District Judge Cooke. On a mission?

[Mindzai]

I rely on my legal counsel to advise me, this issue was never flagged to me. Now that it has, I'm awaiting advice on a solution.

 

Funny, I remember pointing this out to you (as did plenty of others) a few months back. Still i suppose it took a qualified legal professional for the message to have any effect. Oh the irony.

[podgydad]

Funny, I remember pointing this out to you (as did plenty of others) a few months back. Still i suppose it took a qualified legal professional for the message to have any effect. Oh the irony.

 

Err no, you were talking about champerty & maintenance, which we're not being accused of.

 

Anyway, there is a simple way around the problem. Just thought that it would be of interest to people.

 

Its also worth noting, looking at all the correspondence we have had from the court, it has always been judge Cooke that has dealt with our claims. Seems odd for him to make this order now don't you think?

[Marconi]

I take it podgyday was acting on behalf of a client?

 

Or does that mean that no one can start any court proceedings, other than a solicitor?

 

The bit that interested me was the Judges comment, I believe "The banks are chargeing for a service and they can charge what they like and if they make a profit, so be." or words to that effect!!

[Bigdess]

Are you acting as a solicitor if you apply to the small claims court,what is the case in N Ireland.maybe this applys to the county court ?

 

Bigdess

[justwon]

I noticed this legislation recently. The one problem I have is with this part of the legislation being quoted.

 

act as a solicitor, or as such issue any writ or process, or commence, prosecute or defend any action, suit or other proceeding, in his own name or in the name of any other person, in any court of civil or criminal jurisdiction

The problem I have with this legislation is that being interprepted in the manner that it is on this forum would mean that it was unlawful for a person to act on their own behalf and coduct litigation. Therefore, it may be the case that this statutory provision is only relevant when a person "acts as a solicitor" AND issues writs. Another factor is that the interpretation of the word "issue" which may not be equivalent to "prepare".

 

With regard to RobertXC's comments... I don't believe that the issue of this company and its employee's legal ability is relevant to the judges ruling.

[Robertxc]

I was forunate enough to be able to air my views on the subject on Radio 4 this morning. For anyone interested, it's about 15 minutes in: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/listenagain/ram/today0_20070517.ram

[Destinyofsouls]

Anyway, there is a simple way around the problem. Just thought that it would be of interest to people.

Podgydad,

I assume you have been putting your company details on the N1 form for return correspondence have you? As it does say on there:

Claimants or claimants solicitors address to which documents etc...

So, If you were, then you were purporting to be a solicitor. I cannot see any way that you could get round this in the eyes of the law.

I was helping an old lady recover some money from the RBS, and I looked into this a few months ago and was told I must never put my name there unless I was a solicitor.

I suppose that is a bit ridiculous when this sweet little old lady could not possibly do it herself and, if as you say, solicitors are not bothered then how would she do it?

[jshtr3]

Nice one Robert. I too got bothered by a (rather attractive) girl in Leeds the other day asking if I had had any bank charges, there were a few of them. I said I was with CAG and then spent ten minutes hanging around telling the people that they got to sign up that they could do it themselves for free. Would have stayed the whole day if i'd had the time. I know nothing about the legalities of what these companies do but it seems fairly imoral to me, kind of like coke selling bottled tap water for the same price as beer!!!

[jshtr3]

how would she do it

 

People could help her for free, it does happen. The process doesn't take too much effort once you've done it. I have helped friends and only requested 5% donation to this website. My payment comes from the happiness of their win.

[podgydad]

Anyway, there is a simple way around the problem. Just thought that it would be of interest to people.

Podgydad,

I assume you have been putting your company details on the N1 form for return correspondence have you? As it does say on there:

Claimants or claimants solicitors address to which documents etc...

So, If you were, then you were purporting to be a solicitor. I cannot see any way that you could get round this in the eyes of the law.

I was helping an old lady recover some money from the RBS, and I looked into this a few months ago and was told I must never put my name there unless I was a solicitor.

I suppose that is a bit ridiculous when this sweet little old lady could not possibly do it herself and, if as you say, solicitors are not bothered then how would she do it?

 

You can get round it by simply passing it all to a solicitor to deal with.

[Destinyofsouls]

People could help her for free, it does happen. The process doesn't take too much effort once you've done it. I have helped friends and only requested 5% donation to this website. My payment comes from the happiness of their win.

 

 

I was doing it for free!!!!

I even paid her £10 S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) fee cos I felt sorry for her!!!! (WHICH i HAVE NOW LOST)

She is a friend of my mums, and my mum asked if I could help her, so I did.

Her S***head son has now taken over as he can see £6K coming her way.

So, if he cocks up like Mr Berwick, she loses everything.

OH AND MY HAPPINESS WOULD COME FROM THE SAME PLACE AS WELL

 

Maybe you would care to read my post if it helps!

http://http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/royal-bank-scotland/59695-please-help-old-lady.html

[Destinyofsouls]

You can get round it by simply passing it all to a solicitor to deal with.

 

I thought you said solicitors weren't interested?

[podgydad]

I thought you said solicitors weren't interested?

 

Not with dealing with end users but if we have 500 cases for them that makes it worth their while.

[lillboy]

EDITED

 

Am i right in saying this is the same judge that found in favour of the defendent even though they could not even be bothered to turn up. Someone should be asking Questions, this bank treated his directions with utter contempt be he still found in their favour.

 

I am not saying that i agree with no win no fee companies but there are people out there that even with the help of excellent supports site like CAG & Penalty Charges, would not even attempt to take on their bank. I say this because i have recently odopted 2 claims from family members because it was getting to daunting for them and they bwhere prepared to give up their fight.

 

With that said if podgydad is using this site for gain then surely the 5% donation should become manditory. IMO.

 

Back to the main point we should all be working together to ensure people get their money back and sharing knowledge of the banks altering underhanded tactics in order to stay one pace ahead of these big organisations.

[crfx250]

I agree with with Lillboy. These kind of firms are now regulated and it's not

a judge's role to act like a watchdog. Far from accusing someone of acting as a lawyer he could be accused of acting like the OFT.

[jshtr3]

Destinyofsouls. I didn't see your thread before I posted so believe me, I wasn't reffering to you. Was listening to the radio interview. The link to your thread didn't work, but I found it. You seem to have done a very selfless thing. Haven't got time to read it all now but I will later. I'm just not a fan of ambulance chasers or the way we seem to be following the american model of litigation culture. I know I'm a part of it but I believe England has had a small claims court for a long time! People stopping me every time i go onto a city or ringing me at home asking if I've had an accident is definitely quite recent!

[Louiselouise]

EDITED

 

Am i right in saying this is the same judge that found in favour of the defendent even though they could not even be bothered to turn up. Someone should be asking Questions, this bank treated his directions with utter contempt be he still found in their favour.

 

I am not saying that i agree with no win no fee companies but there are people out there that even with the help of excellent supports site like CAG & Penalty Charges, would not even attempt to take on their bank. I say this because i have recently odopted 2 claims from family members because it was getting to daunting for them and they bwhere prepared to give up their fight.

 

With that said if podgydad is using this site for gain then surely the 5% donation should become manditory. IMO.

 

Back to the main point we should all be working together to ensure people get their money back and sharing knowledge of the banks altering underhanded tactics in order to stay one pace ahead of these big organisations.

 

 

I agree with Lillboy - we're getting away from the main issue.

Remember - Together we stand - Divided we fall.

 

We're all on the same side and trying to get the same results from the Banks. The last thing we need is to bicker amongst ourselves and let Lloyds and the Smarmy SC & M read these posts and think that they are getting the upper hand. Onwards and Upwards - back to main objective!!

[podgydad]

I agree with with Lillboy. These kind of firms are now regulated and it's not

a judge's role to act like a watchdog. Far from accusing someone of acting as a lawyer he could be accused of acting like the OFT.

 

In fairness, if such companies are using the court system, its the judges job to make sure that such companies comply with the law.

[nicsussex]

In fairness, if such companies are using the court system, its the judges job to make sure that such companies comply with the law.

 

Which seems to be exactly what he is doing

[podgydad]

I'm not disagreeing

[car2]

Im a bit worried now as a company is charging 25% to do all my paperwork concerning my claim. I haven't had any problems with them but now i am worried.

Iv'e just got an order of judgement accepted by the courts so they haven't mentioned that the company cant act on my behalf or anything but does this mean that they are breaking the law??

Further more, where does it leave me in regards to paying them??

caroline

[elsinore]

Now that’s an interesting point.

 

Presumably, when the cheque is forthcoming from the unsuccessful defendant, it is made out in favour of the claimant. So, how does the amb…sorry, Regulated Claims Management Company ensure it gets paid?

 

If car2 chooses not to pay the perfectly reasonable 25%:o , and legs it with the cheque, then the RCMC will have to sue for its money (in its own name, of course)!

 

Els

[podgydad]

Now that’s an interesting point.

 

Presumably, when the cheque is forthcoming from the unsuccessful defendant, it is made out in favour of the claimant. So, how does the amb…sorry, Regulated Claims Management Company ensure it gets paid?

 

If car2 chooses not to pay the perfectly reasonable 25%:o , and legs it with the cheque, then the RCMC will have to sue for its money (in its own name, of course)!

 

Els

 

Bad debt is a serious problem, especially since many claimants are in debt to begin with, often their settlement gets eaten up by other debts leaving them struggling to pay us. We reclaimed £6.5k for a client 3 months ago who still hasn't paid us. People are a lot better at cashing cheques than writing them

 

Of course the best solution is to get the banks to pay us directly, the only one to do so is Natwest.

[podgydad]

Im a bit worried now as a company is charging 25% to do all my paperwork concerning my claim. I haven't had any problems with them but now i am worried.

Iv'e just got an order of judgement accepted by the courts so they haven't mentioned that the company cant act on my behalf or anything but does this mean that they are breaking the law??

Further more, where does it leave me in regards to paying them??

caroline

 

Did you have to sign any court papers? If so did it mention their name anywhere on the form?

[ANITA]

I have not been on this site since February. What a change in attitude I have seen tonight. I thought this forum supported people making claims, not underminded them. The fact remains that the banks are making huge profits out of disavantaged people, unfairly. Do not stop this from posting podgydad. I am sure many other members will support you.