Locked in car park

[JonCris]

Was not the Lyons Davidson application agreed by BOTH parties so went through on the nod:)

[noomill060]

4 guests now.

[JonCris]

It defeats me as to why the college continue to pursue this. Its my understanding that it can only end in grief for them Suggest they may need new counsel Of course it could be the college & the college alone which is the engine behind this & their lawyers are only following instruction their advice having been ignored Who knows:rolleyes:

[JonCris]

2 guests

[noomill060]

3 guests

[JonCris]

I suggest the 2 hour:eek: application hearing could manifest itself into a disposal hearing

[labrat]

could we have a disposal hearing for theses guests?

 

like little annoying flys going round your head....

 

sorry not too well atm so cant get any smilies of flyswatting

[Annushka]

There were 6 guests a minute ago.

[noomill060]

back down to 3 now

[den3371]

At least one of the guests was me! I didn't log in and was checking on updates at work.

[Patma]

Hello everyone, I'm back. I see Annushka has filled you in on the essentials, but basically it was a pretty good hearing all in all.

We had a different Judge this time and a different barrister for the other side.

The Judge made it clear that he was allowing Fred's defence and counterclaim, both of which had been in limbo since August 6th. He didn't even discuss them, just allowed them with Lyons Davidson's barrister also in agreement.

The issue of the delay in proceedings asked for by Lyons Davidson was also allowed. Fred had already explained that he would not object to their application.Thanks to one of CAG's legal eagles for that and lots of other great advice. (You know who you are:D)

 

The application to put them to strict proof of the caution is going to a 2 hour hearing, as is the application to strike out their claim. The judge said this may not take place for a while because of having to find a spare 2 hour slot, so this does give the police more time to do their work.

 

I feel a lot better now that's over and am going to chill out tonight .

Thaks to all of you for the fantastic support and sorry there's no resolution in sight just yet.

Actually having a defence and counterclaim allowed feels wonderful though after so long getting nowhere.

[Patma]

Was not the Lyons Davidson application agreed by BOTH parties so went through on the nod:)

Yes it was JonCris and very wise advice that was too.

[kiptower]

great news Pat and well done , and of course the thanks to the many that have helped

[Patma]

great news Pat and well done , and of course the thanks to the many that have helped

Thanks Kip, for all your help too and a big thankyou to everyone for keeping us going.

[Patma]

It defeats me as to why the college continue to pursue this. Its my understanding that it can only end in grief for them Suggest they may need new counsel Of course it could be the college & the college alone which is the engine behind this & their lawyers are only following instruction their advice having been ignored Who knows:rolleyes:

 

 

I keep asking myself who's driving who too. I wonder if we'll ever know the answer to that one?

[natalie]

Did you find out who the claimant is?

 

Sun Alliance or PCAD?

 

Did they explain the reason for the confusion?

[Patma]

Did you find out who the claimant is?

 

Sun Alliance or PCAD?

 

Did they explain the reason for the confusion?

No we haven't found out yet why they sometimes claim R&SA are the claimant when they're not mentioned as claimants by the court. Yesterday was such a short event that we didn't get the chance to ask about it.

[RichardM]

Patma.

 

Can you just remind us what the counterclaim of Fred comprised of. It's been such a long time, I'm pretty sure that many have forgotten. All I can remember is that it was originally ignored by the court back in June or July.

[JonCris]

Richard whatever it is I suspect they'll be asking to add punitive damages at the next hearing:D

[caledfwlch]

What baffles me is, if the college called the Police and reported the suspected damaging as a crime, then where is the Police Log No?

 

The one they normally give you when reporting a crime against yourself, for insurance purposes etc. Did the college take the accusation so seriously that they promptly forgot?

 

It certainly sounds like the caution never, ever existed - for the caution AND log no to disapear sounds very odd.

 

And I am suprised that RSA have actually paid out the insurance money without a police log no.

[Patma]

As I understand it, Caledfwlch, a log number is given when an alleged crime is reported and doesn't indicate whether a caution or indeed any charge has been brought.

In Fred's case there is no evidence on police record of a caution, so it either never existed or "disappeared" off the system.

One of the big problems for Lyons Davidson is that they knew there was no caution on record when they applied to the court to amend their statement of case to include a caution. The court allowed their application without question and it wasn't until some weeks later that Fred found out that there was no caution on record, when Lyons Davidson submitted their first trial bundle and very helpfully provided the evidence, in the form of letters from Devon and Cornwall Police, informing Lyons Davidson in 2008 that no trace of any caution could be found.

[caledfwlch]

I though so Patma, I was just wondering, because, if they have not even got a log no for insurance purposes, how do they prove Fred was even arrested?

 

Obviously the caution does not appear anywhere because it never even existed, it seems strange there is no log either, unless they get deleted after a certain amount of time.

 

Is there time before the next case to SAR the police (or have you already done it?) I should think a SAR that shows no caution information would also be convincing to a judge.

[Patma]

I though so Patma, I was just wondering, because, if they have not even got a log no for insurance purposes, how do they prove Fred was even arrested?

 

Obviously the caution does not appear anywhere because it never even existed, it seems strange there is no log either, unless they get deleted after a certain amount of time.

 

Is there time before the next case to SAR the police (or have you already done it?) I should think a SAR that shows no caution information would also be convincing to a judge.

Good idea, Caledfwlch. We haven't done an SAR yet.

They did have a crime reference number which they gave to their insurers at the time and that was presumably why the insurance company paid out.

The police have already said that even if there was a caution on record, they would now be satisfied that it should be expunged.

[Patma]

An order has now arrived from the court following the applications hearing last week.

This is what it says:-

Upon hearing counsel for the claimant and the defendant in person, it is ordered by consent, that

1a) The hearing listed for 17th November 2009, be vacated.

1b) The defendant is permitted to rely on the amended defence and counterclaim filed on 6th August 2009.

2) The defendant's application relating to striking out and the police caution to be listed on the first open date, after 6 weeks, namely on 9th February 2010 at 11am.

So there we are, another delay.

Edited November 17, 2009 by Patma
typo

[foolishgirl]

...The defendant's application relating to striking out and the police caution to be listed on the first open date, after 6 weeks, namely on 9th February 2010 at 11am.

So there we are, another delay.

 

Ah well, enjoy Christmas...