Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • If that was the reason then that is good news. The whole reason that being able to charge £100 for breaching private car park rules is because the law Lords decided in a celebrated case that the rogues had a legitimate interest in keeping their car park spaces available for all motorists . {parking Eye v Beavis]. However when the business is closed then there is no legitimate interest in keeping spaces free so to charge £100 is a penalty. As such any Court would automatically throw out the case when the penalty charge is accepted.
    • gives them a feeling of grandeur. dx  
    • yep they can be a bit like the TV licencing lot. for 4yrs ive been getting a series of about 8-10 diff letters that just go round a loop. currently upto 61
    • thread tidied. new thread for the court claim is here  
    • new thread created for this claimform please post here now for anything to do with it now . pop up on the bulk court website detailed on the claimform. [if it is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] . When you select ‘Register’, you will be taken to a screen titled ‘Sign in using Government Gateway’. Choose ‘Create sign in details’ to register for the first time. You will be asked to provide your name, email address, set a password and a memorable recovery word. You will be emailed your Government Gateway 12-digit User ID. You should make a note of your memorable word, or password as these are not included in the email.  then log in to the bulk court Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform . defend all leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit the website .. get a CCA Request running to the claimant . https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/332502-cca-request-consumer-credit-act-1974-updated-january-2015/ .. Leave the £1 PO unsigned and uncrossed . get a CPR  31:14  request running to the solicitors [if one is not listed send to the claimant] ... https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/332546-legal-cpr-3114-request-request-for-information-when-a-claim-has-been-issued/ . .use our other CPR letter if the claim is for an OD or Telecom Debt or Util debt]  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/332546-legal-cpr-3114-request-request-for-information-when-a-claim-has-been-issued/ on BOTH type your name ONLY Do Not sign anything .do not ever use or give an email . you DO NOT await the return of ANY paperwork  you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform [1 in the count] ..............  
  • 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

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


jonji
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3778 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 247
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

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

 

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 by jonji
Addition
Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

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 by Ford
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 by Ford
Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

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!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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! :-(

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...