Jump to content



Richard Durkin wins Supreme Court appeal – beware lenders!


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1495 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

Richard, I have tried to tweet just the post - but it will only post the thread because the url doesn't alter. I have included the post number in the tweet. Alternatively you would need for the post to be in a new thread of its own with a link back to this thread. ? If you would like me to do that, I can.

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb 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.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 144
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Richard, I have tried to tweet just the post - but it will only post the thread because the url doesn't alter. I have included the post number in the tweet. Alternatively you would need for the post to be in a new thread of its own with a link back to this thread. ? If you would like me to do that, I can.

 

Thanks CB, I think it's best to leave things as they are, all in one thread. It will be interesting if I manage to find justice after being originally rebuffed by the "supreme" Court.

 

Cheers,

 

Richard.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Hi Folks,

 

The local sheriff is seeking to deny justice by incorrectly applying res judicata.

 

He's allowed a motion to prevent new facts and evidence being heard.

 

His interlocutor and my intended appeal attached for those interested.

 

I'm getting very peeved at the injustice and judicial corruption that I am encountering.

 

Any tips on how I might modify the appeal?

 

Cheers,

 

Richard.

Edited by Durkin
Grammar
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure there is a great deal I can achieve by commenting on the substance. I just want to double check you are aware that restarting this litigation has resulted in you being ordered to pay the bank's legal costs. The reality is that the costs will increase if you proceed with this.

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

Thanks SP,

 

I can see the legal costs mounting while the injustice persists. I'm doing all that I can in the hope that it'll not be necessary to take the law into my own hands.

 

It is a fresh litigation. Entirely different from the prior litigation. Something the sheriff seems keen to overlook in favour of the (edit) bankers.

 

Cheers,

 

Richard

Edited by Andyorch
Removed potential defamatory comment
Link to post
Share on other sites

one area to consider adding that may be of interest is the human rights act re fair trial/hearing, if you feel that that would/could be applicable given what you have said? i dont know all the full circs, so just a poss suggestion. it is a complex area, that when invoked usually requires hearing. but, as has been said, costs are mounting?

toning down was a good idea :)

IMO

:-):rant:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

Hi Folks,

 

Here's the latest waffle from HSBC while they continue to deny us redress. Just in time for tomorrow's appeal.

 

Unbelievable what they get away with.

 

Let's hope the Sheriff Principal is bothered about justice. It's not so much of a lottery at this stage. They are (we survive) or they aren't (we're destroyed).

 

Cheers,

 

Richard.

Bank submissions 8 Feb 2016.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Best of luck for tomorrow, Richard

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb 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.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites
received today? nice of them to give you plenty of time on that!

all the best for tomorrow, richard.

 

Wonder if the sheriff will accept it at this late stage.

 

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

bring to the sheriffs attention as non competent due to lateness of submission, and poor submission tactics used by a firm of solicitors who should know better!>>> just a thought

:mad2::-x:jaw::sad:
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks.

 

It's just a written form of what I'll have to listen to at the hearing tomorrow.

 

Hopefully the sheriff won't use too much of it in their ruling.

 

I'm still working on my response to this drivel. Best to get things written down.

 

I'm keen not to delay things any longer. That's the bank's tactic.

 

Richard.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Hi Folks,

 

The Sheriff Principal in Aberdeen refused to allow me a hearing today not because of Res Judicata or Limitation but because of "Incoherent pleadings" and averments "lacking in specification".

 

Worryingly, he was unclear as to which of the new principles I was introducing included malice. He hadn't bothered to ask but it should be clear that malice persists in everything that the bank has exposed us too.

 

The sheriff seemed a tad peeved that I "accused" the higher judiiciary of dishonesty despite him having the evidence in front of him of excactly that!

 

It seems I'll need to start again with "coherent" pleadings and "specific averments".

 

I've attached a new claim. Please help with pleadings and suggest what might be inspecific in the averments.

 

Perhaps it's time to have a go in the Royal Courts of Justice?

 

Cheers,

 

Richard

Initial Writ 25 Feb 2016 no add.doc

Refusal to hear evidence 25 Feb 2016.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

Hi Folks,

 

I decided to appeal the Aberdeen sheriffs incoherence!

 

https://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/fp/news/local/man-back-in-court-over-laptop-costs-from-1998/

 

The sheriff ruled that my fresh case was "res judicata" (already decided), despite ruling that the fraud aspect wasn't.

 

The sheriff principal backed him up but also mentioned a few aspects of the case that weren't res judicata.

 

Neither interested in seeing justice done on their watch!

 

The judge in the Inner House did have the good grace to acknowledge that the earlier Inner House ruling was dubious but whether he'll grease the wheels of justice or slam on the brakes will be determined this summer.

 

Cheers,

 

Richard.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 8 months later...

Hi Folks,

 

They decided to slam on the brakes with more lies.

 

The dishonest judiciary in Scotland continues to refuse to protect the innocent party from injustice.

 

Human rights violations and continuing intentional harm completely poo-pooed.

 

How can completely different actions that happened after an earlier ruling possibly have been decided in the earlier ruling?

 

Could I have gone about the human rights violations differently? Do I really need to trot off to Europe to highlight the dishonesty

 

Parliament remains keen to protect the malfeasance and it seems that attitude needs to change before any of us will achieve justice and appropriate redress.

 

Cheers,

 

Richard.

Final_judgement_Dec_22 with comments.doc

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Richard

 

I have had to unapprove your upload as we simply cant risk carry this on the Forum in its current form..

 

If you could upload again without the comments.

 

Regards

 

Andyorch

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 OTHERS

 

 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
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...