Hoist/Cohen - Claimform old Cahoot flexi loan from 2001***Claim Discontinued***

[billyrayvalentine]

look back at post #154

eg 5.5 etc

what i was thinking was that following a discontinuance, the other party is entitled to their standard costs as of right under the cpr i mentioned.

if that wasnt granted/ordered/or paid voluntarily, then an application could have been made under that cpr. it may then have been ordered as of right without a hearing if the LiP costs were seen as ok. though it cld still end up in a hearing.

but, you tried to negotiate costs, and they only offered 80? ie, it cld be argued that they have been unreasonable etc, so the current app'n may not be in vain, albeit being technically different.

 

All interesting points. My feelings are I would probably have a greater chance of success against the claimant (maybe a direct judgement), as I have to prove "unreasonable behaviour" against the solicitor, in order to get the wasted costs. In my case the solicitor, never disclosed, and repeatedly missed deadlines. Furthermore, they tried to make me sign a consent order, which wouldn't be ratified by the court as I was a LIP.

[Guest]

All interesting points. My feelings are I would probably have a greater chance of success against the claimant (maybe a direct judgement), as I have to prove "unreasonable behaviour" against the solicitor, in order to get the wasted costs. In my case the solicitor, never disclosed, and repeatedly missed deadlines. Furthermore, they tried to make me sign a consent order, which wouldn't be ratified by the court as I was a LIP.

ok, i see what you mean re their non compliance etc, further cause to be mentioned.

was just my thoughts. and prob wld have tried the 'as of right' route first. though that could be mentioned at your hearing as well.

an LiP can sign a consent/tom order. not sure what you mean there.

[billyrayvalentine]

ok, i see what you mean re their non compliance etc, further cause to be mentioned.

was just my thoughts. and prob wld have tried the 'as of right' route first. though that could be mentioned at your hearing as well.

an LiP can sign a consent/tom order. not sure what you mean there.

 

I might write to the judge in this case, and see if the "as of right" route would trigger a hearing too.

 

Lip (consent order), i read CPR 40.6

[mao]

I have zero useful to add, but just want to say, good luck billyrayvalentine, I'm in exactly the same boat with cahoot loan/hoist/Cohen, and this thread has given me a great deal of information and is great to see you taking a firm approach to the spurious claim they raised against you

[billyrayvalentine]

I have zero useful to add, but just want to say, good luck billyrayvalentine, I'm in exactly the same boat with cahoot loan/hoist/Cohen, and this thread has given me a great deal of information and is great to see you taking a firm approach to the spurious claim they raised against you

 

Good luck mao. My advice would be always hit the deadlines, and assume it will go to court.

My feeling is they want you to fail on a procedural issue so they can get the court to legitimize unenforceable debt.

[AndyOrch]

I might write to the judge in this case, and see if the "as of right" route would trigger a hearing too.

 

Lip (consent order), i read CPR 40.6

 

That is with regards to certain types of consent order Billy which need approval by the court rather than by a Court Officer

 

Administrative consent orders

 

Certain consent orders can be entered by a purely administrative process without the need for obtaining the approval of a judge. This is provided for by the Civil Procedure Rules, in particular rule 40.6. However, the process cannot be used if one of the parties is a litigant in person (rule 40.6(2)(b)). The categories of orders which are covered by those provisions include:

 

Judgment orders for the payment of money;

 

Judgment orders for the delivery up of goods (other than specific delivery);

 

Orders setting aside default judgments;

 

Orders to dismiss part or the whole of the proceedings;

 

Orders for stays on agreed terms which dispose of proceedings, including Tomlin orders;

 

Orders for discharge of liability of any party; and

 

Orders for the payment, waiver or assessment of cost.

 

The order itself has to be drawn up in all of the agreed terms and bear the words ‘By Consent.’ Further, it is necessary to be signed by solicitor or counsel for each party. In cases where terms are annexed in a schedule, provisions regarding the payment of money out of court should be contained in the body of the order rather than in the schedule.

 

Consent orders approved by the court

 

Most situations where an order includes provision going beyond the type of orders listed above, or if one of the parties is a litigant in person, in order for the consent order to be effective, it will need to be approved by the court. Often, the orders are considered before a District Judge or a Master.

 

The order is to be drawn up in the same manner as in the case of administrative consent orders.

 

The court on considering the order is not bound to accept it but retains ultimate control. However, the judge will always take into account the terms agreed between the parties in whatever order he decides to make.

 

In cases where the court’s approval must be sought, either one of the parties may make the application for approval. The application may subsequently be considered on a hearing or dealt with without the conduct of such.

 

http://www.inbrief.co.uk/civil-court/consent-orders-in-civil-litigation.htm

[Guest]

I might write to the judge in this case, and see if the "as of right" route would trigger a hearing too.

 

yours was fast track,

so 38.6/44.9 cpr wld apply.

 

 

44.9 = if 38.6 right arises,

'a costs order will be deemed to have been made on the standard basis' in favour of the def where a claimant discontinues.

so, it shldnt 'trigger' a hearing as such.

 

 

but, if they refused to pay such costs as is or costs werent agreed upon negotiation,

then, i suppose, as a last resort it cld end up in a hearing upon application pursuant to that cpr to assess the costs and then a formal order made. which shld go in favour so long as the costs claimed are reasonable etc. see also the cpr re costs assessment.

 

as has been pointed out on thread, the 'wasted costs' is re the legals, 38.6 is re the claimant. as J asked, whether or not costs had been recovered from the claimant is a relevant point i guess.

 

i really dont know whether your application will be successful or not (am not too familiar with yr thread etc). it seems that it could be if the claimant has refused to pay reasonable costs as required, and last resort is via the sols (as seems to be the hint re that J's question?), plus you have the sols lateness etc you mentioned...

[billyrayvalentine]

***Update*** Costs awarded over £700

 

Before my costs hearing was scheduled, I got a letter for Cohen, and the gist of it was they wanted to settle out of court for my costs. A bit of letter tennis, and I got a cheque for just over £700, which i banked, so no court appearance at all (which is good as i'm overseas at the moment).

 

This wouldn't have been possible without applying to the court, as they kept low-balling me.

 

So all in all a good result, and an end to this admin nightmare.

 

Thanks to everyone who helped me on this thread.

 

Billy

[AndyOrch]

Excellent ..well done Billy.

 

Perhaps consider making a donation so we can continue to help others.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[Guest]

good result