Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yes of course. That's why it says cc:: BIg Motoring World at the bottom. Don't imagine that this solves the issue. It doesn't. He not have to force the finance company and big motoring world to accept the rejection to give your money back. I suggest that you get the letter off tomorrow. And let us know what you hear but on Friday you should then send a threat to the finance company.   Have a look what I have said here about your options and read the whole thread as well.  
    • Been perusing the actual figures on the polls above wondering where the '16% claimed for deform comes from? I understand that there are 'weighted' end results based on secret calculations ...   Probably going to repeat this later, but remember that the ukip/brexit/reform/deform party has ALWAYS had poll speculation FAR better than their actual  performance at elections - by large margins. SO: The labor and Tory votes come largely from simply the people who say they will vote for them - sorted Lab 43% Tory 20%, with maybe another small 1-2% coming from the weightings of the 'not sures' Greens largely get what is declared from 'other' , although with another declared green bit from the 'pressed' question   So as the share of the voting displayed in 'other' granted to reform/deform is around 11%, where does the '16% too often being reported come from? Seems that reform has been granted as beneficiary of effectively ALL the don't knows and wont says, who when pressed didn't actually declare for someone else ... effectively adding 40%+ to their reported polling % - rather strange given their consistent under-performance compared to polling - or perhaps that is the cause of the higher rating eh?   Now I admit the possibility (probability?) of wingers being ashamed of declaring their support for the yuckey lemon end of the spectrum ... but surely  that should affect the 'Torys as well? Maybe the statisticians have simply weighted in that deform wingers are simply more likely to lie?   But - without 'weightings' and assumptions that faragits will get everything that isnt declared as a definite and unequivocal 'not that Piers Morgan' - reform is on around 11% it seems.   Add to that the and the history of polling a lot less than the hype - and the simple fact that faragit wingers seem to be spread across the country (presumably skulking in their moms spare room despite being 45+) and greens and lib dems seem to be community minded - I think two seats will be an epic result for farage. Hardly the opposition - far more raving wingnut party.   and importantly - Has farage got a home in clacton yet?
    • "as I have no tools available to merge documents, unless you can suggest any free ones that will perform offline merges without watermarking" (which you don't) ... but ok please upload the documents and we'll go from there
    • Please go back and read my message posted at 10:27 this morning @jk2054. I didn't say that I wasn't going to provide documents, only that I will upload them to an online repo that I am in control of, and that I would share links to these. You shall still be able to read and download them no different from if they were hosted here. And, the issue I have is not so much with hosting, but using an online pdf editor to create a multi-page pdf, again I have discussed this that same message.
    • Thanks ,DX, I'd forgpotton about that letter and can't remember sending a SB letter. I must have left it and they did not chase. Unclebulgia. Yes several periods of no contact. Think its time for the SB letter . 
  • 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

Erudio Claimform - Old Student Loans - poss Statute Barred.


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 135 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

the judge cant do that if you respond as told too

they have till xx date to file their skeleton, then you have to 7 days to retort it.

you'll be doing that by the looks of things so the judge cant complain.

job done and free!

 

just relax.

 

dx

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have dropped an email to the judge just to clarify if the next hearing is purely about their application for summary judgement or whether it will be a ruling on the whole case.

Nurselayer v Natwest - Settled in Full :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had an email from the court telling me it's inappropriate for the judge to speak to me out of court so that clears nothing up at all.

I'm wondering if I can fit "Vigilantibus non dormientibus seccurit lex" into any argument to repudiate any skeleton argument that they may put forward? In particular with regard to Maritius Shipping v Employment Relations Tribunal where I believe that the court ruled that whilst within time, the application had not been made sufficiently promptly?

I've still not amended my defence, although now I finally have the right forms. Do I need to put in the exact details if I amend my defence or can I just say something like "Due to not adhering to the requirements of the Consumer Credit Act this debt is unrecoverable"?

I'll be honest, this is affecting me hugely. I'm full of anxiety, I'm losing sleep about it and having this hanging over me is really affecting my life. 

Nurselayer v Natwest - Settled in Full :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks to me you cannot do anything until you receive their skeleton argument for you to do a rebuttal. 

 

Have you received the direction order from the court yet saying when the claimant has to send their skeleton argument to you?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I still haven't received anything from the court.

 

Talking of which, should I advise the court of dates that I'm unavailable for?

What happens if they schedule the hearing for a date when I'm away?

 

Nurselayer v Natwest - Settled in Full :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Open 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi folks, got a new hearing date of 30th October.

Have there been any new Doyle/Hart developments in the last few months? I have searched the forum but couldn't see anything relevant.

 

Nurselayer v Natwest - Settled in Full :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

not that ive seen.

dx

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hi folks,

Not to be too paranoid, but I'm a month away from the hearing date and there's stuff that I'd rather Drydens didn't know about the case that I'm going to put to the court.

I would imagine that if I put up specific details on here about what's been happening with my case to date it'd be easy for them to work out which case they refer to.  Please reassure me that this is very unlikely.

 

Nurselayer v Natwest - Settled in Full :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

in a nutshell so what?

we've never seen a case of posted stuff anon on a forum being used at a defendant losing.

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, here's where I'm at. 

Spoke to a free law advice clinic and they advised me to ask Drydens to consent to an amendment to my defence.  Wrote out the defence and a draft consent order and sent it to them with a deadline to reply. Got no response. Emailed them on the deadline day and got no response.

Got an N244 form and filled it in, sent it to both Drydens and Erudio but when I took it to the court I found that the court had closed 5 minutes before I got there.

Just as I was about to go to the court the next morning I got an email from them saying that they had signed the consent order.  The received date of the email was 6 days after the deadline I'd set.

The following day, when they must have received the N244 forms, my amended defence, and a claim for costs, I got an email saying that they would be fighting the N244 as they had replied to my email in time - they enclosed a copy of an email that was dated 6 days before I actually received it...it's almost as if they had just manually changed the date.

They also said that they'd replied in writing but to an "old" address - even though the address for reply had been clearly put on the form and has been the one that they've been sending all previous correspondence relating to the court case to. 

Funnily enough, I've not received this reply in writing, even though I have access to post at that address.  It's almost as if they had realised that I was going to go through with this and then were trying to backdate everything to make it look as if they had replied in time. 

No matter, I was able to tell them that I had fortunately not submitted the N244 to court and would instead submit the consent order.  They also offered a response to my amended defence and an offer to settle in advance of the court case.

They have accepted that they have been served with the Amended Defence and today I received a copy of the order from the court allowing it. I shall be sending this onto Drydens and Erudio on Monday morning.

I am minded to make an offer to settle in advance of the case.  I have a figure in mind that would be worth paying simply for my peace of mind. I would appreciate your input on how to make this Without Prejudice offer.

I'm fairly convinced that I will win at court but the amount that I'm going to offer, if accepted which I doubt it will be, is small enough that I can afford to pay it and won't even cover their initial court fee.  It would purely save me having to attend court and it would mean that this isn't hanging over me for another month. 

 

Nurselayer v Natwest - Settled in Full :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

i  would concur they appear to be on the back foot, as it stands with all you've been through, it would not have dragged on so far if drydens were so sure of their stance. they would have forced it through, they didnt..speaks volumes.

dx

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, say a case was stayed and then the solicitors submitted an N244 asking for an order that: 

1) For the defence to be struck out, and/or
2) Summary Judgement on the whole claim; and
3) A costs order against the defendant

But made no statement about requesting the stay be lifted, would that mean that they had done it wrong?


Scratch that...they made the request in the witness statement.

Nurselayer v Natwest - Settled in Full :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

:classic_cool: Ideally there should be directions attached to the application what the application is requesting.

 

 

.

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 OTHER

 

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

Does there have to be a reason for a delay for them to apply to lift a stay? 

I can see that there if a) the defence is that the amount has been paid or b) if it is not defended or admitted then the claimant MUST submit a reason for the delay, but I can't see where it deals with this if a defence has been submitted?

 

Nurselayer v Natwest - Settled in Full :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

The longer a claim is left stayed the more a legitimate genuine reason is required as to why when making said application. A judge would question why a claim was issued initially if the claimant wasn't ready to proceed once a defence was submitted and then make consideration whether to allow the application to proceed.

Claims have been issued in the past simply to stop the limitations clock and park the debt to stop it ever becoming statute barred.

Of course visa versa a defendant can make application to lift the stay (although unlikely) knowing that the claimant is not fully prepared to proceed with its claim for various reasons.

Stayed claims normally fall of the system after 3 years but I have seen older resurrected.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1

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 OTHER

 

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

I understand that, but from what I understand under Part 15 of the CPR link here - 

It says that in cases of a claim where either the amount has been admitted or not defended, or where it is claimed that the amount has been paid the claimant MUST submit a reason for the delay.  I can't see where it deals with claims where any other defence has been submitted.  I think the wording of "MUST" is important, which is why I'm asking.

 

Edited by Nurselayer

Nurselayer v Natwest - Settled in Full :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 09/10/2023 at 12:44, Nurselayer said:

MUST claimants declare the reason for a delay in their application for a stay to be lifted where a defence has been submitted?

Yes I've already previously stated. There cant be a stay if a defence has been filed unless the claimant didn't respond to proceed or one or either party have made an application to stay the claim.

 

 

.

 

 

.

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 OTHER

 

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

Ok, but there was a stay on my case after a defence was filed.  Here's the timeline - 

Early Jan 2020 Court proceedings issued against me through MCOL
Late Jan 2020 Defence Submitted
Then nothing happened and the case was posted as "stayed" on MCOL.
Then suddenly in June 2022 they applied for a lift on the stay.

Shouldn't the case have been struck out after they didn't respond to the defence after Jan 2020?

If you go back and look at Post 80 in this thread you can see me asking about it back in 2020...I think it's on Page 3.


 

Edited by Nurselayer

Nurselayer v Natwest - Settled in Full :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's only 2 years 5 months delay as per initial post I have seen stays in place up to 5 years then the claimant successfully applied (with reason) to lift the stay.

15 minutes ago, Nurselayer said:

Shouldn't the case have been struck out after they didn't respond to the defence after Jan 2020? No

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 OTHER

 

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

In your last post you said that "There cant be a stay if a defence has been filed."  

Can you direct me to where is says that they "MUST" give a reason for a delay where a defence has been filed?  


This would be very helpful if I can quote it in my WS when I go to court.

 

Nurselayer v Natwest - Settled in Full :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...