Jbw Enforcement Ltd !!!!!won!!!!!!!

[Bailiffchaser]

What do you think is actually going on ? Are they just picking bits off or are they stalling for time ?

[MARTIN3030]

Right what they are referring to is the protocol for if it is a claim issued thorught the high court. So it does not make sense at all. As forthe complaining i will log this with the law society and also will be producing this in court as the law firm have forgotten one thing !!!! without prejudice!!!!!!!!!

 

 

Baliffchaser this is not set in stone.The fact that the latest or last communications that you have from them is not clearly headed without predjudice does not automatically allow for it be be used in your favour.

Earler communications can also reflect this as can discretion.there is also something known as priviledge which can also enter the frame.

[hagenuk]

We spent 45 mins at the court filing counter with a huge queue assembling at the back of us. The young girl was trying to tell us that we needed to fill in a pre action form. We knew from information on this site that we should NOT file this form. She kept going to ask colleagues who were sat at their desks, and we could hear some of them saying "well if they dont know which form they need to fill in, how do they think we should know". None of them had any idea. We explicitly told her we wanted to file for non compliance of S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) request and compensation at the judge's discretion. She gave us the form and said, it wasnt at the judge's discretion and we had to choose an amount we wanted to claim and pay extra on a rising scale depending on how much compensation we wanted to claim. The paper cost £150 to file and £30 extra to claim £300 compensation. The claim for compensation went up to as much as £400 just to claim a few hundred more.

 

These people in the courts just dont know what they are doing.

 

Hi

 

It is important to realise that many County Courts are not familiar with the Data Protection Act and claims for non-compliance.

 

You should make this claim using an N1 form. Look here for details.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/6971-data-protection-act-non.html

 

I have done four such claims and each time used an N1 and the cost was £30 only.

[MARTIN3030]

Further to my last post......here is something you may find interesting and of course explains in greater detail what I was saying.

 

Without Prejudice.

“Without Prejudice” documents (which are also “Privileged” documents) are those documents that relate to all negotiations genuinely aimed at a settlement between the parties.

Any communications which are intended to be part of a genuine settlement attempt should be clearly marked “Without Prejudice” at the top of the letter.

The courts have held, however, that the principle of “Privilege” can protect subsequent and even previous letters in the same chain of correspondence. Strictly speaking, therefore, it is not necessary that every letter be marked “Without Prejudice” if it is clear that the communication is intended to be part of the settlement negotiations.

The converse of this being that, just because documents are marked “Without Prejudice”, unless they are intended to be part of a genuine settlement attempt they will not actually enjoy “Privileged” status and they will not be protected from disclosure.

“Without Prejudice” correspondence remains “Privileged” even after a compromise has been reached and is generally inadmissible in any subsequent litigation on the same subject matter whether between the same or different parties. However, where the negotiations are successful and the “Without Prejudice” correspondence constitutes a binding contract the correspondence may be produced to prove that such a contract has been entered into (if, say, one party does not comply with the terms of the settlement, and the other wishes to enforce it). (Ref: Rush & Tompkins v Greater London Council (Court of Appeal) 21 December 1987).

[Bailiffchaser]

Then why is it despite us being legit and so on by sending the sar and then the lba etc and after that the summons which are not replied to and then bailiffs move in do people start putting in applications to set aside ? Especially major big companies ?

[stan5131]

Hi

 

It is important to realise that many County Courts are not familiar with the Data Protection Act and claims for non-compliance.

 

You should make this claim using an N1 form. Look here for details.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/6971-data-protection-act-non.html

 

I have done four such claims and each time used an N1 and the cost was £35 only.

 

 

Hagen, It WAS a N1 form. I downloaded the form and filled in before going to file. I used poc as per alanfromderby on this site and they still insisted it was £180 even though I told them it should be £35.

[hagenuk]

Hagen, It WAS a N1 form. I downloaded the form and filled in before going to file. I used poc as per alanfromderby on this site and they still insisted it was £180 even though I told them it should be £35.

 

I think the problem arises because the Court staff are unused to this type of claim.

 

They doubtless had you file it as a Pre Action Disclosure under CPR Part 31 or a claim under CPR Part 8 and not a simple money claim. Both of these other options attract higher court fees.

 

It is possible that your court will not have seen one of these claims and therefore it is important to stress that the Information Commissioner has indicated that these claims are to be treated as Small Claims Track - and the fee will be £30. Do not let them give you any other forms to complete.

[Bailiffchaser]

It easeir if you post the summons in to court with the relevant fee or exemption form. As obviously you can point out under which section you would like the claim to be issued.

[Bailiffchaser]

Here is the link to the reply to my complaint to the office of fair trading what do you make of this ?

 

link here :bailiffchaser/OFFICE OF FAIR TRADING JBW ENFORCEMENT COMPLAINT - Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

 

DOUBLE CLICK TO ENLARGE PICTURES

[Bailiffchaser]

If anybody wants to attend the application hearing by jbw to have the judgement set aside then you are all welcome at medway county court

high street chatham kent me4 4dw at 12.30pm on monday the 5th of feburary 2007. recieved notification on friday for this.

[Glenn UK]

Hagen, It WAS a N1 form. I downloaded the form and filled in before going to file. I used POC as per alanfromderby on this site and they still insisted it was £180 even though I told them it should be £35.

 

i think you'll find the reason is not the form, but the way you fill it in, if you fill it in and put some damages on the form then it becomes [for fee purposes] a money claim and the fee level is determined by the level of damages sought.

 

If however, you don't put any damages on it it becomes something else and the fee is the £180.

 

When i filed for non-compliance i put a fiver's worth of damages down and the fee was £30.

 

FWIW i had the same problem with my Court not understanding it and i had to insist that i was doing it right, they took it and i now have the data i wanted.

 

HTH

 

Glenn

[Glenn UK]

I'm not sure which post it was but someone was asking about the issue of the data controller claiming they haven't cashed the cheque and using this for a reason not to process a valid S.A.R - (Subject Access Request).

 

FWIW I don't believe the data controller on whom the S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) is legitimately served can not cash the cheque and use that as an excuse for not supplying data.

 

I don't think the act actually makes that point, if it doesn't i have missed it. Logically i cannot see a court falling for that, all the act says is that you have to apply in writing and that the data controller has RECEIVED the fee.

 

If they receive it then they have been served, and whilst they may argue they never received it because they didn't cash the cheque, the act doesn't say they have to bank the fee only receive it.

 

HTH

 

Glenn

[Bailiffchaser]

I have recieved a letter today advising of change of solicitor. It now turns out that the md of jbw enforcement will be or one several of the main staff will be at medway county court for the hearing to set an application aside. Anybody has any qualms show up and speak to the rep from jbw enforcement ltd there and then !!! the hearing is at medway county court

anchorage house

high street

chatham kent me4 4dw

it is scheduled for 12.30 pm.

[Bailiffchaser]

the director himself mr j waller will be in to defend his company on monday at 12.30 pm. anybody want to meet him personally come along.

[Bailiffchaser]

Judgement has been set aside as the companies director has claimed that the companies registered address had changed last week of november -and companies house details were not updated due to the delay. hence they did not recieved the claim form etc. they also deny recieving the sar even though they were sent 2 copies. Then why has not the data comissioners database been updated yet ? travel costs have been allowed only for this hearing.

[half ax I]

You would have thought that any reputable company would ensure that they have the Post Office redirect their mail when they move. Just think of all those important communications that wouldn't get to you such as all the cheques that people are paying them. A Judge accepted that lame excuse.:o

[Bailiffchaser]

Trust me ther is more going on in the background. however i have checked several reliable sources and can confirm that certain things are not correct.

[Bailiffchaser]

Just a quick. I should be soon in the near future brining you a exclusive. i cannot comment on what it is but if confirmed then it will be a spectacular thing. will update when it happens.

[Bailiffchaser]

search for my name on any of the search engines and courtesy of me they will come up with loads of threads.

[The Lantana]

Bad luck Bailiffchaser. When you did the Companies House search did it confirm the date of change of the registered office?

 

Regards

 

Lantana

[Bailiffchaser]

Because of obvious ongoing litigation i cannot confirm or make a comment of any sort.

[Bailiffchaser]

Right i cannot obviously write things on here without them actually being censored so here is my blogg have a read and make use of my links.

bailiffchaser vs jbw enforcement ltd: jbw enforcement ltd judgement

[Bailiffchaser]

Bad luck Bailiffchaser. When you did the Companies House search did it confirm the date of change of the registered office?

 

Regards

 

Lantana

 

 

Thanks for pointing me nothing has shown in the companies house website.

[The Lantana]

If Companies House is still showing the address you used as being their registered office, then presumably you've got them. Why not enquire with Companies House about how long it takes them to process a change of registered address - by checking this out you may expose JBW.

 

It may be that JBW are telling the truth.

[itsamomentintime]

Just a quick. I should be soon in the near future brining you a exclusive. i cannot comment on what it is but if confirmed then it will be a spectacular thing. will update when it happens.

 

any updates BC?