yup Pt2537 is here now too

[Angry Cat]

Re: Alexandra Slater v Egg Banking Plc August 9th 2010

FFS. No, he wasn't, and that is the point.

He simply spouted off, turned it personal, then gloated when a perfectly valid and well planned Claim did not win.

If we all followed this so called advice, we may as well all bend over now, and take what is coming.

If this gets me banned from LB, so be it.

Cheers,
BRW

Clearly, I agree!

[pt2537]

Re: Alexandra Slater v Egg Banking Plc August 9th 2010

I could answer the points,

but i do believe it would then start more trouble than its worth so i shall refrain,

I can only say that my client changed her testimony and that accounts for the terms and conditions issue.

I would post the very good skeleton argument, which my counsel put a lot of work into, however, i do honestly believe it would simply be a point for PB to continue to criticise.


As i said, in view of the fact that i am simply trying to do my job, i shall say no more on this subject

[Angry Cat]

Re: Alexandra Slater v Egg Banking Plc August 9th 2010

Agreed. She was under pressure from Egg's counsel but it was the job of her barrister to ensure she was prepped. It is hard to imagine how something so essential as this was overlooked...

Courts are foreign territory for the general consumer. Ms. Slater could have suffered a fit of nerves, thus the error. Or, there could be another reason why she changed her story...
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------

I could answer the points,

but i do believe it would then start more trouble than its worth so i shall refrain,

I can only say that my client changed her testimony and that accounts for the terms and conditions issue.

I would post the very good skeleton argument, which my counsel put a lot of work into, however, i do honestly believe it would simply be a point for PB to continue to criticise.


As i said, in view of the fact that i am simply trying to do my job, i shall say no more on this subject

Fair enough, PT.

[Ihaterbs]

Re: Alexandra Slater v Egg Banking Plc August 9th 2010

[QUOTE=pt2537;168924]I could answer the points,

but i do believe it would then start more trouble than its worth so i shall refrain,

I can only say that my client changed her testimony and that accounts for the terms and conditions issue.


That's a sickener. I assume this was your strongest argument and a valid one but hard to prove if it was claimed that it was diligent business practice to send the terms and conditions. I've lost on this very issue even though it was denied that the t&cs were received.

[WendyB]

Re: Alexandra Slater v Egg Banking Plc August 9th 2010

Militantconsumer, why are you counting down. This is not OTR and posts don't get deleted or people banned at the drop of a hat.

I have been following the judgement, or trying to anyway as CCA isn't my thing. Your post has given a different but plausible perspective.

[Amethyst]

Re: Alexandra Slater v Egg Banking Plc August 9th 2010

Now counting down until this post gets deleted or I get banned............

If this gets me banned from LB, so be it.

No one is being banned for goodness sake, this is not CAG! Have a read of our 'moderation' policy

FORUM RULES - Please Read - Legal Beagles Consumer Forum

[Angry Cat]

Re: Alexandra Slater v Egg Banking Plc August 9th 2010

Clearly, this matter is extremely unfortunate!

Just had a quick look on MSE, of which I am not a member.
MC's post concurs with what is being stated over there.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/...=870601&page=2

We know that the judges are anti CMC's...things are becoming clearer now.

And I am not saying that PT works for a CMC, as he does not.

[militantconsumer]

Re: Alexandra Slater v Egg Banking Plc August 9th 2010

Clearly, this matter is extremely unfortunate!

Just had a quick look on MSE, of which I am not a member.
MC's post concurs with what is being stated over there.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/...=870601&page=2

We know that the judges are anti CMC's...things are becoming clearer now.

And I am not saying that PT works for a CMC, as he does not.

Yes, I read that stuff on MSE as well.

I am not one for conspiracy theories but I just saw people saying 'poor Ms Slater, she must have got confused in front of the judge' and I thought people should at least know what seems to be the background to the case.

<comment removed>

[Ihaterbs]

Re: Alexandra Slater v Egg Banking Plc August 9th 2010

Murky waters indeed.

[middenmess]

Re: Alexandra Slater v Egg Banking Plc August 9th 2010

Unless someone can put proof on the table that these allegations are true please stop it or i will start proceedings to get it stopped,


It is damaging to me on a working level , and i am not prepared to allow this to continue, so please stop these allegations forthwith.

Regret to say that it will probably have to go to that extreme as you appear to be the whipping boy for all those who were expecting a different outcome to the Slater v Egg case.

You've helped many people in their time of need but with one decision going the wrong way and despite your numerous successes,for many you've gone from Hero to Zero virtually overnight

I can imagine that you are more than just the angry that your mood indicator shows and hope that reason and common sense will return to this and other forums forthwith.

[Spamheed]

Re: Alexandra Slater v Egg Banking Plc August 9th 2010

Is this the same PB who postesd so eloquently on the Credit Today forum?

or was that someone else using the monicker?

[Amethyst]

Re: Alexandra Slater v Egg Banking Plc August 9th 2010

I would appreciate no further discussion on this matter.

PT has answered the questions put to him now.

The Egg judgment is there for all to read and you are most welcome to discuss the legal arguments and decisions within that judgment on this thread.

However personal attacks and unproven allegations are not acceptable. If anyone wishes to continue that avenue of discussion please contact me by pm and I will arrange for access to the Kennels.

An explanation of the Kennels can be found here - FORUM RULES - Please Read - Legal Beagles Consumer Forum

Thank you.

Amethyst

[Angry Cat]

Re: Alexandra Slater v Egg Banking Plc August 9th 2010

Amethyst, you cannot put me into the kennels, because I am only a little cat

[Angry Cat]

Re: Alexandra Slater v Egg Banking Plc August 9th 2010

I'm afraid you're for the wheelie-bin

Oh No, not the wheelie bin

[militantconsumer]

Re: Alexandra Slater v Egg Banking Plc August 9th 2010

I have removed the offending comment from my earlier post as I do not wish for PT to bring proceedings against me or against this forum.

I will not repeat the suggestion nor make any other related comments.