Taking Cabot to court for failing to supply HSBC CCA + Distress etc

[tbern123]

thanks, I am learning as I go....

 

But shouldn't I have been sent a A&Q ?

[elizabeth1]

thanks, I am learning as I go....

 

But shouldn't I have been sent a A&Q ?

 

 

Tbern I am not sure - but am sure you should have an opportunity to reply to their "new defence" - not sure if it would be another AQ type form though.

 

If they have amended their POC's / AQ - there would be a hearing for directions to follow that? - I am sure that's where your opportunity to reply comes in.

[debt_mountain]

thanks, I am learning as I go....

 

But shouldn't I have been sent a A&Q ?

Tbern

 

I have 2 cases where a revised POC was filed.

 

First the bank of scoltand. I changed these without the banks agreements and I was called to court to discuss them and help the judge understand what track they should follow. The judge decided if the ammended POC was ok and the other party got to argue against sections they wanted struck out. I did not do a new AQ for this and we are off to court in 6 weeks time.

 

 

My second claim was Cabot which I did agree the ammended POC with them before it went to court and do not have to do an AQ.

 

Doesn't really help you but shows anything can happen. If you have done an AQ before, then it may be worth just sending in the new version with a cover letter. May help sway the judge to the track you want.

[tbern123]

A little question for you legal eagles.

 

Are there any restrictions in relation to who can file a defence on behalf of a defendant ?

 

Can anyone sign the statement of truth ???

[Guest Battleaxe]

The defence should be filed by the Senior Legal person of the company concerned.

 

Statement of Truth should be the same person.

 

It can be signed by the Company Secretary.

 

Correct me if I am wrong, and I am only doing a paralegal course, so it doesn't make me a qualified legal eagle.

[tbern123]

Thanks BA

 

What I was trying to ask in a cryptic way was, can someone that works for one company file a defence for another company, who they do not work for and they are not the appointed legal representative for ?

[ODC]

Thanks BA

 

What I was trying to ask in a cryptic way was, can someone that works for one company file a defence for another company, who they do not work for and they are not the appointed legal representative for ?

Do I detect yet another little problem for the legal team at Cabot Towers:D

[make them aktiv runners]

edit

[Seahorse]

I see what you are getting at. But what's the betting someone gets a new job just in time to head this off at the pass?

[elizabeth1]

Thanks BA

 

What I was trying to ask in a cryptic way was, can someone that works for one company file a defence for another company, who they do not work for and they are not the appointed legal representative for ?

 

Really?? Mmm!! I wouldn't have thought that was a "proper thing to do"

[tbern123]

Basically it occured to me today that my claim is against Kings Hill (No.1) Lts (now called Cabot Financial (UK) Ltd). As confirmed by a company search, they don't actually employ anyone.

 

So that begs the question, who appointed Hodsons as their legal representative. The only people that could have done this are the directors or the company secretary.

 

Then as I was thinking it dawned on me. The Defence was not submitted by Hodsons and the statement of truth was not signed by one of the Directors.

 

The Defence was submitted and the statement of truth was signed by

 

Mr WW

Head of Compliance

Cabot Financial (Europe) Ltd.

 

Now, (Europe) is not a named Defendent and WW does not work for (UK) so this court case, actually has nothing to do with him

 

Or have I got all this wrong ?

[Rhia]

Oh go and have a read at my new info you know where. I think it may help you a little in regard to this.

[tbern123]

Have I stumbled onto something or am I barking up the wrong tree ?

 

As I have not been sent a certificte of suitability as set out in the Civil Procedures rule, I know that WW is not acting in the capacity of a litigation friend. (which I thought related to children and mental health patients)

 

WW is not a party to the case and the named Defendant is (UK) and he works for (Europe)

 

Hodsons and not WW are the legal representatives of (UK)

 

What do people think ?? Am I wasting my time following this up ?

[Rhia]

Tbern this is the crux of the whole matter - the confusing structure of the Cabot group and the way it is used to bamboozle us all into asserting our rights or at least doubting we have a case.

[humbleman]

Have I stumbled onto something or am I barking up the wrong tree ?

 

 

What do people think ?? Am I wasting my time following this up ?

 

anyone can act for a company as long as he/she is authorised by the company.

[make them aktiv runners]

edit

[tbern123]

Thanks Rhia,

 

But, the defence is signed WW (EUROPE) when they have nothing to do with the case. Would it be like you to file and serve a defence for me ?

[Guest Battleaxe]

WW can sign for Cabots sadly. It is irrelevant that Hodsons represent them. It can be either who do the deed. I hate giving you this news.

[tbern123]

Even if WW does not work for the said company ? sorry, I am on a mission again and am like a dog with a bone

[elizabeth1]

Even if WW does not work for the said company ? sorry, I am on a mission again and am like a dog with a bone

 

 

I am sure BA is right Tbern - a Litigation Friend doesn't have to be connected in any way.

 

I am going to do my mums Bank Charges etc.. and doing all of her paperwork etc.. so I am acting as her "Litigation Friend" to represent her etc.. (it's not just children or mentally ill people who can be represented)

 

It just means "acting on behalf of" with permissions etc.. - I am sure there isn't any rule in how the "Litigation Friend" is related to the case - it just means that particular person has permission to deal with something.

[tbern123]

Doesn't CPR 21 cover litigation friend. From what I have read tonight, this only relates to children and mental health patients.

 

As (UK) is not a child and as far as a know not a mental health patient, can they still appoint a litigation friend , to act on their behalf

[psykix]

Check this link...

 

Statutory Instruments 1998 No. 3132 (L. 17)

 

And in particular the following :-

 

(5) A person who is to act as a litigation friend for a defendant must file -

 

 

(a) the authorisation; or
 
(b) the certificate of suitability,
 

at the time when he first takes a step in the proceedings on behalf of the defendant.

 

(6) The litigation friend must -

 

(a) serve the certificate of suitability on every person on whom, in accordance with rule 6.6 (service on parent, guardian etc.), the claim form should be served; and
 
(b) file a certificate of service when he files the certificate of suitability.

Has WW done this?! Seems to me that he will need the court's permission before he becomes a "litigation friend"...

[make them aktiv runners]

edit

[tbern123]

Thanks Aktiv,

 

As (EUROPE) is not a solictors and in the defence they state that Hodsons are their legal representative... now I am confused

[andrew1]

Might this be a little like CitiFinancial who have a certain Brian Smith who acts as their solicitor but writes on their headed paper and refers to Citi as 'his client'?

Even that is confusing, but it might just be another WW & Europe/UK situation worthy of further investigation.