Natwest purchase protection insurance claim struck out

[pop_gun]

I read post #14 and you said this:

However, the above is not enforcement of the contract.

 

I never said it was.

 

The quote is a posit (be sure to look up the word before posting again)

[Ganymede]

I never said it was.

 

The quote is a posit (be sure to look up the word before posting again)

 

 

No need to be patronising, it's not becoming of you.

[Andyorch]

Can we please try to keep this civil chaps.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[pop_gun]

In my appeal I accused the original Judge of "extreme bias". I realise now the courts don't recognise bias amongst the Judiciary.

I also have no way of proving imputed bias or actual bias without knowing more about the Judge's professional\personal interests. How does a person go about finding out such details?

Although I may have some luck with apparent bias. This will never be attributed to the Judge directly, but through her actions. If indeed it's acknowledge by the appeal at all. In Metropolitan Properties Co. (F.G.C.) Ltd v Lannon [1969] Lord Denning M.R. had this to say "In considering whether there was a real likelihood of bias, the court does not look at the mind of the justice himself or at the mind of the chairman of the tribunal, or whoever it may be, who sits in judicial capacity. It does not look to see if there was a real likelihood that he would, or did, in fact favour one side at the expense of the other".

 

Denning also goes on to say "Surmise or conjecture is not enough" to challenge the impartiality of the Judge, but circumstances must bring about the real likelihood of bias.

 

Porter vs Magil [2002], Lord Hope (aptly named I might add) phrased the problem in the following manner; "the question is whether the fair minded and informed observer, having considered the facts, would conclude that there was a real possibility that the tribunal was bias".

 

Lord Hope's interpretation is more in keeping with natural justice and it's something I will rely on.

Edited October 2, 2012 by pop_gun

[Gaston Grimsdyke]

I had thought I had presented my claim in such a way as to verify it's merits.

 

The merits of your claim were indeed crystal clear. Which is why it was dismissed.

 

BTW actually putting in your appeal that the DJ was extremely biased will probably land you with indemnity costs. Such an accusation is always the last refuge of those with hopeless cases.

[pop_gun]

An indemnity is compensation and it refers to contracts between parties. Judging from the misuse of the word in your post, you are under the impression myself and the judge are in a contract. Even if you somehow meant myself and the bank, you would be wrong as I cannot indemnify the bank in relation to payments I made to it.

The mistakes you make are of such a fundemental nature as to make a person question which high school you attend.

[Ganymede]

You really are a difficult person to deal with and are failing to grasp the simple concept that the legal definition of words can differ from the dictionary definition.

 

You clearly have access to the internet so you would have though you would have engaged Google before engaging your brain.

 

As you seem to be struggling I'll help out...

 

"In litigation, the court can award indemnity costs, as opposed to costs on the standard basis, in certain defined circumstances and under its wide discretion regarding costs under CPR 44.3. An order for indemnity costs is intended to provide a party to litigation, when their costs are assessed, with recovery of all, or nearly all, their outlay in the litigation. This is more favourable than costs on the standard basis under which a party only recovers a large proportion of his costs but never anything close to what he paid. Indemnity costs need not be, but often are, penal, that is, awarded for unreasonable conduct or abuse of process.

 

This practice note explains the nature of indemnity costs, the process for obtaining them and, with extensive reference to case law, how the court can exercise its discretion whether or not to award them."

[Gaston Grimsdyke]

An indemnity is compensation and it refers to contracts between parties. Judging from the misuse of the word in your post, you are under the impression myself and the judge are in a contract. Even if you somehow meant myself and the bank, you would be wrong as I cannot indemnify the bank in relation to payments I made to it.

The mistakes you make are of such a fundemental nature as to make a person question which high school you attend.

 

Oh dear...

 

I think I might come along to Lambeth on 31 October, I think it's going to be very entertaining. Will you still buy me lunch?

[Andyorch]

Gaston:nono:

 

Please keep this thread civil.

 

Andy

[Ganymede]

I am!

[42man]

No need for personal insults, just agree to disagree if necessary

[pop_gun]

You really are a difficult person to deal with and are failing to grasp the simple concept that the legal definition of words can differ from the dictionary definition.

 

You clearly have access to the internet so you would have though you would have engaged Google before engaging your brain.

 

As you seem to be struggling I'll help out...

 

"In litigation, the court can award indemnity costs, as opposed to costs on the standard basis, in certain defined circumstances and under its wide discretion regarding costs under CPR 44.3. An order for indemnity costs is intended to provide a party to litigation, when their costs are assessed, with recovery of all, or nearly all, their outlay in the litigation. This is more favourable than costs on the standard basis under which a party only recovers a large proportion of his costs but never anything close to what he paid. Indemnity costs need not be, but often are, penal, that is, awarded for unreasonable conduct or abuse of process.

 

This practice note explains the nature of indemnity costs, the process for obtaining them and, with extensive reference to case law, how the court can exercise its discretion whether or not to award them."

 

You haven't helped me out as much as caught me out, which given our previous correspondence is an achievement for you.

Perhaps you should go lie down.

[pop_gun]

Oh dear...

 

I think I might come along to Lambeth on 31 October, I think it's going to be very entertaining. Will you still buy me lunch?

 

I don't think the Judge will allow minors in. No matter how well intentioned.

[Ganymede]

You haven't helped me out as much as caught me out, which given our previous correspondence is an achievement for you.

Perhaps you should go lie down.

 

 

 

Right, as Duncan Bannatyne would say "I'm out".

 

Enjoy your appeal. Let us know how you get on.

[Gaston Grimsdyke]

Enjoy your appeal. Let us know how you get on.

 

Somehow I don't think he'll be doing either of those things.

[pop_gun]

The listing manager at the lambeth county court has informed me DJ Wakem no longer sits at the court. Unfortunately that's the extent of the good news. The e-mail goes on to say the court had received the N460 form I had sent on the 23rd July 2012 but was faxing a copy to the Judge today.

It's a good thing the courts are protected by the royal charter otherwise it's incompetence would have seen it bankrupted thrice over.

[pop_gun]

Today I lost my appeal. In summing up the Judge started by outlining the respective positions

of both parties. He stopped doing so when the truth would inconvenience the pre determined

outcome. I realised the purchase protection insurance isn't a contract, it's an amendment to

an existing contract. I said as much but the Judge persisted in calling it a contract.

Once he accepted the agreement was with Royal Sun Alliance despite Natwest settling disputes

in regards to claims I knew the Judge was ignoring case law in relation to conduct.

The Judge however wouldn't approve cost until a cost Judge had looked at the costings.

A small crumb of comfort.

 

For anyone out there who later reads this and is in a similar situation. My advice is don't

bother appealing a decision. In some ways it felt like a FOS decision. Meaning the law

was never applied.

[Gaston Grimsdyke]

Oh dear. As both the District Judge and Circuit Judge were so obviously wrong, not to say extremely biased, presumably you'll be appealing again?

[pop_gun]

Oh dear. As both the District Judge and Circuit Judge were so obviously wrong, not to say extremely biased, presumably you'll be appealing again?

 

Answer me this. When the Respondent argues that the written exclusion clause is not definitive and other items (not listed) should be included.

 

Do you agree?

 

Gaston, you strike me as a timid soul. Someone who doesn't question authority.

[ThedaBara]

Dodgy experience in the County Courts? Surely not?!! I have suffered a biased judge… one who seeing a LIP with severe hearing difficulties made the decision NOT to adjourn the trial when the audio loop failed to work, thereby preventing me from my right to a fair hearing…told me I was going to lose less than halfway through proceedings (I didn't understand the cross examination questions), then went on to allow the other side a 100% uplift of their costs despite their lack of making me aware of a CFA… waste of time appealing as it will probably be more of the same.