Fluffystuff's OH v HFC

[Josie8]

Wrong way round..............his written application for permission to appeal was refused and now he has made application for an Oral hearing which is listed for 6th December 2010.

 

You should request a further stay pending the outcome.

[Fluffystuff]

Wrong way round..............his written application for permission to appeal was refused and now he has made application for an Oral hearing which is listed for 6th December 2010.

 

You should request a further stay pending the outcome.

 

Thanks for the correction Josie, apologies for any confusion caused.

[Josie8]

Your first witness statement was drafted for the Summary Judgment and drafted in such a way as to address those issues. You need to resubmit a Further witness statement and adding anything further in you wish to include. Send by first class post two days prior, obtain a certificate of posting and complete a certificate of service. Alternatively agree the simultaneous exchange by email or fax.

[Fluffystuff]

Your first witness statement was drafted for the Summary Judgment and drafted in such a way as to address those issues. You need to resubmit a Further witness statement and adding anything further in you wish to include. Send by first class post two days prior, obtain a certificate of posting and complete a certificate of service. Alternatively agree the simultaneous exchange by email or fax.

 

Josie, you're a star - THANKYOU. X

[Fluffystuff]

Somewhat surprised this morning to receive a written request from Restons asking for confirmation about something in our disclosure statement. Now, as the order states that all requests for clarification or further info based on a document disclosed should be made within 21 days of disclosure, a date that has long since passed; I don't think we'll be able to help them, do you?!!

[pt2537]

then they willl simply make a formal part 18 request or seek an order for your compliance,

 

you would be better served making that point in a letter to the Claimant and CC ing the court in on it to say you will oblige but that htey were out of time and not in accordance with the order

[Fluffystuff]

then they willl simply make a formal part 18 request or seek an order for your compliance,

 

you would be better served making that point in a letter to the Claimant and CC ing the court in on it to say you will oblige but that htey were out of time and not in accordance with the order

 

Thanks pt; I take your point. They already have a copy of the document concerned.

[pt2537]

then write to them and clarify that point, simple as that

[Fluffystuff]

Look forward to receiving their new W/S - will they admit they lied??

[Fluffystuff]

Hi all,

 

Just tweaking our W/S used to defeat the SJ application and have a couple of questions please.

 

1. In HFC's t&c's (those that they allege would have been on the back of the application form) it is stated that they may terminate "subject to service of any notice required by law".

Should I add that to the W/S?

 

2. Assume it would be prudent to point out that Carey & McGuffick do not apply?

 

3. As the other side are already in possession of all the documents exhibited, is there any need to forward further copies?

 

 

TIA x

[Fluffystuff]

Hi all,

 

Just tweaking our W/S used to defeat the SJ application and have a couple of questions please.

 

1. In HFC's t&c's (those that they allege would have been on the back of the application form) it is stated that they may terminate "subject to service of any notice required by law".

Should I add that to the W/S?

 

2. Assume it would be prudent to point out that Carey & McGuffick do not apply?

 

3. As the other side are already in possession of all the documents exhibited, is there any need to forward further copies?

 

 

TIA x

 

Polite bump!

[emmaf01]

subscribing

[emandcole]

Hi all,

 

Just tweaking our W/S used to defeat the SJ application and have a couple of questions please.

 

1. In HFC's t&c's (those that they allege would have been on the back of the application form) it is stated that they may terminate "subject to service of any notice required by law".

Should I add that to the W/S?

Sounds like they need to follow CCA law and issue a valid DN then etc. Yes, I'd make sure there can be no doubt as to the process they should have followed. Add it where appropriate and make sure it's all referenced so the court can easilt review this if the need arises.

 

2. Assume it would be prudent to point out that Carey & McGuffick do not apply?

Always, those cases are banded about far too often like some sort of get out of jail free card. Presuming you're aware of the cases and why they may not (can't recall your exact situation as too many threads in my head) be appropriate in your case...

 

3. As the other side are already in possession of all the documents exhibited, is there any need to forward further copies?

As long as you have complied with the directions of the court and you have ensured the other side have copies of everything you intend to rely on then I don't believe there is any need for you to resend anything. As long as you don't introduce any 'surprises' for them you'll be ok.

 

TIA x

 

[Fluffystuff]

Update ~

 

HFC have not produced a revised W/S and confirm that they will rely on the (third party) one produced for the (dismissed) S/J application.

They state that the envelope we disclosed, did not contain the D/N !!!!!!!

[pt2537]

ok

does the envelope have a orange bar code on the front of it?

 

if it does and the envelope was second class mail, it is possible to ascertain from the legal department at Royal Mail when the envelope was posted, the date, the address it was delivered to etc

[Fluffystuff]

ok

does the envelope have a orange bar code on the front of it?

 

if it does and the envelope was second class mail, it is possible to ascertain from the legal department at Royal Mail when the envelope was posted, the date, the address it was delivered to etc

 

Hi pt,

 

The envelope does indeed have the orange bar codes.

[Fluffystuff]

Seems to me, that HFC now acknowledge that the envelope was second class, hence their allegation that it is not the envelope that contained the D/N.

What did they send in that envelope then?? -

Their system notes show no other communications to OH after issuing the D/N.

As the DJ with a wry smile, informed their barrister at the SJ hearing, the onus of proof is on them.

[middenmess]

ok

does the envelope have a orange bar code on the front of it?

 

if it does and the envelope was second class mail, it is possible to ascertain from the legal department at Royal Mail when the envelope was posted, the date, the address it was delivered to etc

 

Assuming UK Mail then do you mean when the envelope entered the RM system as a second class item for delivery in a further 2 days--or one day on a good day with a following wind?

 

As it was as 'ordinary' type mail [not Special Delivery or Recorded] there is no way that anyone could know to what address it was delivered ---the address on the envelope might well be on RM's system but proof of delivery to that address will not be.

[pt2537]

all i can say, is that the High Court of Justice on the 30th September, accepted, that the evidence i produced from the Royal Mail showed the date of posting, the address it was delivered to, and the posting location all of which was taken from the organge bar code

 

tis all i am able to say on the matter

[middenmess]

tis all i am able to say on the matter

 

I will not press you on it then8-)-----------but further info at a later time perhaps would be of interest.

[pt2537]

lol you will need to wait til the high court hands its judgment down

[Fluffystuff]

Just wondering if anyone has any news on the Brandon application for appeal - believe it was due to be heard at 10 am today??

[Chipmeister]

see this thread http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?286311-Brandon-Case(1-Viewing)-nbsp

[Fluffystuff]

Thankyou Chip - a faint glimmer of hope perhaps.

 

A Very Merry Christmas to all. x