Babble vs Cabot/Monument

[foolishgirl]

I suggest that the central library in Grimsby is a convenient place for me to view these documents. Please confirm when you will be presenting them for examination as per the aforementioned Order.

 

Excellent, also add VJ's comments & you may also want to add:

Otherwise, please suggest an alternative time & place that will be mutually convenient within the next 7 days. (or however long they have to fulfil inspection request)

 

VJ - can you answer the query on the signature on the N265 please?Can/will the court refuse admission of the docs because there is no signed disclosure or will they just brush over it?This is an important point for babble's CMC.

Edited March 21, 2010 by foolishgirl
addition

[vjohn82]

I would advise reading the CPR and relevant Practice Direction so that you understand disclosure a little more...

 

PART 31 - DISCLOSURE AND INSPECTION OF DOCUMENTS - Ministry of Justice

 

PRACTICE DIRECTION – DISCLOSURE AND INSPECTION - Ministry of Justice

[babble]

Thanks for that...would've been sooner but having a nightmare trying to get the internet to work

 

I've adpated my letter which I'll email them shortly and post tomorrow too.

 

I've just had a quick read through those documents vjohn...makes interesting reading.....I think they've failed on 31.10 (7) as they haven't identified the person making the statement or why he is making it.

[foolishgirl]

This omission needs bringing forcibily to the attention of the DJ at the CMC & ask for directions on disclosure. However wait & see what happens with your request for inspection first as I suspect you may be asking for quite a bit...

[babble]

Well I've just emailed Morgans with the request. It'll also be in the post to them. If they try to make out that it should have been sent to cabot I'll point to the fact that on the claim form it says all correspondence to Morgans and on the disclosure statement it doesn't include who has made the statement.

 

I think that maybe at the CMC I need to point out the finding from the Wilson case where they quite clearly stated that as companies have an advantage in the fact that they can access legal assistance easily (and in the case of cabot they have their own in-house solicitors) the onus is on them to do everything to the letter of the law....then go on to point out how they have not (in respect of the legal process rather than detail of the case) and conclude that not only does this show a lack of respect for me but also to the Law.....be interesting to see how they think they'll manage to worm out of that...

 

then of course there's the flaws in many of their statements and the actual lack of a real agreement, DoA, etc

[babble]

Well seven days since I emailed my request to inspect documents and also sent a letter by post and yet no response. I'm sure they'll try to wriggle out of it somehow (I couldn't afford to send it by recorded delivery so they might try to make out they haven't received it - although how they deny receiving an email is going to be a good one....especially as their transaction log shows them as receiving the previous email I sent to them).

[citizenB]

Well seven days since I emailed my request to inspect documents and also sent a letter by post and yet no response. I'm sure they'll try to wriggle out of it somehow (I couldn't afford to send it by recorded delivery so they might try to make out they haven't received it - although how they deny receiving an email is going to be a good one....especially as their transaction log shows them as receiving the previous email I sent to them).

 

Oops:)

 

I am not sure what your next move is. When is the CMC ?

[babble]

The CMC is 7th May so a while away but every little thing like this helps me.....it'll be quite funny if I'm there and they are not (as it says in the schedule they sent to me they aren't available on the 7th May).

 

It's quite useful that it quite clearly shows them receiving an email from me because they can't say that the email address is wrong (and they haven't included an email address on any of the court documents) and it can be proven they have received it if they try to deny it. Unfortunately for them I had to check on things like this in my last job.....as they say 'deleting doesn't usually erase something' there is always a trail unless you destroy the computer system and everything linked to it and I don't think their ISP would be too happy to destroy all their equipment and files, lol.

[Hadituptohere]

Any news Babble???