Settle f&fl or part 36? -help/advice

[ims21]

I have and nothing there!

 

No not you silly....The Mould

[jonji]

Heheheheheehe!!!

[jonji]

He's not very well he said! He's probably gone to bed! Never mind.......maybe tomorrow eh!

 

All these eager people awaiting a response too!! I was choking and laughing at the same time before after I had been checking my emails awaiting something to come through......was funny!

Edited November 14, 2013 by jonji
Addition

[The Mould]

Please check your e-mail

 

 

Thank you again ims21, will check my email and then send my response accordingly on the morrow.

 

Kind regards

 

The Mould

[The Mould]

Check in on you on the morrow jonji.

 

Not going to bed just yet, but soon will be, otherwise I might end up in the 'midnight club'. Check this club out, look up "wish me well" Halifax taking me to Court in these legal issues forum, this is from about 3 years ago, I hope you p*** yourself laughing at what we did to the Halifax.

 

Godzilla for now.

 

Kind regards

 

The Mould

[jonji]

I shall go now and have a look while I 'ave me cuppa before going to bed too!!

 

Hope you are feeling better in the morning too

[jonji]

Funny that Mouldy hehehe! Obviously couldn't be real .........gathering it's just a P**s take; couldn't possibly be real.........could it?????????

[The Mould]

Funny that Mouldy hehehe! Obviously couldn't be real .........gathering it's just a P**s take; couldn't possibly be real.........could it?????????

 

It was real and this case really helped me to make my mark on CAG!

 

What authorities is the Claimant relying upon and why?

 

Do not feel vulnerable as regards posting out here in the public domain. Seriously, do not worry about the Claimant or any of his spies. Concentrate on your SO application and the reasons and evidence and authorities that you have served in support thereof.

 

Unfortunately, the attempt at making contact under the supervision of the Site Team has not worked out, so please keep your posts out here in the public forum, you will find that by doing so, other CAG members will see your thread/case and they will post up their advice/help and support thereon if they are able to. Many hands make light work jonji, so please, do not feel that you must hide something away from "prying eyes", really, do not worry about the Claimant and his spies, if indeed he has any.

 

Kind regards

 

The Mould

[jonji]

Haha.......I didn't get to read it all but what I read was very funny. I shall read it to the end one day after all this has finished.

 

Spent today getting all my stuff in order so I can make a paginated file of my own! I am still doing that and probably finish it after tonight and the weekend. So many papers- and I found more in the old CAB file! Loads of scanning and printing to do because I lost some stuff on my old laptop last year. Had a load of messing at the start of the week trying to recover it. Think managed it all though and have hard copies anyway. Just knowing what's there and whats not by making up the file as I go along and checking it out! Sort of like revision too with all the reading.

 

Nothing really to report now I guess. My application is going to be looked at during the hearing re a strike out; amend my defence if their application to have their summary judgment application restored;my costs.

 

Letter today from court (oh so I did have something to report!). Just to say that my application was put before the judge yesterday and it has been placed on file to be considered at the hearing. Is that a good or bad thing?

 

Hey Mould, hope you are feeling better today

[Guest]

 

Letter today from court (oh so I did have something to report!). Just to say that my application was put before the judge yesterday and it has been placed on file to be considered at the hearing. Is that a good or bad thing?

 

 

as suggested prior, combined, and J has at an SJ hearing the power to strike out an SJ applicant.

Edited November 16, 2013 by Ford

[jonji]

So that is a good thing then Ford!

[Guest]

i don't think its a bad thing

depending on outcome, there may be the issue of costs to resolve but j should address that.

Edited November 15, 2013 by Ford

[The Mould]

Haha.......I didn't get to read it all but what I read was very funny. I shall read it to the end one day after all this has finished.

 

Spent today getting all my stuff in order so I can make a paginated file of my own! I am still doing that and probably finish it after tonight and the weekend. So many papers- and I found more in the old CAB file! Loads of scanning and printing to do because I lost some stuff on my old laptop last year. Had a load of messing at the start of the week trying to recover it. Think managed it all though and have hard copies anyway. Just knowing what's there and whats not by making up the file as I go along and checking it out! Sort of like revision too with all the reading.

 

Nothing really to report now I guess. My application is going to be looked at during the hearing re a strike out; amend my defence if their application to have their summary judgment application restored;my costs.

 

Letter today from court (oh so I did have something to report!). Just to say that my application was put before the judge yesterday and it has been placed on file to be considered at the hearing. Is that a good or bad thing?

 

Hey Mould, hope you are feeling better today

 

Read it all, I guarantee that it will make you cry withlaughter in the face of these robots and also prove to you that one personagainst an almighty army can indeed defeat and win against the same.

Be careful as regards making your own trial bundle, the Judge may considerthe same a rival bundle to which you have no permission to file and serve andhe may also consider that your bundle is taking a liberty and he may, therefore, consider the question of costs in favour ofthe Claimant in the light of your rival bundle, which may take up some time of the Court –possibly 1 or 2 hrs in deciding suchupon arguments/submissions made by both you parties on the same.

At the hearing, the Claimant will most definitely object toyour trial bundle!!!!. Which will have been filed and served without the Court’spermission and the Claimant’s agreement thereon, he will also argue that his skeleton argument has been prepared with his trial bundlewhich the Court Ordered him to prepare and file and serve at least 7 daysbefore the hearing of his SJ and your cross application to strike out.

Contact Claimant’s sols and requestservice of their clients’ trial bundle and the authorities that he relies upon in at least 7 days before the hearing of hissummary judgment application and your cross-application to strike out hisclaim.

Feeling a little bit better today, thank you jonji.

Kind regards

The Mould

[jonji]

Hi Mould........don't understand what you mean ????? I have asked for permission to rely on a further ws in response to their most recent. I have document that go with and are needed for that ws. As I have to serve and file seven days before a hearing, I have already done that. The file I am talking about in the quote above, is for my own benefit so all is in order.

 

Answer me this if you can please.......If the last order was to ask for permission to submit a further ws and the other side did ask permission and then produced a witness statement, wouldn't I need to do another ws in response? Hence the reason I asked for permission via letter to DJ. In order for the other side to get this within the timescale, I had to post it off in time along with documents relied on. Which I have.

I am getting confused with it all as the other side are witness statement happy!

If the order says we can rely on our previous WS's does that mean that I can just bring them up OR do I have to include them in a NEW WS????????? See I am getting very confused!!!!

[steampowered]

I imagine the witness statement would have accompanied their N244 to revive the SJ application. Have a look at whether the date of the statement and the date of the N244 are the same.

 

If your previous WS has already been filed at court then of course you can rely on it at the hearing.

 

With these things it is more important to focus on being ready to explain the merits of your case to the judge (and make sure you have the documents together - such as transcripts of any case law you are relying on) rather than focussing too much on the procedure. It was improper of the other side to put a bunch of extra information in their application to revive the SJ, but ultimately this should not affect the merits of the judge's decision.

 

WS are primarily designed for factual issues. It doesn't sound like there are any new facts since the previous version. If you are wanting to raise new legal points or address the points in their WS, I suggest that shortly before the hearing you file with court and serve on the other side a skeleton argument which concisely sets out the legal arguments you intend to make in court.

[jonji]

Thank you steampowered for that. So I CAN rely on ws's and documents that are already filed from the previous hearings. Do they not need to be in my last witness statement then? Maybe I need to find some legal representative for this hearing. They always have a barrister and I am a litigant in person!

[steampowered]

No, if you put lots of documents which duplicate each other on the court file the judge will be annoyed. Just make sure the judge has the right documents at the start of the hearing.

[The Mould]

Hi Mould........don't understand what you mean ????? I have asked for permission to rely on a further ws in response to their most recent. I have document that go with and are needed for that ws. As I have to serve and file seven days before a hearing, I have already done that. The file I am talking about in the quote above, is for my own benefit so all is in order.

 

Answer me this if you can please.......If the last order was to ask for permission to submit a further ws and the other side did ask permission and then produced a witness statement, wouldn't I need to do another ws in response? Hence the reason I asked for permission via letter to DJ. In order for the other side to get this within the timescale, I had to post it off in time along with documents relied on. Which I have.

I am getting confused with it all as the other side are witness statement happy!

If the order says we can rely on our previous WS's does that mean that I can just bring them up OR do I have to include them in a NEW WS????????? See I am getting very confused!!!!

 

As regards the first paragraph of yourabove post, in the ordinary course ofcivil procedure progress, where a party has made an application, whateverthat application may be made for, the other party has a right to respond to suchapplication.

However, in your case, the Claimant has made an app for SJ and he hasasked that the Court imposes a condition upon you, that being, that the Court has ordered that you requireits permission to file and serve your WS in response to Claimant’s SJ app.

As to the second paragraph of your abovepost, if the order states that you canrely upon any previous WS, then of course you can rely upon any suchprevious WS filed and served by you, thiswould be in addition to your cross-application seeking strike out of Claimant’scase and all matters relied upon in support thereof by you.

Can you please post up the Claimant’ssummary judgment application and his WS served in support thereof, and the authorities upon which he relies –minus all personal details.

Kind regards

The Mould

[jonji]

Hi Mould.....the SJ application stuff is on post #70 above. The WS is 40 plus paragraphs and is basically going through the whole case from start to finish.

 

Thanks

[The Mould]

Hi Mould.....the SJ application stuff is on post #70 above. The WS is 40 plus paragraphs and is basically going through the whole case from start to finish.

 

Thanks

 

Invaliddefault notice served – as admitted by Claimant, his claim cannot proceed incontravention of statute – period. The Court of Appeal qualified this fact of lawin the Brandon case.

Claim isover and must be struck out. You are not liable for Claimant’s costs as hiscase was bad in law. You must keep on respectfully referringthe trial judge’s attention to these irrefutable facts, regardless of Claimant’scontentions. He has admitted that he has not complied withhis obligations imposed upon him under s.87(1) CCA 1974 (as amended), therefore, he is not entitled to proceed to enforce theagreement that he terminated in reliance of service of an invalid statutory default notice!

Keep on arguing s.87(1) CCA 1974(as amended), Claimant’s admission that he failed to comply with his statutoryduty thereunder and the successful Brandon v American Express case decided bythe Court of Appeal.

Kindregards

TheMould

[jonji]

Thank you TM for your enthusiasm and sorry I haven't responded sooner. Not been too well myself for a few days.

 

Called the court earlier to see what the time allocation is for the hearing.......well, what was two and a half hour is now only fifteen minutes..........G U L P!! (They have probably already made up their minds what the outcome will be).

Not sure if that is a good thing or a bad thing! Hope it's the end of it whatever! It's really taking it's toll on me now.

Actually thinking of trying to get some legal representation as I don't feel up to it the way I am at the moment!

 

Regards,

 

Jonji

[The Mould]

Thank you TM for your enthusiasm and sorry I haven't responded sooner. Not been too well myself for a few days.

 

Called the court earlier to see what the time allocation is for the hearing.......well, what was two and a half hour is now only fifteen minutes..........G U L P!! (They have probably already made up their minds what the outcome will be).

Not sure if that is a good thing or a bad thing! Hope it's the end of it whatever! It's really taking it's toll on me now.

Actually thinking of trying to get some legal representation as I don't feel up to it the way I am at the moment!

 

Regards,

 

Jonji

 

It might be the case that in the light of your SO application and the Court of Appeal's authority handed down in the Brandon case, that the Court will hold in your favour on the invalid DN issue and therefore strike out the claim as it cannot continue in contravention of the above stated higher authority and statute. (s.87(1) CCA 1974 (as amended).

 

Kind regards

 

The Mould

[mjt2013]

I wouldn't get too carried away, they've probably just block listed it with a standard time estimate. I would not take the time estimate as an indication that anyone has made their mind up.

[jonji]

Hi TM......and if they don't and their application get them summary judgment, what happens then? Do I appeal? Would I have to pay up there and then- even before an appeal could take place?

 

 

Hi mjt2013........I haven't got carried away (don't believe in counting my chickens before they hatch). I don't think it has been 'block listed' though as the last court order stated a time for next hearing as 2.5 hours! This has now been listed for a fifteen minute hearing late in afternoon!

 

 

Regards

[jonji]

Can someone let me know what the process is when you change from a litigant in person to being represented in court. Do you need to let the courts and the other side know?

 

Regards