companies is incoherent and inefficient, but that might have been a step too far.   I disagree it's all Corbyn's fault because the Tory's campaigned on a very simple message - "get brexit done".  In effect, their manifesto was very basic, and labour haemorrhaged leave voting labour voters so desperately tired of the process.  There was a hell of a lot of anti Corbyn propaganda from the word go.   I said after the referendum that the Tory's would be screwed because they wouldn't be able to deliver on any of the promises made, and for a long time it looked like that would be the case.  However, I never took into consideration the effect of Boris Johnson would have because he's a very good salesman... I would bet my life on us having a deal by the end of next year, and whatever we're left with will be championed as a massive success... I'm sick of it all if I'm honest.  I've had people banging on about remainers can all shit up now, they lost etc, as if they'd won the lottery.  But when I look at it, it was all still based on nonsense and misinformation, so I think we've all lost.   We're now left with a Tory government that has a huge majority so that they can push through anything they like.  Where's the democracy there?  Leavers wanted more democracy, but Johnson having played a blinder, has secured less democracy and conviced them they're all winners.  Coupled with their promise to "renegotiate the relationship between parliament and the courts" I'm concerned all these leave voters aren't really thinking clearly.  I've also said all along that brexit was about the elite in our country having more overall control, and now they have it.  They've even convinced working class labour voters that it's in their interest.  How did this happen?
  • Our picks

IS IT ME?

Repossession questioned by deeds not being signed

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2115 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

This is again a nun ported case, the chamber sates it was asked by the 'appellant to send this out????

I know of no appellant asking for this to be done and as it is trying to stop the cases going though why would the appellant send it out??? Some thing is going on here me thinks

 

OH no it's only me???? Lol

 

Ummm IS IT ME who is this Applicant ?

 

pj


e-petition is live please sign it.. unlawful repossessions..!!!

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/56915

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The letter from the chamber says - " I have been asked to send you the enclosed copy decision of HH Judge Blunsdon dated 20th March 2013. This has been sent to us by the Applicant in another case similar to your case..."

 

Has anyone else had this case through? Joseph Henry Fergus (by LPA Receivers P Jardine and GC Davis) and Calvin Matthews and Persons Unknown. - Lambeth County Court..

 

Is there any way this case can be posted if I get it scanned in?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I don't understand is -

1. who is the Applicant who asked this to be sent?

2. Why would an Applicant send a case through that still harps on about section 2 LPMPA 89?

3. Why are the Property Chamber doing the dirty work of the lenders?

 

I think I need to make a call to the Chamber tomorrow. All very confusing!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The letter from the chamber says - " I have been asked to send you the enclosed copy decision of HH Judge Blunsdon dated 20th March 2013. This has been sent to us by the Applicant in another case similar to your case..."

 

Has anyone else had this case through? Joseph Henry Fergus (by LPA Receivers P Jardine and GC Davis) and Calvin Matthews and Persons Unknown. - Lambeth County Court..

 

Is there any way this case can be posted if I get it scanned in?

 

Has anyone remembered to PM Sequenci?

 

He was going to see if he/she could get a link to the case to help out.... that would save a lot of time?

 

Apple


[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think so

 

Oh well... hopefully Sequenci will remember and get back to us on this......

 

I can imagine we need to look at it pretty swiftly.....

 

The clock is ticking.....

 

Apple


[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will have a hunt once I've finished my working day. I *might* be able to find it :)

 

Sequenci.........any joy???

 

Apple


[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the chamber are allowing you to see what the lenders would rely on so you can see how you can fight it.

 

Surely it's good that you know what you're up against and enable you to prepare to fight it.

 

If you scan it you should be able to post it up.


 

What's Best for You?

 

 

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

 

Alliance & Leicester Moneyclaim issued 20/1/07 £225.50 full settlement received 29 January 2007

Smile £1,075.50 + interest Email request for payment 24/5/06 received £1,000.50 14/7/06 + £20 30/7/06

Yorkshire Bank Moneyclaim issued 21/6/06 £4,489.39 full settlement received 26 January 2007

:p

 

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sequenci was going to post it up if he could find it as I can't find on the inter web lol

 

If it is a case sent to the Chamber by the Applicant.....then it is possibly a case that will help other Applicants......I can't see a lender asking the Chamber to send a case that would assist Applicants can you?

 

Apple


[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe the chamber are allowing you to see what the lenders would rely on so you can see how you can fight it.

 

Surely it's good that you know what you're up against and enable you to prepare to fight it.

 

If you scan it you should be able to post it up.

 

That would be a first........why would the Chamber show all applicants a lenders "hand" before the trial???

 

They sent out 'lamb'.....that was strange also.... got us all in a tizzy on here.....

 

Apple


[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If it is a case sent to the Chamber by the Applicant.....then it is possibly a case that will help other Applicants......I can't see a lender asking the Chamber to send a case that would assist Applicants can you?

 

Apple

 

Whoever it helps it has to be better to know in advance than let them spring any surprises on the day.

 

TimetogoRAM asked if it could be posted if he scans it, and it can by hitting Go Advanced on a new post and using the paper clip to attach the scan.

 

If it's a new case it may not be on the legal databases yet.


 

What's Best for You?

 

 

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

 

Alliance & Leicester Moneyclaim issued 20/1/07 £225.50 full settlement received 29 January 2007

Smile £1,075.50 + interest Email request for payment 24/5/06 received £1,000.50 14/7/06 + £20 30/7/06

Yorkshire Bank Moneyclaim issued 21/6/06 £4,489.39 full settlement received 26 January 2007

:p

 

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That would be a first........why would the Chamber show all applicants a lenders "hand" before the trial???

 

They sent out 'lamb'.....that was strange also.... got us all in a tizzy on here.....

 

Apple

 

In a court case it's standard practice for both sides to provide a bundle of documents that they intend to rely on in court to enable them to prepare their arguments. I attended a dwp tribunal a while back and received a bundle in advance. I don't see why this tribunal wouldn't ensure parties had the opportunity to prepare in advance too. Often documents submitted on the day are not allowed or an adjournment will be allowed to read and digest the new info. Let's not forget the tribunal should be fair to both parties.


 

What's Best for You?

 

 

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

 

Alliance & Leicester Moneyclaim issued 20/1/07 £225.50 full settlement received 29 January 2007

Smile £1,075.50 + interest Email request for payment 24/5/06 received £1,000.50 14/7/06 + £20 30/7/06

Yorkshire Bank Moneyclaim issued 21/6/06 £4,489.39 full settlement received 26 January 2007

:p

 

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Was it before or after the lame case as I can't find it any where , also why would the chamber send this out.?

It's not from an application as no one on here has asked about it erm some thing fishy here

 

I think TTGR said it was 'March 2013'.......'lamb' was July 2013..... we found 'lamb' ok.....if this case was 'before' 'lamb'.......it must be on the data base by now...surely...??

 

Apple


[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think TTGR said it was 'March 2013'.......'lamb' was July 2013..... we found 'lamb' ok.....if this case was 'before' 'lamb'.......it must be on the data base by now...surely...??

 

Apple

 

No idea. Just a suggestion. If TimetogoRAM has a copy and can post it, it saves everyone hunting for it.


 

What's Best for You?

 

 

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

 

Alliance & Leicester Moneyclaim issued 20/1/07 £225.50 full settlement received 29 January 2007

Smile £1,075.50 + interest Email request for payment 24/5/06 received £1,000.50 14/7/06 + £20 30/7/06

Yorkshire Bank Moneyclaim issued 21/6/06 £4,489.39 full settlement received 26 January 2007

:p

 

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In a court case it's standard practice for both sides to provide a bundle of documents that they intend to rely on in court to enable them to prepare their arguments. I attended a dwp tribunal a while back and received a bundle in advance. I don't see why this tribunal wouldn't ensure parties had the opportunity to prepare in advance too. Often documents submitted on the day are not allowed or an adjournment will be allowed to read and digest the new info. Let's not forget the tribunal should be fair to both parties.

 

Yes, but it is never the 'court' that send details from the other sides case..it is normally the respondent as party to a trial that would be ordered to disclose any documentary evidence it intends to rely upon.......(the court don't do it for either party) .... yet....we are seeing it is the 'tribunal' (court) sending out particular cases...they are not sending a 'bundle'.....the other side are not sending the 'bundle'.....we are not seeing an 'actual' objection......it is strange behaviour......

 

Ah well.... we haven't yet seen the case...we may not get to discuss it anyway....and if we can't discuss it.... then there is no point it having been sent out in the first place....

 

Surely...if they are looking to prepare both sides.... why not send the complete 'bundle' then... why are they sending it in bits and bobs??

 

Apple


[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No idea. Just a suggestion. If TimetogoRAM has a copy and can post it, it saves everyone hunting for it.

 

I think we should let Sequenci have a quick look first.... then, if no joy then we may have no choice.....but... I'm not sure I like this case management approach from the Tribunal in sending out bits and bobs at all......it makes it all seem un-professional...almost 'knee jerk; and reactive.... rather than proactive if you will :sad:

 

Apple


[COLOR="red"][B][CENTER]"Errors do not cease to be errors simply because they’re ratified into law.” [/CENTER][/B][/COLOR][B][CENTER] E.A. Bucchianeri[/CENTER][/B]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
here's the case from property chamber

 

HIS HONOUR JUDGE BLUNSDEN -V- MR JOSEPH HENRY FERGUS..

 

Well done PJ! I didn't have access to a scanner till later.. Saved me a job. Thanks for this.

 

The first line of this document underlined says it all really - County Court unapproved judgement

Edited by TimetogoRAM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, but it is never the 'court' that send details from the other sides case..it is normally the respondent as party to a trial that would be ordered to disclose any documentary evidence it intends to rely upon.......(the court don't do it for either party) .... yet....we are seeing it is the 'tribunal' (court) sending out particular cases...they are not sending a 'bundle'.....the other side are not sending the 'bundle'.....we are not seeing an 'actual' objection......it is strange behaviour......

 

Ah well.... we haven't yet seen the case...we may not get to discuss it anyway....and if we can't discuss it.... then there is no point it having been sent out in the first place....

 

Surely...if they are looking to prepare both sides.... why not send the complete 'bundle' then... why are they sending it in bits and bobs??

 

Apple

 

Really strange behaviour. It's almost as if the Chamber are trying to put a stop to this.

I know the lender are definitely using tactics to put a stop to it...

 

I have again been copied in to a third email to the Chamber, which is again requesting more time to submit objections to the application.

 

What makes me laugh is that they mention requesting more time because the application has been stayed pending the outcome of similar applications and due to "the tight deadline" - what tight deadline? They've had plenty of time to submit objections.

 

I am still yet to receive any notification from my lender that they have instructed a solicitor - contrary to rule 14 (2)

They also again mention saving costs - which they would like to add will be added to the borrowers mortgage account - contrary to rule 13 (1)©

Edited by TimetogoRAM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Marika

 

If there is stuff you don't understand... you should let us know.....

 

I know GHAM has been posting up stuff to assist...but if it is not 'hitting the spot'....do advise...ok?

 

Apple

 

Thank you Apple will do

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2115 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
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...