Jump to content

broken arrow

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    3,602
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by broken arrow

  1. There was a couple of claims in Sept which came to CAG, HFO discontinued both when challenged.......
  2. OFT still minded to refuse/revoke their licences, HFOC, current licence expires on 26/3/2013 and Roxburghe expires 4/3/2013, HFO Services expired Sept 2009.
  3. Hi Fallback, who was the original creditor?
  4. Probally for the best, the off forum advice you received, I am aware of, he is a top bloke and really knows his stuff, I still think argued well you could prove the claimants conduct had been unreasonable in making their claim. The main thing is you beat them and the alleged debt will now be stat barred, so have a good Christmas and a happy new year.
  5. I don't know if any would take it on, there is only one firm who I would recommend anyhow!!!
  6. If you are going to continue, you will have to be prepared to make that application, go to court and be able to understand and argue your points, I would make an issue of their misconduct in this matter.
  7. This claim had zero chance of ever going to the SCT, because they had no intention ever of it going to court, we know this because they discontinued on every part claim which was defended.If it had gone to court, there was a stong case for it to be fastrack due to the complexities of the issues involved and also the fact they where actually trying to claim more, an amount which was over the SCT threshold.
  8. Liability for costs38.6(1) Unless the court orders otherwise, a claimant who discontinues is liable for the costs which a defendant against whom the claimant discontinues incurred on or before the date on which notice of discontinuance was served on the defendant.3) This rule does not apply to claims allocated to the small claims track.Your claim was never allocated...........
  9. 27.14(1) This rule applies to any case which has been allocated to the small claims track unless paragraph (5) applies.(Rules 44.9 and 44.11 make provision in relation to orders for costs made before a claim has been allocated to the small claims track)
  10. They are correct in that the claim does not fall within CPR 27.14 as it was never allocatedCosts on the small claims track27.14(1) This rule applies to any case which has been allocated to the small claims track unless paragraph (5) applies.
  11. What proof of a split claim do you have, it was only a partial claim for alleged arrears, they only stated there would be a balance owing after judgement, they never stated they would make a further claim for this balance, anyhow there is no need to mention this, you only need to ask for a figure between their original offer and your detailed costs, to save time and draw a conclusion to the matter.
  12. You should maybe have accepted their original offer, any hearing in the matter would be very informal.
  13. TR will try to convince the Judge this is a simple low value claim, but we know better, for starters if it was such a simple claim why did they not continue once you defended and allow the claim to be stayed and then discontinue....WHY?
  14. What do you want to do, I would go for a detailed assessment hearing, just to get them in court and throw a bit off xxxx at them, you would need to convince the Judge this would have had to have been allocated to fast track the guys have given you plenty of reasons why.
  15. Hopefully one day we get someone on here who did not respond to the claim for arrears and received a default judgment.
  16. It's more than likely to have dropped off now geee, mine dropped off in September.
  17. I like the last one, threatening court action on an account which had already been to court.
  18. Get the idiots into court and ask them why they start claims, then if the claim is defended, they ignore and or discontinue. there are plenty of these on this forum to refer to, they have clearly wasted your time and the courts, IMO they should be barred from ever making a claim again.Also they have already made you an offer and they have paid out previously on another defended part claim.
  19. let me guess, BT & T-Mobile say they don,t need to serve Default Notice, Lowell are saying they don,t have the paperwork.
  20. Or give him the advice you got, a phone call costs nothing.
×
×
  • Create New...