Jump to content


discussion thread - Judgment granted then DG tries it on....


lateralus
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5127 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

There seem to be a number of these cases cropping up - so here's a place you can get together and discuss what should be done.

 

You get your judgment against hsbc for missing deadlines, not complying with directions, whatever and then dg tries to get it set aside and uses the OFT test case as the excuse.

 

Here's audreygreeneyes thoughts on what should be done:

 

FROM WHAT I AM READING THERE ARE VERY CLEAR BREACHES IN COURT PROCEDURES............... THE CLAIMANTS NEED TO SEND DETAILS TO THE OFT AS THIS IS OUT WITH THE BOUNDS OF THE "WAIVER"

 

IT IS ALSO VITAL THAT COMPLAINTS BE MADE TO THE MOR....... MASTER OF THE ROLLS........

 

IT MIGHT ALSO BE WORTH GOING TO THE SENIOR CIRCUIT JUDGE.........

 

GO TO YOUR MP. THE SUMMER RECESS IS OVER SHORTLY...............

 

 

These are a couple of the cases we've seen - so now you can kick it around on here if you like - putting heads together to see what should be done......

 

Claim against HSBCClaim against HSBC

 

HSBC trying to enforce a stay

 

Hsbc

 

As I've said before - this looks to me like DG playing fast and loose with the waiver given to them for the test case and I think it stinks that they are using it this way - when they have never taken any notice of the deadlines, frequently submitting things late and the courts accepting it.

But this is really OTT - you get a judgment against them and they use the OFT waiver to get out of paying - they wouldn't be able to do this in any other circumstances - why at this late stage of court action should they be able to do it - you need to fight it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 83
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

The Clerk to the Master of the Rolls

The Master of the Rolls' Private Office

Room E214

The Royal Courts of Justice

The Strand

WC2A 2LL

Fax 020 7947 6544.

http://www.civilappeals.gov.uk/.

 

 

If this had or was happening to my case this is what I wouldeb doing........ contact the MOR ^^^^^ and making a formal complaint as the courts are not applying their own civil procedure rules......... here are the 2 sections that in my own view are relevant......

When judgment or order takes effect

40.7 - (1) A judgment or order takes effect from the day when it is given or made, or such later date as the court may specify.

 

(2) This rule applies to all judgments and orders except those to which rule 40.10 (judgment against a State) applies.

 

 

and

 

Time for complying with a judgment or order

40.11 A party must comply with a judgment or order for the payment of an amount of money (including costs) within 14 days of the date of the judgment or order, unless -

  • (a) the judgment or order specifies a different date for compliance (including specifying payment by instalments);
     
    (b) any of these Rules specifies a different date for compliance; or
     
    © the court has stayed the proceedings or judgment.

(Parts 12 and 14 specify different dates for complying with certain default judgments and judgments on admissions)

 

 

NOW THESE ONLY APPLY IN THE 2 FOLLOWING CIRCUMSTANCES.............

 

A THE COURT STRUCK OUT THE DEFENCE OF IT'S OWN INITATIVE

OR

B YOU APPLIED OT HAVE TI STRUCKOUT AND THIS WAS GRANTED........

 

INTHE FIRST INSTANCE THEY FAILE DTO COMPLY WITH THE 1ST CORT ORDER..........WHEN YOU MADE YOUR APPLICATION THEYW ERE WRITTEN TO AND GIVEN AGAIN A SPECIFIC TIME TO RESPOND. THEY DID NTO. HENCE JUDGEMENT......

 

UNDER THE 2 ABOVE RULES THEY CANNOT APPLY TO HAVE IT SET ASIDE USING THE OFT "WAIVER" MY REASONING FO RHTIS IS......

 

THIS IS NOT A BREACH OF THE BANKING TERMS AND CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH THE "WAIVER" APPLIES...

 

THIS IS BREACH OF COURT CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES............ TOTALLY DIFFERENT AND THEREFORE THE OFT WAIVER HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS........IT IS FURTHER PROOF OF "ABUSE OF PROCESS" AND MANIPULATIONS.....

 

Now sorry forgot the caps......lol.... if ti was me they way I woudl be procceeding is A write tothe court pointing this out( anyone who wnats help compose a letter jsut shout)

my next move would be to write or fax the MOR as he is the seinor judge in charge of this.............. he has to be made aware of these breaches he has the power to act and he will ahve to........

 

next contact the OFT and this is urgent as they 2 month trial period is up ont he 27th sept...........

 

this again shows clear breach of the "waiver" it shows clearly they are abusing the OFT waiver............. it is not relevant in your cases.......the more that do complain the better the chance of the "waiver" being withdrawn and all cases would then have to progress as they woudl have prior to this deal...........

 

again this is only my view and if ti was me, I would also be throwing in the fact that Article 6 of the human rights act 1998 is definately cominginto play here as it is looking like active discrimination.............PLEASE READ THAT CAREFULLY I DID SAY IT IS LOOKING LIKE.....

 

now all the above is onyl my own thoughts and views at theend of the day it is down to the individual to make their own choice.........

 

if any of this has been helpful ro you think I can help you in any other way, composing letters about the obve or just to soundoff at, please feel free.........

 

I do hope this is of help:):)

 

Age

rockin all over the world

Link to post
Share on other sites

The OFT is based in central London at:

Fleetbank House

2-6 Salisbury Square

London

EC4Y 8JX

For the OFT switchboard or to contact OFT Enquiries via the switchboard, please ring 020 7211 8000.

 

I cannot find an email addy or fax number on their web site but it might be worth a call to the switchboard and ask for it:):):)

rockin all over the world

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have two cases where the defence has struck out and DG have written to me to say they are to apply for stay with an N244 application notice a copy of which they have included .They are also applying for a stay on one which hasnt been struck out even though they havent complied with their allocation questionaire. I will ring the court in the morning get an update on any further developements or if they have applied yet, then we may have to get the ball rolling back in our direction with your help. I must say what you have said makes sense( after reading it three times) perhaps it could be more condensed and in stages e.g A do this B write this etc we are not all as brainy as you and lattie.Going to watch footie now and not in tomorrow will check and update on thurs pm cheers:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

you must be joking - i'm really all at sea with this stuff - but i take your point - so audrey - let's lay it out for them -

 

this much i know - if you have a judgment - try to get it executed quickly - before they can apply for the stay/set aside. you do that by - well here - i just found these two -

Got A Judgment? How To Get Paid

How to enforce a Judgement.

 

 

if you aren't quick enough (this is no reflection on you - it's just the way it pans out sometimes) - and they apply for the stay/set aside -

 

then i think you need to write a letter to the judge telling them why they shouldn't grant a stay - and primarily to me it's because they haven't done diddly up to this point - - they even have a judgment against them for not doing what they were supposed to to so why in heaven's name should they be allowed to use the waiver on the test case to apply for a stay on a judgment - the oft question and answer page is quite clear - it's for the courts to decide on cases already before them and it was the intention of the master of the rolls that stays be granted on a case by case basis. this action by dg is a blantant attempt to not pay what has already been adjudged against them. i'd point to dougal's super win to get his stay lifted and the arguments he used - HDR - v - HSBC (multipage.gif1 2 3). which brings me to the point - if they get the stay/set aside - then you need to follow the threads for getting a stay removed.

 

audreygreeneyes will be along to add some thoughts to this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

just watched Liverpool win so in a good mood and read your reply and have taken it on board thanks will wait for audaud(we had a friend called audrey and my kids called her this) to add her bit and then action it tomorrow and thurs ta lol

Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is a brilliant idea Latty, to collate as many instances as possible of the banks playing fast & loose with court rulings.

 

For someone who says they don't know what's going on you're doing a cracking job of ferreting out info - more power to your elbow Lat.

 

John :-)

Nemo me impune lacessit

 

 

Advice & opinions given by johnnymitch are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

 

If you think I've helped you please feel free to tickle my star :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok baased on what appears to be coming a common problem, have composed this letter for you tosend to the OFT...........NOW THIS IS ONYL MY SUGGESTION. PLEASE FEEL FREE TO ALTER IT OR DELETE WHAT EVER AND WHERE EVER YOU FEEL.................

 

Your name and address here

 

 

 

 

 

Your claim reference number

 

 

Dear Sir

 

 

I am writing with regards my bank charges claim, whilst being aware of the OFT announcement of the 27th July and the waiver given to the banks.

 

 

I wish to make you aware of their abuse of this waiver, judgement was awarded to me on the courts own initiative as “Abuse of Process” the court took this decision based on the fact that the service of the required paperwork on myself and the court had not been met.

 

The court then sent out this order and it gave the defendant a further 7 or 14 days to respond if they wished to have it stayed, varied or set aside, the defendant failed to comply with this order also. They submitted their request late “alleging” that it was administrative error. The grounds for this request are the OFT waiver.

 

The OFT waiver does not apply as these are breaches of the Civil Procedure Rules,

 

When judgment or order takes effect

40.7 - (1) A judgment or order takes effect from the day when it is given or made, or such later date as the court may specify.

 

(2) This rule applies to all judgments and orders except those to which rule 40.10 (judgment against a State) applies.

 

Judgment against a State in default of acknowledgment of service

40.10 - (1) Where the claimant obtains default judgment under Part 12 on a claim against a State where the defendant has failed to file an acknowledgment of service, the judgment does not take effect until 2 months after service on the State of -

(a) a copy of the judgment; and

 

(b) a copy of the evidence in support of the application for permission to enter default judgment (unless the evidence has already been served on the State in accordance with an order made under Part 12).

(2) In this rule, "State" has the meaning given by section 14 of the State Immunity Act 1978[50].

This is yet further evidence of the banks continual manipulation of the waiver and the courts system, you cannot allow this to continue and I respectfully request you inform

DG Solicitors, 12 Calthorpe Road, Edgbaston BI5 1QZ that in case (quote your case reference number here ) the waiver is not applicable due to the fact it is breaches of the Civil Procedure Rules, which is in fact an act of parliament.

 

It is also possible that under section 148_7.c of The Financial Service and Markets Act 2000 there has been a breach also, here is the relevant section

 

Modification or waiver

148 Modification or waiver of rules

(1) This section applies in relation to the following—

(a) auditors and actuaries rules;

(b) control of information rules;

© financial promotion rules;

(d) general rules;

(e) insurance business rules;

(f) money laundering rules; and

(g) price stabilising rules.

(2) The Authority may, on the application or with the consent of an authorised person, direct that all or any of the rules to which this section applies—

(a) are not to apply to the authorised person; or

(b) are to apply to him with such modifications as may be specified in the direction.

(3) An application must be made in such manner as the Authority may direct.

(4) The Authority may not give a direction unless it is satisfied that—

(a) compliance by the authorised person with the rules, or with the rules as unmodified, would be unduly burdensome or would not achieve the purpose for which the rules were made; and

(b) the direction would not result in undue risk to persons whose interests the rules are intended to protect.

(5) A direction may be given subject to conditions.

(6) Unless it is satisfied that it is inappropriate or unnecessary to do so, a direction must be published by the Authority in such a way as it thinks most suitable for bringing the direction to the attention of—

(a) those likely to be affected by it; and

(b) others who may be likely to make an application for a similar direction.

(7) In deciding whether it is satisfied as mentioned in subsection (6), the Authority must—

(a) take into account whether the direction relates to a rule contravention of which is actionable in accordance with section 150;

(b) consider whether its publication would prejudice, to an unreasonable degree, the commercial interests of the authorised person concerned or any other member of his immediate group; and

© consider whether its publication would be contrary to an international obligation of the United Kingdom. Possibly The Human Rights Act 1998 Article 6 of the convention….

(8) For the purposes of paragraphs (b) and © of subsection (7), the Authority must consider whether it would be possible to publish the direction without either of the consequences mentioned in those paragraphs by publishing it without disclosing the identity of the authorised person concerned.

(9) The Authority may—

(a) revoke a direction; or

(b) vary it on the application, or with the consent, of the authorised person to whom it relates.

(10) “Direction” means a direction under subsection (2).

(11) “Immediate group”, in relation to an authorised person (“A”), means—

(a) A;

(b) a parent undertaking of A;

© a subsidiary undertaking of A;

(d) a subsidiary undertaking of a parent undertaking of A;

(e) a parent undertaking of a subsidiary undertaking of A.

It is my understanding that in the first instance this “waiver” is for a 2 month trial period and its continuation is dependant on the bank’s conduct and compliance of the terms set out in the said Waiver”.

 

This case alone is clear evidence that they have not complied with those agreements and will continue to further abuse the courts and your “waiver”. It is my understanding that mine is not the only case they have used this tactic.

 

I await your response.

rockin all over the world

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok vin firstly what are the dates the court issued judgement and what does the order say............ like you have 7 days to apply to have this order varied,ste aside or stayed...........

 

basicly once the judge orders it struck out it is in actual fact effective from that date............ as the section i pasted in here says.......

 

now you are objecting under the courts own cicil procedure rules, which is totally different to the oft waiver............ the 2 have no relevance on each other..............

 

the civil procedure rules are an act of parliement and nothing can interfer with that or over rule it............they are manipulating the waiver to siut their needs......... which under the cpr they cannont..........

 

now it is possible that the judges are not inactual fact aware of this, it coudl be thatmost are being seen by junior judges, and lets face it there are a lot of rules in the cpr (trust me on that).......

 

I also think there is a touch of niaveity on the courts parts in that they actually believe that DG or any of them would not actually attempt to pull a stunt like this..............

 

NOW THIS IS THE VITAL PART YOU MUST REMEMBER THAT THEY WERE ONYL GIVE THIS WAIVER FOR 2 MONTHS TRIAL PERIOD........... IF THEY BREACH IT IT MAY VERY WELL BE REVOKED WHICH IS WHY IT IS VITAL YOU MAKE A COMPLAINTOT THE OFT......... THATS WHAT THE ABOVE LETTER IS FOR ............

i AM NOW GOING TO DRAFT A LETTER FOR THE mor , THE MASTER OF THE ROLLS, THE 3RD HIGHEST JUDGE IN THE LAND AND IT WAS HE WHO SAID NO BLANKET STAYS ETC ETC.........

 

right back to the drawing board.............:):)

rockin all over the world

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your details here

Claim ref no…………

Dear Sir Anthony Clarke,

I am writing to you with regards the above mentioned claim and believe that the Civil Procedure Rules are being breach and abused.

My claim was dealt with in the following manner, the Judge struck out the defense as an “Abuse of Process” this was on the 25th July 2007, they had failed to comply with the courts original order. The defendant was sent a copy and had the time specified by the judge in which to respond and have it stayed, set aside or varied.

They failed to comply with this order also, submitting it late and claiming it to be an error in their office, they also stated the reason for this stay was the OFT ruling.

The OFT ruling does not apply in this instance as it is a breach of the Courts Civil Procedure Rules in specific the following.

When judgment or order takes effect

40.7 - (1) A judgment or order takes effect from the day when it is given or made, or such later date as the court may specify.

 

(2) This rule applies to all judgments and orders except those to which rule 40.10 (judgment against a State) applies.

Judgment against a State in default of acknowledgment of service

40.10 - (1) Where the claimant obtains default judgment under Part 12 on a claim against a State where the defendant has failed to file an acknowledgment of service, the judgment does not take effect until 2 months after service on the State of -

(a) a copy of the judgment; and

 

(b) a copy of the evidence in support of the application for permission to enter default judgment (unless the evidence has already been served on the State in accordance with an order made under Part 12).

(2) In this rule, "State" has the meaning given by section 14 of the State Immunity Act 1978[50].

Mine is not the only case this is happening to currently and feel that clarification is needed from your office in this regard, it is clear that the bank’s are playing fast and loose with the judiciary and continuing to manipulate the system to their advantage.

 

I wait your response.

Yours Sincerely.

rockin all over the world

Link to post
Share on other sites

the date the order or judgement was issued was 9th aug on7se07169 and the same date on7se07170 and it is addressed to DG it states ^^Before DISTRICT JUDGE OLDHAM sitting at Sheffield County Court ,The Law Courts West Bar Sheffield S38PH ^^Upon the Courts own motion .The court has made this order of its own initiative without a hearing.If you object to the order ,you must make an application to have it set aside,varied or stayed within 7 days of receiving it .IT IS ORDERED THAT 1 the defence be struck out 2Judgement for the amount claimed plus interest plus court fee.Dated 9th august /DGs letter to me is dated the 20th August.I spoke to the court this morning and both cases have been referred for direction to the Judge on the 28th so I should get a letter informing me if it is going to court by beginning of next week the other case 7se07171 they have put a stay on and i have received a letter from the court this morning dated the 24th august saying it is stayed pending the the issues raised in the test case.So is it worth me doing anything now before i receive the Judges direction .may not read what you suggest until tomorrow night now got to go out in an hour .thanks for the nickname audaud lol:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

The court has made this order of its own initiative without a hearing.If you object to the order ,you must make an application to have it set aside,varied or stayed within 7 days of receiving it .IT IS ORDERED THAT 1 the defence be struck out 2Judgement for the amount claimed plus interest plus court fee.. erm am I missing something here. if judgement has been awarded then why is there a hearing???...........

 

and yes get yourself down to the court first thing in themorning and get the baillifs sent in.......... asap...........:):)

rockin all over the world

Link to post
Share on other sites

if judgement has been awarded then why is there a hearing???...........

 

I wondered about that too, Auburn - surely the judgement has been passed - or have DG asked for a stay AGAIN!!! after the event. If so , is this another one for the MORs file?

 

These seem to be coming thick and fast now, it's got to hit the fan soon -Yes/No? :-?

Nemo me impune lacessit

 

 

Advice & opinions given by johnnymitch are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

 

If you think I've helped you please feel free to tickle my star :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

well there is no mention of the stay being applied for the 1st 2 only the 3rd........... so not sure.........

 

yes "Duke" thats why I did the 2 letters ^^^^^^^^^^^ there. one for the oft and 1 for the MOR:):)

 

and yes I would say it coudl well hit the fan sometime in the next 4 weeks. as the "waiver" was onyl for 2 months in the first instance:):)all those who have had deadlines missed should write to the OFT and complain............that they are using their waiver to get out of missing deadlines:):)

rockin all over the world

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Maureen ;) I hope it comes to a head soon, they're playing everybody for fools and I hope it comes back to haunt them! :evil:

 

 

PS Congrats on passing you're 1000th post !!!-

Yes - you have done it this time! :D :D

Duke

Nemo me impune lacessit

 

 

Advice & opinions given by johnnymitch are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

 

If you think I've helped you please feel free to tickle my star :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that everyone cant do much now till monday but will try the warrant ,but bit worried that they had seven days to respond from the 9th and their letter to me was dated the 20th Allowing for post 4days plus 9 = 13 plus 7days =20th

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just wanted to say this is a brilliant thread lat! And those letters AGE are really well put together and obviously well thought out!

Vinyared, why are you allowing 4 days for post? Forget the 4 days! 9 Plus 7 = 16th!!!

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Welcome to the Consumer Forums

Free advice and support to to solve your consumer problems.

You will soon discover what a friendly place this is and get lots of hints about standing up to consumer bullies or dealing with other consumer rights.

 

Which guide to the Sale Of Goods Act

 

New advice guide explains credit card rights

 

Help the CAG!!

Make a donation

 

ARE YOU A VICTIM OF COWBOY BUILDERS?

 

Has your RBS account been transferred to Santander?

 

Forum rules. Please read these before posting

 

PLEASE CHECK OUT THE CAG LIBRARY!! IT HAS LOADS OF USEFUL STUFF IN THERE. CLICK HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks freaky, I spenmt a lot of time researching the facts and composing the letters.......lol........... yeah I know........ bad form......

 

 

thanks for the congrats Duke x........

 

now my mind is in overtime, having read those articles freaky about the students and how they used facebook to their advantage...........

 

perhaps it is time we took a more pro-active role, altong with mse and pc............if everyone in the courts system just now was to move their account from HSBC this would seriously affect their profts. wouldnt it? am sure the shareholders will not be too hapy if they see the peasents revolting and it hitting their pockets?........... just a thought........what does anyone else think?

rockin all over the world

Link to post
Share on other sites

if everyone in the courts system just now was to move their account from HSBC this would seriously affect their profts

 

This would be an ideal solution Auburn - but getting concerted action is pracrtically impossible. It's like getting everybody to jump up in the air and land at the same time.............. :)

 

Trouble is the banks know this, which is why they don't listen to their customers - unless it suits them of course! :rolleyes:

 

If you could pull this off, Auburn, we'll put a statue of you up beside Nelson Mandela LOL :D

 

PS - I thought you were off Rock-Chicking it with the Quo? ;)

Nemo me impune lacessit

 

 

Advice & opinions given by johnnymitch are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

 

If you think I've helped you please feel free to tickle my star :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well my account is all but closed anyway, I just cant work with them anymore its impossible. Theres an overdrawn balance which is less than the charges they have taken and that will stay there until judgement is reached in the test case.

 

pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

Waal, you're goin' off with them stetson quo guys Maureen, - why shouldn't I get a saloon gal in? :p You ain't jealous, is you?

 

[/url] th_thjohn_wayne.jpg

Duke

Nemo me impune lacessit

 

 

Advice & opinions given by johnnymitch are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

 

If you think I've helped you please feel free to tickle my star :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...