Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Tony Connelly of RTE has been talking to people in Brussels. There is a view that HMG will invoke Article 16 of the NIP soon and the source/s think the EU will take legal action and/or impose tarriffs on British exports.    https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/1441360546058567682  
    • Here is an updated draft of the proposed particulars of claim. Please can you start dealing with this. Fill in the figures and also let me have some comments.    
    • They may try to say that you haven't given them an opportunity to remedy the situation. You are now in a position to say that that is untrue and that you have invited them to address all the defects but subject to a written schedule and subject to supervision. Assuming that you will have actually issued the proceedings, you will then be able to say to the court that despite this approach, the defendants have declined and it is for this reason that you have been obliged to issue proceedings. You should emphasise that you have only brought the matter into the court process as a last resort – whereas by contrast, the building company have attempted to use a bankruptcy procedure as a first resort.
    • Points to emphasise with the court: There is no problem about money. The entire issue is about the quality of the work which has been carried out. The shabby workmanship has been confirmed by an independent survey for which you have paid £355. The survey report has been provided to the builders and yet they have so far ignored it and declined to comment. There were four contracts in all. Two of them were completed to a satisfactory standard and the price of those contracts was paid without any difficulty. The dispute relates simply to two remaining contracts which are the subject of the independent report. From the outset of this dispute instead of trying to hold a dialogue her adopted a barracking and bullying approach – the same approach which is being used by their debt collection agency. You have received threats that they will trespass onto your property and remove your driveway. They are completely aware that there is a legitimate dispute and in fact one of the directors admitted that the work was not up to standard. You have embarked on the pre-action protocol as a prelude to legal action. Legal action in respect of one of the contract has now been issued. You are still hoping that the builders will deal with the matter without the need to take the litigation into the court room. The building company have attempted to avoid the independent scrutiny and transparency of the court process. The proper procedure for addressing this dispute would have been to start a legal action against you. The building company have decided not to use a transparent process and have the evidence weighed by a judge. The building company has preferred to shortcut the process and to use the strong-arm tactic of trying to have you declared bankrupt. This is clearly an abuse of the process. If there were serious questions about your intention to avoid payment, it would have been open for the building company to issue proceedings and eventually to have required that you would pay the disputed some into court. You would have complied with such an order without any difficulty – but they have chosen not to litigate. Now that litigation is underway, you believe that the best course of action is to allow the litigation to take its course and for the building company either to come to the table or else for the matter to be decided by a court after having weighed all the evidence. I'm going to say that if you had been more responsive in the way that you had been dealing with this so far – and as we have been encouraging you to do throughout this process, we would be well advanced by now and there wouldn't be this furious last moment dash to prevent a bankruptcy procedure. I hope that in view of what is happening you will now re-prioritise this matter.   I don't know what your temperament is like but when the hearing starts, you must remain very level and gentle in your approach and your tone of voice. Simply make your points. Listen very carefully to what is being said to you. While the judge is speaking, you should make notes so that you don't forget to refer to a particular point if something important is said. In the heat of the moment and in the stress, it is very easy to hear the judge say something to which you want to respond and then as the judge continues, you forget to say it. Once again, I expect that @Andyorch will be along at some point although he may be away for the weekend.  
    • How the European papers see Britain's problems, from the Independent.   European newspapers blame Brexit for UK supply chain crisis WWW.INDEPENDENT.CO.UK Continent’s press liken situation to 1970s Winter of Discontent and ‘boycotted Cuba’  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

My mum V's Capital One


kimbers100
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5169 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi

 

I am just about to help my mum get her Capital One charges back.

 

There are £100.00 worth of charges on her statements made up of 5 x £20.00 late payment fee.

 

Do I just send a prelim asking for the £100.00 and add interest later?

 

Thanks

 

Kim

Link to post
Share on other sites

Add the interest thay have levied on the charges (at their APR) on now. You can add a further 8% if and when you file in court.

Steven

 

Using CAG Toolbar will generate much needed income - Download Here

 

Confused by Simple Interest? Confounded by Compound Interest? Read my Interest Tutorial

My Wins

 GE Money Won unconditionally May 2007

NatWest Won unconditionally August 2007

Brighthouse Won unconditionally August 2007

Goldfish Won unconditionally April 2008 (including CI on the basis of Sempra)

Clydesdale Financial Services (now BPF) Won unconditionally February 2008

 

Any opinions are without prejudice & without liability. Do not take any legal action on my advice alone. Almost everything I know concerning the law I learned from this site.

 

Please note, I will not give advice by PM. Please send a link to your thread and I will do my best to answer there.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...