Solicitor/negligence claim:

[BazzaS]

Stop putting yourself down Barry:-D:-D:-D

 

Your areas of skill, knowledge and expertise, far outweigh any negatives that you have experienced in life.

 

Bazza (or Dave, apparently), please.

 

Yes, I do view my areas of skill, knowledge and expertise as making up for those areas I don't claim to be skillful in.

I've met a few people I'd class as polymaths, but most of us have to accept we have areas of strength and areas of weakness.

The key is in having insight into them, maximising your strengths and seeking help for the areas you are less strong in.

 

With 2 struck out claims (and no reports of success), would you classify "civil litigation" as an area of strength for you?

[callum1999]

Bazza (or Dave, apparently), please.

 

Yes, I do view my areas of skill, knowledge and expertise as making up for those areas I don't claim to be skillful in.

I've met a few people I'd class as polymaths, but most of us have to accept we have areas of strength and areas of weakness.

The key is in having insight into them, maximising your strengths and seeking help for the areas you are less strong in.

 

With 2 struck out claims (and no reports of success), would you classify "civil litigation" as an area of strength for you?

 

But having two claims struck and base on how or how they were achieved, one for not receiving notification, the other based on a perversion of facts, if after taking on board both facts, it has nothing to do not have any strength as to litigate a case, quite the reverse, unless you want me to be held accountable for the actions of others.

 

The facts were there, and will always be there for me to have a jolly good chance of winning, if the solicitors and the courts want to scatter to conceal that evidence, as i have correctly pointed out, yday hearing and the judgement had already been made, before i entered that court, it was fairly obvious, we all knew that, including you.

[callum1999]

So, bearing in mind how I have spoken to you, you'll stop helping?.

 

Too true. You certainly haven't helped people to give you better advice by your refusal to answer (relevant) questions, and you certainly haven't seemed to help yourself overall.

That is 2 claims (PI against the council, the negligence claim against the solicitor) you've had struck out now.

 

You might (at the start of the process) have had a faint possibility of a successful claim against the solicitor, if carefully pleaded and case undertaken with care, whilst following the CPR. It's difficult to be certain though, with the rambling irrelevancies you reply with, and your presentation of defeat as some sort of victory.

 

Yes you were right in your prediction the case was going to be struck out. I'm just not sure being self-celebratory about it shows insight: due to the way you have presented yourself in the thread, it was the likely result (of a self-fulfilling prophesy!).

 

You might (for example) have sought disclosure of the contract / retainer details (that you apparently) so desperately seek under CPR 31.16 before you started proceeding - but you instead jumped in with a shambolic PofC, which got struck out.

 

As for:

 

 

I'm not sure how making an application that wasn't ruled on, and won't be ruled on as the case was struck out counts as a "master stroke" - but that will probably be just another area we disagree on,

 

It was ruled on, and dismissed, the reason-s, because of the reasons giving to strike out.

 

This however, after i politely reminded the judge that he was going to deal with my application, which i reminded him that he said he would deal with the application, which he duly obliged and gave reasons for dismissing.

 

So that now takes it up to four applications that i have made which have either been ignored or dismissed, a quite remarkable achievement when you consider the courts jumped through hoops to accommodate the other-sides one application, and just like magic, its successful........

[callum1999]

Just looking at the Draft Order for directions, which was agreed by the High Court, as proposed by the Defendants, for a less senior Court/Judge to consider, the claim.

 

Can someone please explain why my propose directions were not considered?, but the Defendants were accepted.

[SuperVillain]

Just looking at the Draft Order for directions, which was agreed by the High Court, as proposed by the Defendants, for a less senior Court/Judge to consider, the claim.

 

Can someone please explain why my propose directions were not considered?, but the Defendants were accepted.

 

They most likely were considered but maybe the Judge looking at them simply preferred the Defendant's version. The purpose of directions is case management and the Judge might consider one of the proposals, a mix of both or neither - whichever best manages the case...

[BazzaS]

They most likely were considered but maybe the Judge looking at them simply preferred the Defendant's version. The purpose of directions is case management and the Judge might consider one of the proposals, a mix of both or neither - whichever best manages the case...

 

Absolutely!

"Didn't get his way" doesn't mean "submission made wasn't considered".

We don't know the relative case loads between the county court & high court, and the OP hasn't told us the basis on which his submission that this should be heard in the High Court was made.

 

From value alone it could have been heard in either. If the other side made persuasive submissions and the OP didn't : not surprising it went to the County Court.

(In the same way they got a strike out : it doesn't mean the court had made its mind up in advance - it could reflect they had a strong argument, well presented, and you had (at best) a debatable case, which (based on your presentation of postings in this thread) could have been presented in an illogical and rambling manner with an inherent misunderstanding / misapplication of the law)

[SuperVillain]

Absolutely!

"Didn't get his way" doesn't mean "submission made wasn't considered".

We don't know the relative case loads between the county court & high court, and the OP hasn't told us the basis on which his submission that this should be heard in the High Court was made.

 

From value alone it could have been heard in either. If the other side made persuasive submissions and the OP didn't : not surprising it went to the County Court.

(In the same way they got a strike out : it doesn't mean the court had made its mind up in advance - it could reflect they had a strong argument, well presented, and you had (at best) a debatable case, which (based on your presentation of postings in this thread) could have been presented in an illogical and rambling manner with an inherent misunderstanding / misapplication of the law)

 

I don't know even know what the value is, I got from page 1 to 12 of this thread and it all started blurring into one...

[BazzaS]

I don't know even know what the value is, I got from page 1 to 12 of this thread and it all started blurring into one...

 

The OP never defined it clearly, but when forced to (by the court papers) said "more than £25k", but didn't say "more than 50k".

 

The OP did later say he would just submit a new claim for breach of contract (the contract he is vociferously arguing never existed!?!) and put a figure of loss claimed such that it would be heard in the High Court ..... but he then listened to the advice that that would be plain foolish....

[BazzaS]

It was ruled on, and dismissed, the reason-s, because of the reasons giving to strike out.

 

This however, after i politely reminded the judge that he was going to deal with my application, which i reminded him that he said he would deal with the application, which he duly obliged and gave reasons for dismissing.

 

So that now takes it up to four applications that i have made which have either been ignored or dismissed, a quite remarkable achievement when you consider the courts jumped through hoops to accommodate the other-sides one application, and just like magic, its successful........

 

Maybe they choose their applications with care, formulate them carefully, follow the CPR, and are just generally more persuasive?

 

But hang on : the application was heard and dismissed?

Just as well i got the application in before the claim was struck out, a master stroke:lol:

 

Icing on the cake.

 

Getting an application heard and dismissed is 'some sort of victory', "a master stroke" and "Icing on the cake"?

That is on a par with "the war situation has developed not necessarily to Japan's advantage"!

https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/hirohito.htm

 

Blimey, how bad does it have to get before you don't see it as a victory / that you aren't the world's greatest litigator??

[callum1999]

They most likely were considered but maybe the Judge looking at them simply preferred the Defendant's version. The purpose of directions is case management and the Judge might consider one of the proposals, a mix of both or neither - whichever best manages the case...

 

OK thanks for that,, appreciated.

 

The same High Court judge, and after considering my POC and the defence, stated that the case was suitable for multi-track.

 

What is striking is that a Master of the High Court having considered the POC and the defence clearly saw a different case to by far a less qualified judge who knew better.

[callum1999]

Maybe they choose their applications with care, formulate them carefully, follow the CPR, and are just generally more persuasive?

 

But hang on : the application was heard and dismissed?

 

 

Getting an application heard and dismissed is 'some sort of victory', "a master stroke" and "Icing on the cake"?

Blimey, how bad does it have to get before you don't see it as a victory / that you aren't the world's greatest litigator??

 

And you most certainly are nowhere near that level either, don't give up the day job.???

 

The fact that that court/judge dismissed my application for the other-side to proof the contract just adds to all the evidence now stacking up, their barristers face when the order was to be considered, he went the colours of the rainbow.

[BazzaS]

OK thanks for that,, appreciated.

 

The same High Court judge, and after considering my POC and the defence, stated that the case was suitable for multi-track.

 

What is striking is that a Master of the High Court having considered the POC and the defence clearly saw a different case to by far a less qualified judge who knew better.

 

Which High Court judge?

A Master of the High Court isn't the same as "A High Court judge", so your case may never have been seen by a High Court judge, only a Master.

 

The Masters deal with administrative issues, not the actual trial of a case in the High Court. Unless an application for summary judgment was made, the Master would have had to consider only where to allocate it, how do you know they considered the merits of the case in any detail?

[callum1999]

OK thanks for that,, appreciated.

 

The same High Court judge, and after considering my POC and the defence, stated that the case was suitable for multi-track.

 

What is striking is that a Master of the High Court having considered the POC and the defence clearly saw a different case to by far a less qualified judge who knew better.

 

The reason and the pleading used to shift the case, was based on where both parties live, very odd.

[SuperVillain]

What is striking is that a Master of the High Court having considered the POC and the defence clearly saw a different case to by far a less qualified judge who knew better.

 

You can't help which Judge you get, that's the way it works for us all. But just because a Judge is less qualified doesn't necessarily make their decisions wrong.

[BazzaS]

And you most certainly are nowhere near that level either, don't give up the day job.???

 

Which level is that?

You don't know my level, profession or day job, do you?

[BazzaS]

The reason and the pleading used to shift the case, was based on where both parties live, very odd.

 

That (due to the costs implications) is indeed one of the factors considered.

 

However, you don't actually know the rationale for the decision : you've picked up on one possible factor. There may have been others.

 

I asked you on this thread what reasons you felt there were that it should have stayed in the High Court : you couldn't give a logical, reasoned answer. If you did the same in your input to the directions process - no wonder the other side got their way.

[BazzaS]

The fact that that court/judge dismissed my application for the other-side to proof the contract just adds to all the evidence now stacking up, their barristers face when the order was to be considered, he went the colours of the rainbow.

 

How was their face a few moments later when your application was dismissed?

How was it when your claim was struck out?

 

Again, you are claiming "victory" when you have suffered a loss ....

[callum1999]

Which High Court judge?

A Master of the High Court isn't the same as "A High Court judge", so your case may never have been seen by a High Court judge, only a Master.

 

The Masters deal with administrative issues, not the actual trial of a case in the High Court. Unless an application for summary judgment was made, the Master would have had to consider only where to allocate it, how do you know they considered the merits of the case in any detail?

 

So what you are saying is that a Master would never consider a case for professional negligence, they just allocate the case.

 

He did, multi track, after considering the merits of the case.

 

In fact, he could have thrown the claim out, but evidently saw a different case as to the district judge, yday, no suprises there.

[callum1999]

That (due to the costs implications) is indeed one of the factors considered.

 

However, you don't actually know the rationale for the decision : you've picked up on one possible factor. There may have been others.

 

I asked you on this thread what reasons you felt there were that it should have stayed in the High Court : you couldn't give a logical, reasoned answer. If you did the same in your input to the directions process - no wonder the other side got their way.

 

Let me ask you a question, requesting a case being moved because the two parties share the same post-code, i would call that a lottery, and most certainly not in the interest of justice.

 

Why should have stayed in the High Court, because it was a complex case where all the evidence should have been considered, add to that fraud, the case was to big for that judge yday, he was out of his depth, and technically conducted a full trial based on evidence only he considered relevant, one side.

 

I would have thought if a judge suspected one party to be in the slightest bit swayed to tell the court a pack of lies, making sure there contract was in order would have been top of his list, this one was told there was no proof of funding, made no difference, his mind was made up, anotherone who abused that little bit of power that they strive half their lifes trying to get.

[callum1999]

How was their face a few moments later when your application was dismissed?

How was it when your claim was struck out?

 

Again, you are claiming "victory" when you have suffered a loss ....

 

Who is claiming victory, i have not suffered a loss at all, quite the reverse.

 

The other-side have now played all their cards, and took all those risks, this time, in court.

 

Again, you have mis-read, the barrister went the colours of the rainbow when he knew the application was to be considered, and not after it was consider, do keep up.

[SuperVillain]

Why should have stayed in the High Court, because it was a complex case where all the evidence should have been considered, add to that fraud, the case was to big for that judge yday, he was out of his depth, and technically conducted a full trial based on evidence only he considered relevant, one side.

 

I would have thought if a judge suspected one party to be in the slightest bit swayed to tell the court a pack of lies, making sure there contract was in order would have been top of his list, this one was told there was no proof of funding, made no difference, his mind was made up, anotherone who abused that little bit of power that they strive half their lifes trying to get.

 

 

Were the issues that complex though?

 

From what I read, the solicitors were instructed on a housing repair matter, you asked them to reserve your position to make a connected PI claim. Unclear whether or not they did this, but either way, the limitation period for the PI claim was missed hence your allegation of professional negligence. They are disputing they were negligent in not issuing the PI claim by saying they weren't instructed to do that.

 

Am I oversimplifying?

 

The fraud allegation was baffling tbh...

[SuperVillain]

From what I read, the solicitors were instructed on a housing repair matter, you asked them to reserve your position to make a connected PI claim. Unclear whether or not they did this, but either way, the limitation period for the PI claim was missed hence your allegation of professional negligence. They are disputing they were negligent in not issuing the PI claim by saying they weren't instructed to do that.

 

By the way if this is right, I would have been tempted (depending how out of time you were) to find solicitors prepared to issue the PI claim out of time and apply to exclude the limitation period under s33 Limitation Act. Easier to have the limitation argument at Court against the Council, rather than the professional negligence argument at Court against your solicitors/their insurers.

 

I know, hindsight is a wonderful thing...

[BazzaS]

So what you are saying is that a Master would never consider a case for professional negligence, they just allocate the case.

 

He did, multi track, after considering the merits of the case.

 

In fact, he could have thrown the claim out, but evidently saw a different case as to the district judge, yday, no suprises there.

 

"Could have thrown the case out" doesn't mean they even considered the issue. You don't actually know (given there was no CPR 24.2 application) whether it was considered by them, or allocated without them considering its merits in any detail.

[BazzaS]

By the way if this is right, I would have been tempted (depending how out of time you were) to find solicitors prepared to issue the PI claim out of time and apply to exclude the limitation period under s33 Limitation Act. Easier to have the limitation argument at Court against the Council, rather than the professional negligence argument at Court against your solicitors/their insurers.

 

I know, hindsight is a wonderful thing...

 

He wasn't just out of time.

Callum had issued the PI claim against the council in time (before this form of solicitors was involved). It had been struck out and the strike out hadn't been appealed.......

[SuperVillain]

He wasn't just out of time.

Callum had issued the PI claim against the council in time (before this form of solicitors was involved). It had been struck out and the strike out hadn't been appealed.......

 

Oh ok got ya, cheers.