walton v rbos

[paulwlton]

Quick update, a further schedule of costs has just arrived regarding Thursdays hearing £1,638,20. It basically says if it does go to the full hearing further costs will be incurred by the claimant.

[Guest bong]

is that claimant or defendant?

[mcuth]

Quick update, a further schedule of costs has just arrived regarding Thursdays hearing £1,638,20. It basically says if it does go to the full hearing further costs will be incurred by the claimant.

 

Appears that that's another intimidatory tactic then - even if you're on Fast-Track, I believe costs are limited to £750 and that's only if the judge makes a costs order against you!

 

Cheers

 

Michael

[paulwlton]

I agree this could be seen as intimidation. I may make the judge aware of this Thursday.

 

 

The costs estimated above do not exceed the costs which the claimant is liable to pay in respect of the work which this estimate covers. The claimants solicitors reserve the right to apply to the court to vary the amount of anticipated costs claimed.

 

The amount calculated is for this schedule of costs only and is without prejudice to the claimants solicitors right to claim further costs and disbusements properly incurred should this matter proceed to a full detailed assessment.

[JonCris]

It's meant to put you off & the judge will see through it. In fact the judge might just admonish them for trying this tactic................PS now we know why they issued against you after you claimed.........By making you the defendant they get to run the game.......or so they think

[paulwlton]

I'm not sure on this, a counterclaim is considered as a claim and i beleive the fixed costs of preparing the counterclaim can be recovered, if this is the case the claimant is warned of the amount claimed in advance of the hearing.

I think costs are reserved for each application hearing and should only be forwarded on appeal.

 

I think it's a wind up tactic.

[mcuth]

I'm not sure on this one, is it a counterclaim or an application to strike out Cobbetts have made, if it's a counterclaim this is considered as a claim and i beleive the fixed costs of preparing the counterclaim can be recovered, if this is the case. The claimant should be warned of the amount claimed in advance of the hearing.

 

This is getting confusing.

 

Not sure what you're on about here Paul - in this thread I don't see any evidence of them making a counterclaim against you?

 

Their continued sending of cost schedules is clearly meant as an intimidatory tactic, since it doesn't even appear that your case has been allocated to a track yet (at least, I can't see that from your thread)!

 

Cheers

 

Michael

[livelylad]

Not sure what you're on about here Paul - in this thread I don't see any evidence of them making a counterclaim against you?

 

Their continued sending of cost schedules is clearly meant as an intimidatory tactic, since it doesn't even appear that your case has been allocated to a track yet (at least, I can't see that from your thread)!

 

Cheers

 

Michael

 

Agreed they are obviously unsure about their case so they are trying to scare you.

[paulwlton]

Not sure what you're on about here Paul - in this thread I don't see any evidence of them making a counterclaim against you?

 

Their continued sending of cost schedules is clearly meant as an intimidatory tactic, since it doesn't even appear that your case has been allocated to a track yet (at least, I can't see that from your thread)!

 

Cheers

 

Michael

 

Sorry Michael what i'm saying is the defence should only be sending a schedule of costs if it's a counterclaim, the claim was allocated to small claims on the 17th October with a hearing date on the ist Dec, i've stated this in an earlier post.

What are they playing at.

[mcuth]

Sorry Michael what i'm saying is the defence should only be sending a schedule of costs if it's a counterclaim,

 

Ah, right - ok then, but if it's in small claims, they'd only be able to claim the court fee and maybe some small amount of preparation fees - not the amounts they've set out.

 

the claim was allocated to small claims on the 17th October with a hearing date on the ist Dec, i've stated this in an earlier post.

You know, I still can't see the allocation bit - I see Cobbett's attempt to strike out at the beginning of Oct (your posts of 19th Oct), but not the allocation. The hearing 1st Dec I saw - but there's an update on 7th Nov with hearing details, and states a further hearing set for 14th Dec - but no details of 1st or 14th Dec hearings, which confused me too - and now you're at a hearing tomorrow (is this directions again, or a full hearing?)!

 

What are they playing at.

I don't think they know either

 

Good luck for tomorrow - hope it goes well, let us know what the hearing's for, and how it goes..

 

Cheers

 

Michael

[paulwlton]

Michael the reason the defence keep a schedule of costs is if the bank wins on appeal then i am liable for the costs but to send a costs schedule to a litigant in person just before the hearing i think is out of order.

 

The hearing is an application to strike out, the defence are using sec 5.

 

Thanks will post later.

[poltmcm]

good luck paul and let us know how you get on

[paulwlton]

Bad news i'm afraid the judge has struck the claim out.

 

I'll post details later or tomorrow.

[saxon]

Paul I am so sorry, you had put an awful lot of work in.

 

Is there a way to appeal?

[martinpar]

That's a blow. I await the details.

[Guest willowb]

Hi Paul,

 

I've just read your thread and am totally gutted for you hun. I hope you are ok.

 

Is there a way to appeal?

 

In Paul's words....

I know though if a claim is sruck out it may be reinstated, with an application for relief.

 

Wxxx

[mcuth]

Bad news i'm afraid the judge has struck the claim out.

 

I'll post details later or tomorrow.

 

Uh-oh, that's not good news - will await your update with what happened

 

Cheers

 

Michael

[bill-k]

Paul - I've been following this (lurking), and that is a real gut-wrencher, mate, considering your work here. Take some time to get your brain and your guts back together. Then come back here and get a well-deserved fix of pos. attitude. In words of one cylinder, that's lurve, mate.

 

If you can take this back to the shop as faulty, these guys will know how to do it. If we can see what happened, here, then we'll be better equipped for next time. And maybe in return, Karma will be restored, and you'll get an appeal that came around and kicked 'em !!

 

Much Respect.

[Glenn UK]

Bad luck Paul

 

Anything you need give us a shout.

 

Glenn

[livelylad]

Bugger. :mad:

[stevokenevo]

ive just read this thread from start to finish, and am gutted by the decision to strike the claim out, look forward to hearing the latest news

[paulwlton]

Ten minutes before the hearing an 8 page skeleton argument aswell as cases the defendant was relying on was placed onto my lap, i made the solicitor aware that i wasn't happy because this looked very much like an ammended defence, and why hadn't this been sent to me before the 18th December on the courts directions.

 

The hearing lasted nearly two hours and at times my arguments did get the judge thinking, a major problem i had was the unlawfull charges in the ccj the judge was not interested at all, he also dismissed my claim that the debt could not be time barred by one party whilst enforced by another it was realy hard work trying to convince the judge that my cause of action was April 2006 he seemed to think that if i had contacted a solicitor at the time the charges were being levied then it whould some how been sorted.

 

Moving on to the mistake argument the judge dismissed my claim that the bank was mistaken and the claim that i was mistaken was also dismissed with the judge saying the fact is you've allways been mistaken nothings changed, i think i know what the means.

 

So onto concealment my argument was that the banks failure to reveal constituted concealment the defence hit back and refered to a case where not disclosing information wasn't deemed concealment.

 

I made the judge aware that the documents the defence had subbmited should have been forwarded to me and that i wasn't happy, i don't think the judge wanted another adjournment.

 

I think i put sound arguments to the court but it wasn't to be, then came the costs the solicitor made a claim that i'de acted unreasonably and therefore should incurr the costs, the judge asked for my response and i quoted a couple of paragraphs from Praticia Pearls book on small claims, the judge ordered no costs to apply so the RBS have a bill of £2,500 to pay. At least that put a smile on my face.

 

Paul.

[livelylad]

I take my hat off to you Paul a very commendable effort.

[Guest willowb]

so the RBS have a bill of £2,500 to pay. At least that put a smile on my face.

 

Paul.

Good!

 

So, do you think you'll appeal? I know that you must be feeling a little 'raw' but do you have any plans?

 

Wxxx

[paulwlton]

Cheers mate, i'll scan and post anything thats likely to help others.