Feeling intimidated by Claimants solicitor.

[Willis]

..............

[efpom]

Tell the judge at the next hearing - it's called interfering with a witness.

[Willis]

Tell the judge at the next hearing - it's called interfering with a witness.

............

[des8]

You could also write (send 1st class letter with free certificate of posting from post office) telling him you find his behaviour unwelcome, intimidating and harassing and he must no longer visit your property.
Tell him any implied right of access to your property he thinks he may have is now removed, and if he attends again he will be trespassing.
If he should reattend you will be contacting the police and reporting his behaviour to the Solicitors Regulation Authority

[Willis]

You could also write (send 1st class letter with free certificate of posting from post office) telling him you find his behaviour unwelcome, intimidating and harassing and he must no longer visit your property.
Tell him any implied right of access to your property he thinks he may have is now removed, and if he attends again he will be trespassing.
If he should reattend you will be contacting the police and reporting his behaviour to the Solicitors Regulation Authority

Thanks DES8.

[echat11]

Just thinking out of the box, is there any CCTV footage locally, you could add that to the correspondence, that will warn them off in trying to intimidate you. Write to the court, I'm sure the Judge would be interested in viewing it.

[Willis]

Just thinking out of the box, is there any CCTV footage locally, you could add that to the correspondence, that will warn them off in trying to intimidate you. Write to the court, I'm sure the Judge would be interested in viewing it.

........

[Willis]

.......

[des8]

Yes a civil court (county court or high court) can impose civil injunctions in harassment cases as well as awarding damages to the victim for the harassment.

[echat11]

I have CCTV which is why I know that he was taking photo's. He took lots of shots from different angles. He did leave after I asked him to look up at the camera and pointed out that everything he had done was captured.

CCTV - That's great, I do't think there is a distinction, 'intimidation' is 'intimidation'.

[Willis]

Yes a civil court (county court or high court) can impose civil injunctions in harassment cases as well as awarding damages to the victim for the harassment.

........

[Willis]

..............

[Willis]

.............

[EnglandPi]

Let me explain a few things. Documents need to be served. The method of service is determined by statute and normally personal service followed by an affidavit or statement of truth, is always the preferred method and has been for hundreds of years.

Personal service is not harassment no matter how many times a process server visits a property.

No one can stop someone feeling intimidated by the service of legal process but it is never (I’m sure there could be illegal exceptions) intended to intimidate.

If someone registers as a vulnerable person an alternative method could be used with permission of the court but generally, personal service is still the courts preferred method.

In this country anyone can take photographs and video of anyone and anything anywhere except military and nuclear establishments and the person taking the images owns the copyright of the images.

Sharing images on the internet of people without obscuring identifying features can also have legal implications.

[echat11]

Let me explain a few things. Documents need to be served. The method of service is determined by statute and normally personal service followed by an affidavit or statement of truth, is always the preferred method and has been for hundreds of years.

Personal service is not harassment no matter how many times a process server visits a property.

No one can stop someone feeling intimidated by the service of legal process but it is never (I’m sure there could be illegal exceptions) intended to intimidate.

If someone registers as a vulnerable person an alternative method could be used with permission of the court but generally, personal service is still the courts preferred method.

In this country anyone can take photographs and video of anyone and anything anywhere except military and nuclear establishments and the person taking said the images owns the copyright of the images.

Sharing images on the internet of people without obscuring identifying features can also have legal implications.

Yes some people feel more 'vulnerable' then others, so I can understand why the OP feels 'vulnerable' from what she has told us about herself, it might not be the intention of the Defendant, solicitors etc, but it is having that effect. So the OP needs to tell the court that.

As for 'anyone can take photographs and video of anyone and anything', the ICO has quite a bit of information on photographs with examples - https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organis...sonal-data.pdf