Jump to content


Revisited civil claim ***Claim Discontinued ***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1023 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

Are you misunderstanding what we asked for? the claimant is the person or entity suing your friend, we dont need to know anything about the friend.

Reason for wanting to know this has been made but perhaps not fully. ONY THE PERSON WHO HAS SUFFERED THE LOSS MAY SUE so if a store then the store can sue. If the claimant is a third party (not to be confused with the solicitors acting for the claimant) then they dont have a right to do so (locus standi) so their claim will fail if this right to be in court is challenged.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Can you send me a message as a pm? I have had thoughts and discussion regarding one of my earlier posts that may have a better result than arguing about quantum for damages. You currently disallow people from mailiing you so I cant just drop it on you.

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

Quick update, after all that it went out in a bit of a whimper.

 

Witness statements sent within the prescribed time but nothing was received, then a notice of discontinuance arrived, thanks again @ericsbrother and for those interested the claimant was £££land

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thread title updated.

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

It's clear they used the court system in the hope they trip you up with cpr and win by default,

 

out of interest what would of happened if witness statements are not received within the prescribed time?

 

i could be wrong but i get the feeling they had no intention sending their witness statements and made a decision to quit based on the defence that was submitted, was it that they were never going to be able to prove such a loss for the so called case costs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I see it, no WS from the claimant would mean no evidence to challenge hence the respondent could ask for a strike out.

 

 

Can I ask, did any of the recovery companies (RLP/DWF et al) get involved or was this a direct action from the claimant? For the life of me, I cannot see why this store would have followed this action after the case from 2012

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

Claimant was CRS...not ££££££land ?

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
Claimant was CRS...not ££££££land ?

 

To make clear, £££land was the claimant, CRS was the provider of threatograms, they gave up after 5 letters, then 2 threatograms from £££lands solicitors before they issued the court claim.

 

ps the answer i gave was to this.

 

Can I ask, did any of the recovery companies (RLPicon/DWF et al) get involved or was this a direct action from the claimant? For the life of me, I cannot see why this store would have followed this action after the case from 2012

Link to post
Share on other sites

they did this because they were badly advised or encouraged to by either CRS or the solicitors. Once the push came to the shove the other parties will have hidden behind a wall and then said "that isnt what we advised you to say" when it clearly was. They were all hoping for a quick kill and when they got to see that it would be defended they cut their losses, which at this point would have been more than they could ever gain.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...