Marlin/Mortimer CCJ HFC Marbles Card - Set Aside Help **WON plus Costs**

[Spamalot]

At Last..... date received for set aside of Discontinuance...

 

26th February 2010... exactly a year to the day after the original CCJ was awarded...

 

Spam.

[foolishgirl]

At Last..... date received for set aside of Discontinuance...

 

26th February 2010... exactly a year to the day after the original CCJ was awarded...

 

 

How ironic!

 

February though! Can't believe your court is so busy; I think maybe they have put it to the bottom of the heap.

[Spamalot]

Hi FG..

 

How ironic! Yes! Isn't it just..

 

February though! Can't believe your court is so busy; I think maybe they have put it to the bottom of the heap.

 

To be honest, when I went there in August for my original Set Aside the place was choc full of repossesion hearings... it was just so sad to see so many people in such financial straits... I suppose my issue is pretty small considering what some of those people are going through...

 

Anyhoo, pleased the date has arrived.. I shall now set about responding to their 'statement' and show just the right amount of bemusement..:grin:

 

Spam.

[Spamalot]

Hi all,

 

Here we go again..

 

Got a letter today from MC... In a nutshell...

 

They are responding to my set aside of discontinuance application with.. Without prejudice save as to costs...' The basis of my defence is not clear... I am claiming costs but I haven't proved evidence of distress and hardship so they are willing to settle out of court for £xxxx.xx and I can pay them in monthly installments'. They have enclosed an income and expenditure sheet and want to know how much I'm going to offer them so they can draw up a consent order...

 

ARE THEY NUTS!!!!

 

Spam.

[foolishgirl]

 

ARE THEY NUTS!!!!

 

 

 

Just desperate!

[Spamalot]

Just desperate!

 

Hi FG..

 

Agreed with the above...

 

Do you think I should reply to this drivel or just wait and see what else they come up with over the next couple of weeks?...

 

Not sure what would be best as far as 'impression to the court' is concerned....

 

Thanks,

 

Spam.

[citizenB]

Hi all,

 

Here we go again..

 

Got a letter today from MC... In a nutshell...

 

They are responding to my set aside of discontinuance application with.. Without prejudice save as to costs...' The basis of my defence is not clear... I am claiming costs but I haven't proved evidence of distress and hardship so they are willing to settle out of court for £xxxx.xx and I can pay them in monthly installments'. They have enclosed an income and expenditure sheet and want to know how much I'm going to offer them so they can draw up a consent order...

 

ARE THEY NUTS!!!!

 

Spam.

 

[Delfi101]

Write back to them stating that your defence is perfectly clear and that, for a suitable fee, you'll be happy to explain it to them.

 

This serves 2 purposes - it shows that you're not ignoring them if they 'try it on' in court and it also will serve to really really annoy them.

 

D

[Spamalot]

Write back to them stating that your defence is perfectly clear and that, for a suitable fee, you'll be happy to explain it to them.

 

This serves 2 purposes - it shows that you're not ignoring them if they 'try it on' in court and it also will serve to really really annoy them.

 

D

 

.... I am sorely tempted to reply as such even if it's just to see what 'offer' they come up with next... I shall put my thinking cap on.. ... give them their due though, this lot.. they really do like digging their own graves... all this to-ing and fro-ing is just adding heaps to my costs...

 

Spam.

[Craftygirl42]

I was thinking about you yesterday Spam as keeping my fingers crossed Marlins are going to discontinue and was going to look at your thread for further advice.

 

They keep trying to get me to sign a consent order and sending threatograms and phoning to find out if I am going to accept their current offer.....why dont they realise they have lost and just accept it

[Bigdebtor]

sub

[vjohn82]

Interesting stuff... will be keeping an eye on this

 

How did you apply to set aside the discontinuance though? N244? Did you have to pay a fee?

 

Cheers

[jon888999]

Hi all,

 

Here we go again..

 

Got a letter today from MC... In a nutshell...

 

They are responding to my set aside of discontinuance application with.. Without prejudice save as to costs...' The basis of my defence is not clear... I am claiming costs but I haven't proved evidence of distress and hardship so they are willing to settle out of court for £xxxx.xx and I can pay them in monthly installments'. They have enclosed an income and expenditure sheet and want to know how much I'm going to offer them so they can draw up a consent order...

 

ARE THEY NUTS!!!!

 

Spam.

More rubbish from them then, you'd have thought they'd have learnt. At the moment the claim is discontinued. So I really don't think that they understand. I would point this out to them!!

I'd be tempted to turn it around on them, write back and offer to settle out of court, state that you are prepared to withdraw your application if they pay you £xooo.oo's and remove rubbish from CRA'S ETC.

No they aren't nuts they just hope you are!!

[Spamalot]

Interesting stuff... will be keeping an eye on this

 

How did you apply to set aside the discontinuance though? N244? Did you have to pay a fee?

 

Cheers

 

Hi Vjohn..

 

In answer to your questions.. I applied for the set aside of discontinuance on an N244 and my court charged me £75 (although I think it should have been £40 ) It has to be done within 28 days of claimant discontinuing.

 

Spam.

[vjohn82]

Thanks very much... doing exactly the same in my case against HFO to be honest.

[foolishgirl]

I'd be tempted to turn it around on them, write back and offer to settle out of court, state that you are prepared to withdraw your application if they pay you £xooo.oo's and remove rubbish from CRA'S ETC.

 

I'd be tempted to give jon's idea serious consideration but make sure your costs & fees are covered in any offer.

[Spamalot]

Thanks again Jon & FG for your continued support and advice..

 

I have composed a reply which I would be grateful for any editing that you think necessary....

 

 

I refer to your recent correspondence of 21/1/2010.

 

I have read this letter and am somewhat bemused by its contents. At this present moment in time the above claim has been discontinued by your client and the application for the set aside of the discontinuance is not due to be heard until 26th February 2010. This being the case I fail to see how you can request payment from me for a claim that is not legally in existence.

 

In reply to your statement that ‘the basis of my defence is not clear’ the basic details were laid out in my application to set aside the original judgement. As you are no doubt aware, your client did not contest the setting aside of this judgement and subsequently discontinued with the claim.

 

As far as my claims for costs and compensation are concerned, the evidence and explanation in support of these are prepared and ready for production to the court should the District Judge request them.

 

I agree that it would be in everyone’s interest to resolve this matter without the need for a court hearing, which is why I offered to do this in my letter dated 13.9.2009, but as your client chose to ignore this offer I had no option but to reapply to the court.

 

Should your client now wish to reconsider this option and is in full agreement to the terms and conditions of my letter dated 13.9.09, I would be willing to withdraw my application on receipt of the costs and compensation owed to me thus far. This figure now stands at £xxxx.xx with an additional £xx.xx in respect of the current application and Litigant in Person allowance bringing it to the grand total of £xxxx.xx .

 

This offer will remain open for 10 days from the date of this letter and I look forward to hearing from you within that time period, with confirmation that this offer is acceptable. ( I nicked the bit in red from their letter... )

 

As I said before... all editing and advice welcome...

 

Should I also mark it up 'without prejudice save as to costs' ......that bit always confuses me..

 

Spam.

[robcag]

Hi Spam

 

Glad to see you're still pressing on with this.

 

Strange how there seems to be little occasional bursts of activity from MC, I had a phonecall from them myself about a week ago. I gave the almost standard answer of " ... not going through security on the phone, put it in writing ... ", to which the reply was they would get something off in the post to me. Not heard anything yet though.

 

But it did prompt me to re-send my CPR 31.16 request to them (prior to my own set aside application) as the first one which was sent Special Delivery during the postal strikes has mysteriously vanished without trace, but that's another story ...

 

I've made a small edit to your letter below (which you said were welcome!) for the reason given alongside the edit.

 

Thanks again Jon & FG for your continued support and advice..

 

I have composed a reply which I would be grateful for any editing that you think necessary....

 

 

I refer to your recent correspondence of 21/1/2010.

 

I have read this letter and am somewhat bemused by its contents. At this present moment in time the above claim has been discontinued by your client and the application for the set aside of the discontinuance is not due to be heard until 26th February 2010. This being the case I fail to see how you can request payment from me for a claim that is not legally in existence.

 

In reply to your statement that ‘the basis of my defence is not clear’ the basic details were laid out in my application to set aside the original judgement. As you are no doubt aware, your client did not contest the setting aside of this judgement and subsequently discontinued with the claim.

 

As far as my claims for costs and compensation are concerned, the evidence and explanation in support of these are prepared and ready for production to the court should the District Judge request them how about replacing the words in red with something like in due course. I think maybe it shows a bit more intent of forcing the costs issue rather than waiting for the Judge to use his/her initiative

 

I agree that it would be in everyone’s interest to resolve this matter without the need for a court hearing, which is why I offered to do this in my letter dated 13.9.2009, but as your client chose to ignore this offer I had no option but to reapply to the court.

 

Should your client now wish to reconsider this option and is in full agreement to the terms and conditions of my letter dated 13.9.09, I would be willing to withdraw my application on receipt of the costs and compensation owed to me thus far. This figure now stands at £xxxx.xx with an additional £xx.xx in respect of the current application and Litigant in Person allowance bringing it to the grand total of £xxxx.xx .

 

This offer will remain open for 10 days from the date of this letter and I look forward to hearing from you within that time period, with confirmation that this offer is acceptable. ( I nicked the bit in red from their letter... )

 

As I said before... all editing and advice welcome...

 

Should I also mark it up 'without prejudice save as to costs' ......that bit always confuses me..

 

Spam.

 

 

Cheers

Rob

[Spamalot]

Hi Rob, Nice to hear from you again..

 

Thanks for the input and the edit... It does sound more forceful.... I hope to get this off in the post tomorrow so if anything else springs to mind,

do feel free to chime in...

 

Do you happen to know as to whether I need to put without prejudice etc?? The thing is I really want the court to know I have tried more than once to settle this and it's them that's playing silly beggars...

 

Thanks again,

Spam.

[foolishgirl]

Well done spam! Particularly like 'I fail to see how you can request payment from me for a claim that is not legally in existence' - nicely put.

 

Agree with robcag on wording.

 

There is no advantage to you in marking the letter 'without pred. save for costs', in fact it would be good if it did come to the court's attention as it would demonstrate how reasonable & willing to settle you have been so I wouldn't mark it.

 

FYI, 'without prejudice save for costs' means that it cannot be disclosed until the matter of costs is to be decided. Sometimes it's advantageous not to let the court know the type of discussion that has been going on prior to the hearing as it may infer guilt & prejudice the judgment. Once the DJ has made the decision, corresp. can be shown to the court, usually in an attempt to sway the DJ to coming down hard on one side or the other by 'making them pay' for inappropriate action or attitude.

[humbleman]

Hi All..

 

Received a 'Statement of account' today from 'Phoenix Recoveries' who despite being in Luxembourg, have a PO Box address in Worthing..

 

 

Is this on a Phoenix headed paper, if so can you post it on this thread

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/242653-have-you-lost-phoenix-8.html

[Spamalot]

Updated letter going in the post today...

 

I refer to your recent correspondence of 21/1/2010.

I have read this letter and am somewhat bemused by its contents. At this present moment in time the above claim has been discontinued by your client and the application for the set aside of the discontinuance is not due to be heard until 26th February 2010. This being the case I fail to see how you can request payment from me for a claim that is not legally in existence.

In reply to your statement that ‘the basis of my defence is not clear’ the basic details were laid out in my application to set aside the original judgement. As you are no doubt aware, your client did not contest to the setting aside of this judgement and subsequently discontinued with the claim.

As far as my claims for costs and compensation are concerned, the evidence and explanation in support of these are prepared for production at court in due course, but

I have enclosed a rough copy of the current schedule outlining my costs so far for your perusal.

I agree that it would be in everyone’s interest to resolve this matter without the need for a court hearing, which is why I offered to do this in my letter dated 13.9.2009, but as your client chose to ignore this offer I had no option but to reapply to the court.

Should your client now wish to reconsider this option and is agreeable to the terms and conditions of my letter dated 13.9.09, I would be willing to withdraw my application on receipt of the costs and compensation owed to me thus far. This revised figure now stands at £2121.86 inclusive of the additional £93.50 in respect of the current application and Litigant in Person allowance.

To demonstrate my willingness to settle this matter without the courts intervention, you will note I have not added the statutory interest to the amount claimed or printing and copying costs, but should this matter be furthered to reach full trial, please be advised that I will be requesting them in addition to a compensation figure more in keeping with the amount of damage and hardship caused by your clients unfounded claim.

This offer will remain open for 10 days from the date of this letter and I look forward to hearing from you within that time period, with confirmation that this offer is acceptable.

I have left the figures in as I'm sure they know who I am by now...

Spam.

[tosh1]

brilliant

[texanbar]

Looks good to me Spammie, good luck! x

 

x:)x

[gh2008]

Good luck Spammie - just read your thread from the start WoW!! I'm trying to help with another Phoenix thread http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/235385-bryan-carter-letter-think.html so that started my interest in yours

 

BTW as there was a bit of confusion earlier as to Without Prejudice letters, this is a bit of info as I understand 'Without Prejudice' and 'Without Prejudice save as to costs'

 

Basically when a genuine offer is made either WP or WPsatc the other side cannot use the letter as evidence that the 'offerer' is willing to settle for less than is claimed.

 

If the WP letter is not a genuine offer then it can be produced as WP only covers genuine offers. e.g. you cannot write a WP threatogram

 

You can reveal your own WP letters at any time yourself to the court, however you can't if it reveals what was written WP by the other party.

 

If a 'chain of communication' is started with a WP offer then the whole chain is covered even if each letter is not explicitly headed WP

 

The 'save as to costs' means that when it comes to deciding costs the whole chain (including the 'other side's' letters can be produced to show that one side or the other has acted fairly or unfairly.

 

Think that's how it was all explained to me

 

Good luck

gh