Claiming for a third party

[lateralus]

if you had sent an mcol - your aq would have been dispensed with at the discretion of the local judge.

you filed an N1 - so your went straight to a local judge - and they are doing one of several things - yours appears to be sending an aq and maybe a leaflet promoting mediation. some are sending out orders to have tried to settle by xx/xx/xx date - so if it's just a leaflet - just fill in the aq and file it (with 100 if the claim is over 1500 or your friend is exempt) and file it nearer the deadline. but in the meanwhile - it's not too early to prompt dg by letter (with a breakdown) to settle - using one of the nudge letters as a basis - but using your friends details - like you will be shortly filing an aq, blah, blah..

[nevilley]

Hi thanks for all the replies. I think I know where I'm going now.

 

For the benefit of those who follow I have scanned the leaflet and forms and put them on line here:

 

http://nevilley.no-ip.org/nfy53/images/Mediation_form_side_1.jpg

http://nevilley.no-ip.org/nfy53/images/Mediation_form_side_2.jpg

http://nevilley.no-ip.org/nfy53/images/Mediation_Leaflet_side_1.jpg

http://nevilley.no-ip.org/nfy53/images/Mediation_Leaflet_side_2.jpg

 

Feel free to put them somewhere on this site as I can't say how long they will stay on my website.

[Castlebest]

Hiya Nev, Well the forms you have posted do have a section in the reply to the District Judge which says no you don’t want to go to a mediator.

As I said earlier, I don’t believe mediation is appropriate for a bank claim situation, there is nothing to mediate. Not sure if you have had a stay placed on your claim but all this will do is prolong the period until DG make an offer.

HSBC have deducted charges from our accounts.

We believe the charges are unlawful.

HSBC/DG wont/cant produce evidence to prove us wrong.

DG settle in full every time (all be it an ex-gratia payment).

The mediation service must look very tempting to a busy District Judge (go away and come back when you have an agreement) but until HSBC substantiate their charge value there is nothing to agree except when the money will be paid.

 

pete

[nevilley]

Is any one here good with words? I have a complete mental block

On the Mediation form I not only have to fill the "no" tickybox but I have to give my reason for refusing mediation. I can't get past "cos it's a bl**dy waste of time" but I don't think that would go down too well.

 

I think I may be starting to panic as I included "service charges" for having a plus account in my claim (see up there^ somewhere). Now as I knew nothing about the plus a/c thing until I got the offer from HSBC (after I had sent off the N1) I think it should still be repaid but I'm starting to fear that I'll lose the lot if I don't drop that part. (and I'm starting to waffle).

 

How does this sound?

"I am still in negotiation with HSBC and their solicitors, attempting to reach a settlement before the matter goes to court but have so far have met with total intransigence.As such I do not feel that mediation will offer anything other than a delay".

or

"It is known to me that in many other cases the defendants and their agents will not attend a mediation meeting although they will use one as a means to delay proceedings."

ARRRGH! I need beer!

[nevilley]

just an update (for me if no one else). AQ goes in tomorrow with copies to DG.

doesn't help matters much that I've been ill these past couple of weeks and not been able to do much at all. I've not heard anything from DG apart from their defence attached to the AQ by the court. So no attempt at a settlement apart from the one from HSBC that came after I had filed.

I don't want to p*ss off the judge so I'll say I'm willing to mediate. It may be a waste of time but I could use the time to get back on form.

[lateralus]

ok, well it's time to write a nudge letter to dg - they really need a kick up the bum to make them come to the table. so, in post 24 above - i gave you a couple of links - look at the post 1 in each. do up a letter to dg - and send a copy of your aq plus a breakdown to dg along with a letter along the lines of the aq has now been filed - let's get this thing done - i will accept xxxx.xx (full amount),..blah,blah.. as in the letters.

[nevilley]

It's all gone very quiet (again). Since I last posted, I've sent a couple of nudge letters. I'm guessing it is normal for dg to make no response to them. Last contact with the court; they said still no AQ from dg. I (again) guess the court are giving them lots of time to think. Is it always like this? A mad rush to get things done followed by weeks of nothing, then another mad rush, then nothing. It's very frustrating.

[lateralus]

i'd check with the court again and if it still hasn't come in - just ask casually - so, how long will the judge wait - should we be doing anything?

 

and truthfully, it is better for them to file the aq than to go the default judgment route - so nudge dg again with whatever they say - i think one of my nudge letters says - you still haven't filed - then in nudge 3 it's - sort of i think you are just procrastinating and wasting the courts and my time - please file your aq before the courts see how you are abusing the process. and go on to say you will accept, blah, blah.....

 

if they are going by claim dates - the ones we are seeing now were claimed late feb-early march - and if they are going by court dates - then it is good to keep on the courts too move them into setting a court date -

sort of a vicious circle - some courts i think are hoping the banks will settle and the banks aren't settling until force into it with a court date.

you (and friend) will get there - just keep at it.

 

there is also the opportunity to bring things to a head more quickly by sending a letter to the judge asking him to consider a draft order - look at the letter and the draft order half way down in the two aq threads - post 1 the ones in my signature.

[nevilley]

Ah well, it is said "all things come to he who waits" and by eck I've waited.

The court tell me DG have still not filed an AQ.

 

Today I got a letter from the court advising of a preliminary hearing on 10/8/2007. Est time 5 mins. DG have not even acknowledged any of my nudges so far so I'm hoping this may wake them up. I'll send another nudge over the weekend.

 

I don't think I need to do anything if I'm reading this letter correctly. The 5 points on the letter are: [sic]

1. The claim be allocated to the small claims track

2. The claim be listed for further directions only at a preliminary hearing (time estimate 5 minutes)

3. At this hearing the court will consider either:

a) to stay the claim pending the decision in a test case involving the Defendant, or

b) to give directions for this claim to be heard as a test case, and if necessary to reallocate the claim to the multi track route for that purpose.

4. Not less than 14 days before the preliminary hearing, the Defendant shall file with the court and serve upon the Claimant details of any cases proceeding as a test case, the decision in which will determine the issues in this claim. Alternatively, the Defendant shall file with the court and serve upon the Claimant draft directions for this case to proceed as a test case.

5. The Claimant may make any representation to the court in writing provided these are received by the court and served on the Defendant not less than 5 days before the preliminary hearing. If either party is prepared to abide by the decision of the judge as to the directions to be given, that party is excused from attending the preliminary hearing.

Dated 25 May 2007.

 

 

If I've read it correctly I don't need to do anything but may either attend on the 10th or write to the court (I would assume that is the court bundle??).

 

In better news I start a new job on the 2nd July which will take me away from home for 3 months.

[freakyleaky]

I have a feeling when dg see this they will be making an offer before then!

[lateralus]

yes, i think so too - the burden of proof looks to be with them - however - keep in mind that last para - and yes, if nothing else is heard by then - you will need to do the paperwork in plenty of time -

check here for what gary says for the prelim.: GOT A COURT DATE? A guide to the later stages

 

congrats on the new job

will you be able to do the paperwork that's required for your friend?

[nevilley]

will you be able to do the paperwork that's required for your friend?

 

I got most of the court bundle done some weeks ago. I only need to tidy up the witness statements. I will just have to make sure my finger stays pulled out and slot it in with the crazy panic of starting a new job on the far side of the country in 8 days. (arghhhh panic mode)

[nevilley]

Shiiiiiiiiiit.

6 days have gone by and I'm getting further away from being organised!

I thought I only had the witness statements to do for the bundle but so far this week I've had to copy all the letters and statements from the HSBC and all my letters to them, the only one they sent that's of any importance I can't use as it without prejudice, I still haven't been able to write the statement of evidence, every one I look at in various places seems different and suggests re-doing the entire bundle another way. (currently trying the "bundle for dummies"). Still not a peep from dg, the post's on strike, I'm nowhere near ready to start my new job on Monday, I'm panicing, I'm not sleeping, I'm stressed, I guess that's what hsbc want, I read somewhere (can't keep track of it all there's so much) that some courts won't let me represent my friend so I'm stressed about that, I've lost one letter I sent because of a file corruption, f*ck it 6 days, that's more in lost wages than the sodding claim! (if I was working that is).

I'm broken! If dg don't make an offer before I have to send this lot of to court (5th Aug) I'm going to throw the towel in. I just can't cope with it any more.

[lateralus]

and then where will your friend be.

let's look at this clearly - you need to have this stuff submitted 5 days before 10 august -

geez- new job or not - my grandmother could get this done in 4 weeks!

 

i'm perfectly willing to help you through this as are a lot of other people and i don't do this very often - but stop this whining! you started this as a good samaritan project for your friend. ok, fine, let's get it done.

 

my thread is the only one you need.court bundles for dummies

 

point by point - ready.............

 

item 1 - your schedule of charges - easy! (making sure each charge has a date, a name from the statement and amount)

 

so, ok you got that ready -

1 down 3 to go........

 

 

item 2 - statements (only pages with charges circled) - easy! (if you got your statements off the internet - use them)

 

so, you got that...... that's 2 down 2 to go!

 

item 3 - statement of evidence - follow the link A Statement of Evidence: (post 55 in the new strategy): New strategy for Allocation Questionaires note here: hsbc uses the service charge defence - so use the first letter in post 55

- it's the first of the two letters shown there. copy it out i know this is mixed up but try to follow - copy it from the link above the post 55 on the new strategy then it will be called a statement of evidence- then go on this link:Nawanda Vs HSBC (although nawanda was using the statement as amended particulars of claim - the idea remains the same - don't just copy it - make it personal to your claim) she had to do the statement and she did it then there was a bit of comment from garyh - so in the end it is just right - so, once you've copied it out - from post 55 of the new strategy - take a look at that link to fill in the blanks and get it right.

 

here - i'll make it even easier for you:

 

use this one and just change anything that needs to be specific to your friend's case:

 

Claim Number: XXXXXXXXX

 

In the XXXXXXXX County Court

 

Between:

 

 

X.XXXXXXX

(Claimant)

 

 

 

and

 

 

 

 

HSBC Plc

(Defendant)

 

 

 

 

_________________________ ______

Statement of Evidence

 

 

_______________________

 

 

 

 

 

1. The Claimant has an account 00000 with the Defendant which was opened on or around 19XX.

 

2. During the period in which the Account has been operating the Defendant debited numerous charges to the Account in respect of purported breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant and also charged interest on the charges once applied.

 

3. A list of the charges applied is attached to these particulars of claim.

 

4. The Claimant submits that the charges levied to his bank account, as set out in the attached schedule, are, notwithstanding the contention of the defendant, penalty charges arising from and relating directly to breaches of contract on the part of the claimant. As a contractual penalty, the charges are unenforceable by virtue of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999, the Unfair Contracts (Terms) Act 1977, and the common law.

 

5. It is admitted that the Defendants charges were levied in accordance with the terms and conditions of the account in question. However, it is submitted that the Defendants charges are not related to or intended to represent any actual loss arising from a breach of contract, but instead unduly enrich the Defendant which, by virtue of the legislation cited in paragraph 4 above, exercises the contractual term in respect of such charges with a view to profit.

 

6. The Defendant avers that the charges levied are legitimate fixed price contractual services, unrelated to breaches of contract, which are therefore not required to be a pre-estimate of loss incurred on the part of the defendant. The Claimant further submits that this contention is merely an attempt to ‘cloak’, or disguise, their penalties in order to circumvent the common law and statutory prohibition of default penalty charges with view to a profit.

 

7. The Claimant believes the definition of a 'service' to be a provision of knowledge, skill or other transferable facility that benefits the consumer, and one that the consumer agrees is at a reasonable market rate commensurable with the service provided. The Claimant believes it to be inconceivable that the charges levied to his account by the defendant could be any form of ‘service’, rather than a penalty.

 

8. I understand the definition of 'breach of contract' to be the failure of a party, without legal excuse, to perform a contractually agreed obligation pursuant to any or all of the terms agreed within that contract. I have an overdraft with the defendant. This overdraft has a contractually agreed limit, which is an express term of the bank account contract between myself and the Defendant. When I exceeded this agreed overdraft limit, therefore breaching an express term of the contract between myself and the Defendant, I was consequentially penalised for each such breach by way of a charge of £10-£75.

 

9. In the case of Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co v New Garage & Motor Co [1915] AC 79, Lord Dunedin stated that a clause is a penalty if it provides for;

 

"The essence of a penalty is a payment of money stipulated as in-terrorem of the offending part;”

I.e. if it is designed to scare or coerce or is used as a threat. It is submitted that the charges applied are not representative of any 'service' provided by the Defendant, but instead are punitive, and held "in-terrorem".

 

10. The Claimant further submits that the Defendant’s contention that the charges are now a legitimate service charge represents a contradiction to materials published by the bank previously

 

11. Additionally, the claimant believes there to be a high possibility that the terms and conditions of her account contract explicitly describe the charges as to be levied in instances of breaching those terms. This is true of the contracts of other customers of the defendant that the claimant is aware.

 

12. The Claimant refers to the statement from the Office of Fair Trading (April 2006), who conducted a thorough investigation into default charges levied by the British financial industry. While the report primarily focused on Credit card issuers, the OFT stated that the principle of their findings would also apply to Bank account charges. They ruled that default charges at the current level were unfair within their interpretation of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. With regard to the ‘cloaking’ or disguising of penalties, the OFT said this;

 

“4.21 The analysis in this statement is in terms of explicit, transparent default fees. Attempts to restructure accounts in order to present events of default spuriously as additional services for which a charge may be made should be viewed as disguised penalties and equally open to challenge where grounds of unfairness exist. (For example, a charge for ‘agreeing’ or ‘allowing’ a customer to exceed a credit limit is no different from a customers default in exceeding a credit limit.) The UTCCR’s are concerned with the intentions and effects of terms, not just their mechanism”.

 

13. As submitted above, the Claimant believes the charges levied to his account to be disproportionate contractual penalties, arising from clear and demonstrable breaches of express terms of the account contract between itself and the Defendant. The Claimant vehemently refutes the Defences contention that they are legitimate contractual service charges.

 

14. However, and without prejudice to the above, in the event the charges were accepted by this honourable court as being a fee for a contractual service, the claimant submits that they are unreasonable under section 15 of the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982.

 

15. Further, under the UTCCR:

 

"5. - (1) A contractual term which has not been individually negotiated shall be regarded as unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer.

 

(2) A term shall always be regarded as not having been individually negotiated where it has been drafted in advance and the consumer has therefore not been able to influence the substance of the term.

 

(3) Notwithstanding that a specific term or certain aspects of it in a contract has been individually negotiated, these Regulations shall apply to the rest of a contract if an overall assessment of it indicates that it is a pre-formulated standard contract.

 

(4) It shall be for any seller or supplier who claims that a term was individually negotiated to show that it was."

 

Schedule 2 also includes such clauses (to define examples of unfair clauses) as:

 

"(i) irrevocably binding the consumer to terms with which he had no real opportunity of becoming acquainted before the conclusion of the contract;

 

(j) enabling the seller or supplier to alter the terms of the contract unilaterally without a valid reason which is specified in the contract;

 

(m) giving the seller or supplier the right to determine whether the goods or services supplied are in conformity with the contract, or giving him the exclusive right to interpret any term of the contract."

 

The defendant is a multi-national corporation. The term regarding charges was inserted unilaterally in contract. The contract was pre and mass produced and I had no opportunity to negotiate the clause, or indeed any of the contract.

 

The cost of HSBC's charges have increased on more than one occasion during the period in which my account was held, neither time was I given the opportunity to negotiate, or even notified of this increase. This means the bank has unilaterally altered the terms of my account contract to my detriment, and to their advantage.

 

16. Following on from the above, the claimant does not accept The Defendants contention that the charges are enforceable as a service charge. It is not disputed that the Defendant is entitled to recover its damages following my breaches of contract, and it is entitled to include a liquidated damages clause. I accept without reservation the banks right to recover its actual losses or a genuine pre-estimate thereof. A penalty however, is unenforceable.

 

17. The Claimant cites the case of Robinson v Harman [1848] 1 Exch 850 which states that a contractual party cannot profit from a breach and that the charge for a loss suffered from a breach of contract should be the amount necessary to put both parties in the same position before the breach occurred.

 

18. Lord Dunedin in the case of Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co v New Garage & Motor Co [1915] AC 79 set down a number of principles in definition of a penalty clause and how such clause may be ascertained from a liquidated damages clause. One of these principles being -

 

"The sum is a penalty if it is greater than the greatest loss which could have been suffered from the breach"

 

 

19. The Claimant will further rely on numerous recorded authorities dating throughout the 20th century up to the most recent case of Murray v Leisureplay [2005] EWCA Civ 963, all of which have upheld and reinforced the principles set down by Lord Dunedin defining contractual penalty clauses and the unenforceability thereof.

 

20. Further, under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999, schedule 2 (1) includes to define an example of an unfair clause as -

 

"(e) requiring any consumer who fails to fulfil his obligation to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation;"

 

21. On numerous occasions, the Claimant has requested that the Defendant justify its charges by providing details of the costs incurred as a result of my contractual breaches. Each time those requests were rebutted or ignored. MAY DELETE

 

22. In a recent study undertaken in Australia, (Nicole Rich, “Unfair fees: a report into penalty fees charged by Australian Banks”) it was estimated that the cost to an Australian Bank of a customers direct debit refusal was estimated to be in the region of 54 cents. By reviewing the charges against the above figure, the study estimated that banks could be charging between 64 to 92 times what it costs them to process a direct debit refusal. The study’s key findings stated that in its opinion the Australian Bank’s cheque and direct debit refusal fees were likely to be penalties at law.

 

23. The Defendant, or indeed any of the UK banks, has never published any information to support how their charges are calculated, or what their actual costs associated with such breaches are, or what revenue they derive from such charges.

 

24. For their recent BBC2 documentary “The Money Programme”, the BBC appointed a commission of former senior banking industry figures and business academics to attempt to ascertain the actual costs to the UK banks of processing a customer’s breach of contract. They concluded that the absolute maximum conceivable cost that could be incurred by a direct debit refusal or overdraft excess is £2.50, and of a returned cheque £4.50. They did state however, that the actual cost is likely to be much less than this. The commission also estimated that the UK banks collectively derive as much as £4.5billion in profit a year from their charging regimes.

 

25. It is submitted that the Defendants charges are applied by an automated and computer driven process. This process consists of a computer system ‘bouncing’ the direct debit, and sending out a computer generated letter. It is therefore impossible to envisage how the Defendant can incur costs of £** by carrying out this completely automated process. Note that the letter received notifying of a charge is identical in every instance, and if multiple breaches occurred on the same day, a separate letter will be sent in each instance.

 

26. On 22nd May 2006, the House of Commons passed an early day motion which welcomed the OFT's statement that default charges should be proportionate to the actual loss incurred. The house described such default charges as "exorbitant" and "excessive".

 

27. The Claimant also cites a radio interview in 2004 with Lloyds TSB’s former head of personal banking, Peter McNamara, in which he states bank charges are used to fund free banking for all personal customers as a whole.

 

28. As set out previously, it is submitted that The Defendant’s charges can not be considered to be a service charge. In arguing that they are, they also effectively admit that their charges make profits. The Defendant seemingly contends that their charges are not subject to any assessment of fairness whatsoever. This implies they can set these fees at whatever level they like without limit or regulation. Similarly, as set out above, the charges cannot be considered to be liquidated damages. They, by The Defendant's own admission, are not a pre-estimate of loss incurred as a result of the breach of contract. The charges are punitive, held “in-terrorem", and unduly and extravagantly enrich the Defendant. As such, they are a contractual penalties and unenforceable at law.

 

29. Accordingly the Claimant claims:

 

a) the return of the amounts debited in respect of charges in the sum of £855 and any interest charged thereon;

 

 

b) Court costs;

 

c) The claimant claims interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year, from 01/07/03 to 13/04/2007 of £ 124.28and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of £0.21.

 

 

I, the Claimant, believe all facts stated to be true.

 

Signed, dated

 

 

 

 

 

ok, just read through it and change any details to fit your friend's case that's it........ 3 down 1 to go.

 

 

item 4 - the court bundle, follow the link - it's a lot of copying.

AND GUIDO HAS KINDLY OFFERED THE LEGAL BITS OF THIS IN A PDF FORMAT - SEE POST 45 FURTHER DOWN.

GuidoT vbmenu_register("postmenu_924133", true); you can pm guido if you want to take him up on his offer: he says there: I have a single PDF with most of the core generic court bundle documentation, if anyone would like it then PM me your email address (I cannot sent it to you without this address).

 

It includes the following:

1. Dunlop v New Garage case summary

2. Robin v Harman extract from Keating

3. Murray v Leisureplay transcript

4. Australian Unfair Fees report

5. BBC Money Programme Summary

6. House of Commons Early Day Motion

7. Peter McNamara Transcript

8. Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Act 1999

9. Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977

10. Office of Fair Trading Statement

 

It is time consuming trying to locate all of these, when you start to find broken links etc.

 

so, if you pm guido with your email addy - he will be happy to send you that and that is pretty much item 4 done

 

 

 

now, there are a few additional bits and pieces to the bundle.

 

 

also, in the litigation section - you can run a copy of settled claims

Litigation Section - View and print out litigation spreadsheets here, that will take a couple of minutes - no more.

 

also, a copy of all the paperwork between you(your friend) and the bank since you've started this (but nothing marked without prejudice),

 

again, that's a couple of minutes copying tops.

 

 

also, the t & c's - preferably from around the time you opened your account - we are getting more and more all the time so check here:

HSBC T&Cs HERE and failing any there that would help - use these:

 

never mind looking for others - use these 2004 ones - copy the whole of the t & c - it's several pages.

 

HSBC T&Cs HERE

and another note here - use the whole thing and highlight Clause 7.13

 

 

 

and one final note on the whole thing: take a look at how corn flake did her table of contents as it looks pretty good and would be a good reference for anyone doing their bundle:Court date set for 18th June t 12.00 getting worrried now any advice? (1 2 3) post 17.

 

 

ok, i've looked this one up for you too - here is is:

 

 

 

DOCUMENTS

 

Description: Pages

 

Statement of evidence 3-7

Correspondence from Claimant 8-14

Correspondence from Defendant 15

Bank Statements 16-80

Schedule Of Charges 80-83

Relevant Case Law Summary 84-85

Early Day Motion From The House Of Parliament 86

Dunlop v New Garage 87

UTCCR 1999 88-94

UCTA 1977 95-98

SOGA 1982 99-104

Terms & Conditions 1997 105-107

Terms & Conditions 2005 108-156

OFT Statement Summary 157-159

BBC Commission Conclusion 160

 

i think she left out the list of settled claims

but otherwise it's all there, it's just to give you an idea of how she did a table of contents .

 

here's one last bit - each party must provide its documents and written evidence (court bundle) in a single bound paginated (that means with pages numbered) bundle clearly marked on the front with the case number and names of the parties

 

 

now, nevilley, i've not done this for anyone else - it's all in one place - right here on your thread -

you've got until early august to get it done and sent - one copy to dg one to the court and keep one.

 

when dg received a bundle - they make an offer - - so to that end - send dg the bundle a few days before you send the one to the court - to give them time to get an offer to you and chances are very, very good that you'll get the offer - accept it and no one has to represent anyone in court.

 

i hope you haven't come all this way for your friend to give up at this last bit - while it's true that months ago no one had to do the court bundle - it's just part of the fallout from so very many claims being filed. and the most current info i can give you is what i said earlier - when you send dg a copy of the bundle - they make an offer.

 

i'm not in your situation - but can you not just get some rest, start the new job - give it a week or so and then just get this done in your spare time. i know it's a pain - but to get your friend's money back - it will be worth it.

 

take care - good luck with the new job!

[freakyleaky]

Nevilley, whatever you do don't give up now. This is the final hurdle and with lat on your case you can't fail.

You will get the money back.

 

Lat you deserve a sainthood!

[lateralus]

freaky - he is doing this for a friend !- so he's the one who deserves the sainthood! i wouldn't have gone to the trouble of doing it like that except that i think he needs an extra little kick. we all get bogged down with stuff - but going this extra mile for a friend deserves all the help i can give.

 

 

ever heard the dionne warwick song - that's what friends are for.......

i think i'd like it at my funeral - it's sort of my anthem!

[freakyleaky]

Your to modest lat!

I still say it's you that desrves the sainthood!

 

Your funeral? You can't die lat! That would be extremely inconveinient for all new claimant's!

[lateralus]

just planning ahead!

[nevilley]

Lateralus; you are a saint.

After a bottle of voddy and a long nights sleep, I am feeling a bit more focused, delicate but focused. I've packed my suitcase and now got a hotel booked so I can drive off to Cardiff to start my new job in the morning. (Didn't I mention the new job is 280 miles away? so I won't have access to my computer, or possibly the interent, except for one day a month when I come home to collect the mail). That's the main reason for me stressing, I really only have today to get it sorted. Now thanks to you giving me a much needed, and deserved, kick up the arse, I will try again. My friend won't infact be affected financially whether this case is won or not as I've already paid of her debts - (long long story - depression, loans, debt, debt collectors, repossession orders, suicide attempts, debt management, IVAs, selling houses, moving, arguing with the DSS, being p*ssed about by a certain bank). In short a year's worth of hassle but at the end I have a friend who is settled in a mortgage free new house, debt free (except to me and I ain't gonna chase her), now able to manage her income and outgoings. I often wonder if it's all worth it but when I see her smile or catch her humming to herself contendedly then I know it's been worth it.

 

I just never thought I'd still be mopping up 18 months later.

 

Right, I've printed of your reply in #39 above I'll start with the collating.

 

Big thanks.

[freakyleaky]

I wish I had a friend like you Nev!

Good luck!

[lateralus]

and you know - they have computers in cardiff (library, etc.)

also, not home at the moment - but my son does a lot of his uni stuff and then saves it on google docs or something close to that and with his hotmail addy for e-mail - mails stuff to himself that he is working on so if push comes to shove he doesn't loose any of it.

 

my thinking - get done what you can - save it all on that google docs thing - - get a hotmail email if you don't have one (i think most isp's let you pick up your mail at other locations anyway)

and on the lonely nights in cardiff - you find an adult ed place or internet cafe and get some done there -

at least it's a fairly long time to get it done - just trying to give you some helpful hints.

 

i, too, would be glad of a friend like you!

 

 

 

p.s. looked it up - i think it's this one:Google Docs & Spreadsheets Tour

and dr. lat prescribes a couple of paracetamols for the after effects of that bottle of voddie!

[nevilley]

As I sit here wishing I had a pint of Adnams or Greene King I note that for the first time ever I have all three printers going at the same time!

[lateralus]

better than a pen and quill and carbon paper! keep at it!

[Castlebest]

Interesting concept... computers in Wales.. are they coal fired ?

 

 

 

pete

[nevilley]

They're not coal fired but mostly they have internet access blocked by paranoid security teams.

 

Any way. I'm sure I'm not the first to ask. Where are we now?

I am driving 300 miles today to go home to have the court bundles copied and bound and then send them off. But "all cases have been suspended" it says on the news. Does this mean I just stop, or carry on or do something else?

 

Is there a new thread somewhere covering this new development?

 

Thanks