Robinson Way lifting a stay on a County Court claim made in July 2009 - Happy Christmas!!

[Mike_hawk]

At least it sheds some light on why he didn't want to put himself out with your disclosure requests. RW still appear to be running their own case with DWF appointed to represent them for the hearing only.

[Bev250264]

Or maybe he's told them they don't have a leg to stand on!

[Mike_hawk]

That'd be nice At least they've kept to the line that these were business facilities

[Bev250264]

Well they were weren't they? What would happen if they hadn't?

[Mike_hawk]

I'd refer to your w/s

[Bev250264]

DWF just replied asking why I'd think they were not? What shall I say?

[Mike_hawk]

Bugger all to do with them, you asked he answered....... end of conversation

[Bev250264]

Are you referring to the conclusion where it states no personal transactions were made?

[Bev250264]

Bugger all to do with them, you asked he answered....... end of conversation

 

Lol So I'll just ignore him then shall I?

[Mike_hawk]

Are you referring to the conclusion where it states no personal transactions were made?

 

Parts of the whole statement leading up to the conclusion, really needs to be read as a whole

[Bev250264]

Bugger all to do with them, you asked he answered....... end of conversation

 

Lol So I'll just ignore him then shall I?

[Mike_hawk]

Lol So I'll just ignore him then shall I?

 

I would........ nothing more to ask of him and any further correspondence isn't going to lead anywhere

[Mike_hawk]

Hi Bev.......... here's an old thread with another very tardy w/s supplied by Miriam http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?217335-Robinson-Way-Court-Proceedings-Help-urgently-needed!&highlight=miriam

[Bev250264]

V. interesting. Pity we don't know how it ended though

[Mike_hawk]

Probably still stayed

 

Just another example of a template w/s from RW and their ilk.....

[Bev250264]

Mmmm don't know how they get away with it tbh

[Mike_hawk]

Probably because a very high percentage of their cases are not contested

 

Whilst I think about it, references to a couple of points in your w/s;

 

1. Link to s.105 of the act below;

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1974/39/section/105

 

2. Credit/transfer in 2004 [for which, due to the passage of time, you have no records of with the exception of the banks disclosure] link to Wilson v FCT, para 26 should interest you

 

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2001/633.html

[Bev250264]

:-)Thanks

[Mike_hawk]

Ur welcome

 

What's the window of dates for the trial?........ actually, ignore that.... just remembered your checklist isnt due for another month

[Bev250264]

Hi All

 

Just an update... Pre-trial checklist now lodged with the court. Court clerk told us it may be a while before we get a court date. So the waiting continues......:|

[sillygirl1]

Just wondering if anyone has seen this post about Robinson Way, we already know about the name change (and I posted about the background of it to enlighten the poster) but they seem to think that a major breach of Civil Procedure has taken place.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?369201-Robinson-Way-and-Company-Limited-to-Robinson-Way-Limited&highlight=Robinson+Way

 

If what they are getting at is true then all the HFO cases where they changed their name should be viable for a 'judicial review' as that poster states.

 

Somehow I think they are clutching at straws.

[Bev250264]

This thread makes very interesting reading. We were told it was 'simply a name change' when we queried it in the original w/s. Maybe all this explains DWF's hostility to any correspondence.

 

As we've now submitted our pre-trial checklist, not sure how we can use it but I will subscribe with interest.

[Bev250264]

Hi Guys

 

Received the attached from DWF. Trial date now set for 4th January. Any help re skeleton argument will be much appreciated.

[citizenB]

When do you need to submit the Skeleton, Bev ?

[Bev250264]

No idea. Nothing from anyone to say