Morgan Stanley/Goldfish Cabot are now chasing advice please

[trumpetmaest]

cabot are after over 25K so it fits in to multi track and is over fast track.

[trumpetmaest]

Once the defence is filed the court sends a copy to the claimant along with an allocation questionnaire. Each party should complete an allocation questionnaire within the time allowed by the court. The purpose of the questionnaire is to allow the court to begin planning the timetable which it wants the case to follow on the way to trial. The questionnaire helps to identify the factors which are relevant to allocation to track. The court can allocate the case to one of three tracks, generally on the basis of the value of the claim and the anticipated length of trial and whether any expert evidence is likely to be required. The tracks are the Small Claims Track (claims under £5,000) the Fast Track (£5,000 to £15,000 up to £25,000 if after April 2009) and the Multi Track (£15,000+).

 

The rules relating to the conduct of the matter vary according to the track to which the matter is allocated. The key factors relate to the treatment of costs and the length of time permitted for the hearing of the case at trial. Of particular significance is the fact that in Small Claims the successful party is unlikely to recover costs. In such a case if seeking legal advice it is important to ensure that the adviser is willing to work for a fixed fee, or in a limited way so that the claimant has access to legal advice which is cost-effective.

Once the court has decided how to allocate the matter, the parties are notified of its decision and a list of directions is sent to them. These directions set out the steps which the court requires the parties to follow between then and the trial. Direction will address the issue of disclosure, witness statements and expert evidence, as well as dealing with the trial timetable itself.

 

In the fast track the costs of preparation are awarded on a normal basis (reasonable costs are recoverable) but the trial costs are limited. The costs are likely to be assessed summarily (there and then) and will be payable generally within 14 days. In the multi track costs will have to be referred to detailed assessment. The winner is unlikely to get all their costs back. This is because most costs will be assessed on the standard basis. On the standard basis any benefit of the doubt as to whether costs were reasonably incurred or reasonable in amount is given to the paying party. Furthermore, costs may be reduced still further by the Judge applying the proportionality rule and after taking into account other factors such as the conduct of the parties, the complexity of the matter and the value of the claim.

 

 

Multi track claims can be handled a number of ways and the judge may decide that the case will be heard on the basis of documents alone (referred to as a paper adjudication); whether the testimony of expert witnesses may be required or allowed, and the judge may predetermine how much time each solicitor has to argue their case. Ultimately, if a judge does not rule otherwise, a claimant’s case will be public—meaning that it is open to the public and members of the public can witness the proceedings as they transpire.

Multi track cases are resolved as quickly as possible and if the claimant receives a judgment in their favour they are often entitled to court fees, compensation for lost earnings, travelling expenses (within reason), and the cost of expert testimony. Of course, the defendant or claimant can appeal a decision made by the High court—that is if they can prove that something out of the ordinary has occurred.

 

Given my above posts do you think I should push multi track? paper adjudication?

 

 

would I get a more clued up judge? I would presume this could only be in my favour.

[trumpetmaest]

bump

[trumpetmaest]

bump

[trumpetmaest]

bump

[trumpetmaest]

26.6

 

(1) The small claims track is the normal track for –

(a) any claim for personal injuries where –

(i) the value of the claim is not more than £5,000; and

(ii) the value of any claim for damages for personal injuries is not more than £1,000;

(b) any claim which includes a claim by a tenant of residential premises against a landlord where –

(i) the tenant is seeking an order requiring the landlord to carry out repairs or other work to the premises (whether or not the tenant is also seeking some other remedy);

(ii) the cost of the repairs or other work to the premises is estimated to be not more than £1,000; and

(iii) the value of any other claim for damages is not more than £1,000.

(Rule 2.3 defines ‘claim for personal injuries’ as proceedings in which there is a claim for damages in respect of personal injuries to the claimant or any other person or in respect of a person’s death)

(2) For the purposes of paragraph (1) ‘damages for personal injuries’ means damages claimed as compensation for pain, suffering and loss of amenity and does not include any other damages which are claimed.

(3) Subject to paragraph (1), the small claims track is the normal track for any claim which has a value of not more than £5,000.

(Rule 26.7(4) provides that the court will not allocate to the small claims track certain claims in respect of harassment or unlawful eviction)

(4) Subject to paragraph (5), the fast track is the normal track for any claim –

(a) for which the small claims track is not the normal track; and

(b) which has a value –

(i) for proceedings issued on or after 6th April 2009, of not more than £25,000; and

(ii) for proceedings issued before 6th April 2009, of not more than £15,000.

(5) The fast track is the normal track for the claims referred to in paragraph (4) only if the court considers that –

(a) the trial is likely to last for no longer than one day; and

(b) oral expert evidence at trial will be limited to –

(i) one expert per party in relation to any expert field; and

(ii) expert evidence in two expert fields.

(6) The multi-track is the normal track for any claim for which the small claims track or the fast track is not the normal track.

General rule for allocation

 

26.7

 

(1) In considering whether to allocate a claim to the normal track for that claim under rule 26.6, the court will have regard to the matters mentioned in rule 26.8(1).

(2) The court will allocate a claim which has no financial value to the track which it considers most suitable having regard to the matters mentioned in rule 26.8(1).

(3) The court will not allocate proceedings to a track if the financial value of the claim, assessed by the court under rule 26.8, exceeds the limit for that track unless all the parties consent to the allocation of the claim to that track.

(4) The court will not allocate a claim to the small claims track, if it includes a claim by a tenant of residential premises against his landlord for a remedy in respect of harassment or unlawful eviction.

Matters relevant to allocation to a track

 

26.8

 

(1) When deciding the track for a claim, the matters to which the court shall have regard include –

(a) the financial value, if any, of the claim;

(b) the nature of the remedy sought;

© the likely complexity of the facts, law or evidence;

(d) the number of parties or likely parties;

(e) the value of any counterclaim or other Part 20 claim and the complexity of any matters relating to it;

(f) the amount of oral evidence which may be required;

(g) the importance of the claim to persons who are not parties to the proceedings;

(h) the views expressed by the parties; and

(i) the circumstances of the parties.

(2) It is for the court to assess the financial value of a claim and in doing so it will disregard –

(a) any amount not in dispute;

(b) any claim for interest;

© costs; and

(d) any contributory negligence.

(3) Where –

(a) two or more claimants have started a claim against the same defendant using the same claim form; and

(b) each claimant has a claim against the defendant separate from the other claimants,

the court will consider the claim of each claimant separately when it assesses financial value under paragraph (1).

 

 

 

 

After looking at the above I do feel that their costs would be monitored more closely.

However, I do understand that it could leave me exposed to more substantial costs should I not be successful (at this stage).

Thoughts?

[trumpetmaest]

please can someone have a look:eek:

[supasnooper]

I cannot see a judge allocating this case to Multi-track as it does not warrant several days.

 

Unfortunately, even if the case is allocated to Fast Track, you are still exposed to costs anyway.

[trumpetmaest]

I cannot see a judge allocating this case to Multi-track as it does not warrant several days.

 

Unfortunately, even if the case is allocated to Fast Track, you are still exposed to costs anyway.

 

My line of thought was that it increases their cost and given the flimsy (imo) evidence or lack of it may make them take their foot of the accelerator.

[patrickq1]

has there been any developement on this

patrickq1

[trumpetmaest]

UPDATE

 

Court date was set for two days in June... I appointed solicitor on a CFA basis.

 

Case dismissed!!!!! and they are paying some HEFTY costs!!

[andrew1]

UPDATE

 

Court date was set for two days in June... I appointed solicitor on a CFA basis.

 

Case dismissed!!!!! and they are paying some HEFTY costs!!

 

Not being in any way legally trained it was difficult to post and advise you on your litigation trail with this trumpetmaest, but I was watching and hoping you'd get the cavalry out to assist. Not so much the cavalry, but with the way you'd handled this thus far I was confident you'd come up trumps and this proves it.

 

Very well done. Morgans must be quite a liability to Cabot and you've just contributed towards another step to bringing this lot to their senses yet again.

 

Now maybe you can do what one of our Cabot fan Club lads said after nearly 2 yrs of fighting them " I don't want to go to bed at night thinking about Cabot and I don't want to wake up in the morning and starting all over again" Now he doesn't and I sincerely hope you won't either.

 

Well done again.

[pabrmu]

Hi Trumpet, I too have having problems with Cabot/Morgans.

Any chance of sending me a PM with who you used on a CFA basis.

Many thanks and congrats.