Tweet
Hi all,
An Eversheds Sutherland solicitor acting for Nationwide Building Society has admitted to the Court that a 'pivotal' statement in his (so-called) 'Statement of Truth' was, in fact, false and has apologised - profusely - to the Court for his 'inaccurate statement'.
He had asserted - unequivocally - that there was no signed agreement between myself and Nationwide and, despite my two SAR requests, four years apart, which yielded not a shred of evidence of the agreement, finally the Nationwide was able to lay its hands on it - but only because I had included a copy in my witness statement.
This is the same Nationwide which successfully (and shamelessly) persuaded the Court, in order to reverse the judgment by default, that the Claim had not been received - and had possibly gone astray in its post room. The judge said that it's common for Claim forms to go missing in the post - and, of course, there is no record as they are not sent tracked.
The statement - that there was no signed agreement - was relied upon and cited by the Judge in setting aside the judgment by default I had been awarded against Nationwide for £5,000.
The same Eversheds solicitor, who was also responsible for a data breach when he sent my personal information to an unintended party, is seeking to recover in excess of £15,000 in costs against me.
My understanding is that Nationwide, the client/Defendant would be responsible for the untrue statement - if the solicitor had made the statement in his honest belief it was true etc.
It seems Eversheds/Nationwide can simply make an application to the Court apologising - they also missed a deadline to comply with an Order requiring a response to my witness statement within 28 days, for which they also apologised (failure to diarise - honest mistake guv etc).
Is this staggering level of incompetence usual these days and therefore easily forgiven by Courts? And is there anything I can do about it?
Really grateful for any insights/advice.
An Eversheds Sutherland solicitor acting for Nationwide Building Society has admitted to the Court that a 'pivotal' statement in his (so-called) 'Statement of Truth' was, in fact, false and has apologised - profusely - to the Court for his 'inaccurate statement'.
He had asserted - unequivocally - that there was no signed agreement between myself and Nationwide and, despite my two SAR requests, four years apart, which yielded not a shred of evidence of the agreement, finally the Nationwide was able to lay its hands on it - but only because I had included a copy in my witness statement.
This is the same Nationwide which successfully (and shamelessly) persuaded the Court, in order to reverse the judgment by default, that the Claim had not been received - and had possibly gone astray in its post room. The judge said that it's common for Claim forms to go missing in the post - and, of course, there is no record as they are not sent tracked.
The statement - that there was no signed agreement - was relied upon and cited by the Judge in setting aside the judgment by default I had been awarded against Nationwide for £5,000.
The same Eversheds solicitor, who was also responsible for a data breach when he sent my personal information to an unintended party, is seeking to recover in excess of £15,000 in costs against me.
My understanding is that Nationwide, the client/Defendant would be responsible for the untrue statement - if the solicitor had made the statement in his honest belief it was true etc.
It seems Eversheds/Nationwide can simply make an application to the Court apologising - they also missed a deadline to comply with an Order requiring a response to my witness statement within 28 days, for which they also apologised (failure to diarise - honest mistake guv etc).
Is this staggering level of incompetence usual these days and therefore easily forgiven by Courts? And is there anything I can do about it?
Really grateful for any insights/advice.
Comment