Settled.... O2 have set the dogs on me... Shock!!!

[bigbigproblems]

As anyone who cares to look will know I had a dispute with O2 over their selling my information to DCA's and then issuing a load of defaults against me. Luckily the DCA's removed the defaults and accepted they didn't have and evidence.

Stuck a claim in to O2 before that... Just wanted it sorting. Got a letter from O2 now - and they have only gone and get a flashy expensive barrister with an Oxford degree to fight their corner.

Was going to let it go, but not now. Richard Durkin on another site has given me some advice. I can afford to lose a couple of hundred quid in fees if all goes terribly - but I'm not being pushed around by these little scum bags.

P.S. - here is their champion: http://exchangechambers.co.uk/barris.../cv/commercial if he ever gives up on representing shitty companies and telling outrageous lies, then he could make good money as a Gareth Bale lookalike.

[Guest]

Re: O2 have set the dogs on me... Shock!!!

Cheeky B***ers

Just a thought though, I would be careful about trying to claim general damages, there is no such precedent, and the DPA forbids unsubstantiated damages claims, I would justify any losses or at least show how losses could have been incurred.

They may just settle of course , which is not unheard of in these cases but as said I would not rely on unsubstantiated general damages.

[Rico]

Re: O2 have set the dogs on me... Shock!!!

Hi Andy,

I just won general damages in the Supreme Court without involving the DPA. Damages were awarded without having proved specific loss (according to Scotland's not-so-finest). Surely, that's the simplest way ahead for the OP?

Isn't the whole idea of general damages the fact that they don't require substantiating (as opposed to specific damages, that do)?

That seems to be the opinion of those that have represented me and the Supreme Court...

Cheers,

Rico.

[Guest]

Re: O2 have set the dogs on me... Shock!!!

Hi Andy,

I just won general damages in the Supreme Court without involving the DPA. Damages were awarded without having proved specific loss (according to Scotland's not-so-finest). Surely, that's the simplest way ahead for the OP?

Isn't the whole idea of general damages the fact that they don't require substantiating (as opposed to specific damages, that do)?

That seems to be the opinion of those that have represented me and the Supreme Court...

Cheers,

Rico.

Hi Rico

as I understand it the Supreme court did not interfere with any heads of loss awards in the earlier sottish court(and this was an uncontested claim), there was no award made, certainly nothing regarding general damages.

There has never been an award for unsupported damages on this kind of claim, unfortunately losses have to be real and substantiated even if not representing proper liquidated sums.

[Rico]

Re: O2 have set the dogs on me... Shock!!!

there was no award made, certainly nothing regarding general damages.

Hi Andy,

There WAS an award made for general damages (injury to credit I think Lord Hodge described it as). I am certain! It is written. (It was my case)

Rico

[bluebottle]

Re: O2 have set the dogs on me... Shock!!!

The fact that O2 have reacted in the way they have tends to indicate they know they are in the proverbial.

Put them and their rabid legal representatives to strict proof as to the true identity of who owns O2. If O2 exists as an autonomous company in its own right, then it can be sued in its own right. If, however, O2 is a trading name of Telefonica UK Limited, then the defendant is Telefonica UK Limited.

I am inclined to suggest sending the defendants and their legal representatives a warning, in general terms, that it is a very serious matter to mislead or attempt to mislead a court, which can lead to prosecution as well as amounting to serious professional misconduct if committed by a legal professional.

[Guest]

Re: O2 have set the dogs on me... Shock!!!

Hi Andy,

There WAS an award made for general damages (injury to credit I think Lord Hodge described it as). I am certain! It is written. (It was my case)

Rico

Perhaps you could link or copy the actual piece of the judgement to which you refer ?

[Guest]

Re: O2 have set the dogs on me... Shock!!!

The fact that O2 have reacted in the way they have tends to indicate they know they are in the proverbial.

Put them and their rabid legal representatives to strict proof as to the true identity of who owns O2. If O2 exists as an autonomous company in its own right, then it can be sued in its own right. If, however, O2 is a trading name of Telefonica UK Limited, then the defendant is Telefonica UK Limited.

I am inclined to suggest sending the defendants and their legal representatives a warning, in general terms, that it is a very serious matter to mislead or attempt to mislead a court, which can lead to prosecution as well as amounting to serious professional misconduct if committed by a legal professional.

Usually they prefer to sttle in cases like this, however the fact that they have retained a barrister is ominous IMO. He is bound to point out the same facts that I have, and also to use Smaton and Haliday as authority to defer the claim for any general unspecified losses.

There is no way that any court will issue a damage award simply because there is an incorrectly paced default marker, common law will not allow it and the legislation does not either.

[Guest]

Re: O2 have set the dogs on me... Shock!!!

For the OP

Salutary tale here

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...ighlight=noddy

Post 513 says it all really

[Guest]

Re: O2 have set the dogs on me... Shock!!!

From the SC judgment

"HFC did not contest the award of £8,000 for damage to credit if breach of duty were established.
However, the Supreme Court rejects Mr Durkin’s attempt to restore the sheriff’s award of damages for
the extra interest he paid and for the loss of the capital gain on the Spanish property. Appeals like the
present may only be made on matters of law, meaning the Supreme Court cannot go behind the First
Division’s findings of fact on these alleged heads of loss"

[Rico]

Re: O2 have set the dogs on me... Shock!!!

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...ighlight=noddy

Post 513 says it all really

Noddy's case was called before the Supreme Court ruled this in March:

"Damages resulting from HFC’s breach of its duty of care are
confined to injury to Mr Durkin’s credit in the sum of £8,000"

Noddy's judge dismissed my case as "Scottish". Well, now it's British (As it always was)

At least some modicum of common sense managed to filter through at the Supreme Court.

Cheers,

Rico.

[Guest]

Re: O2 have set the dogs on me... Shock!!!

Makes no differnce Rico.

The case was after the decision in the Scottish court which you are saying set the precedent.

To be clear. No one is saying that damage claims are not possible on a misplaced default marker, just that there must be an identification of some kind of damage, this does not have to be particularized necessarily but it mus exist and be identifiable.

There is no use just stating that there was an incorrect marker therefore I have sustained damage(you may not have), because the judge will just say, what damage.

[Rico]

Re: O2 have set the dogs on me... Shock!!!

the judge will just say, what damage.

Perhaps an incompetent judge but with the Supreme Court's ruling this should be fast becoming judicial knowledge.

The answer is "Injury to credit".

Rico.

[bigbigproblems]

Re: O2 have set the dogs on me... Shock!!!

Perhaps an incompetent judge but with the Supreme Court's ruling this should be fast becoming judicial knowledge.

The answer is "Injury to credit".

Rico.

The way I see it, I will either win or I will lose. I can live with those odds.

A particular judge may decide that I havn't lost enough - but I'll sleep safe knowing that I challenged a big bully, and cost them time and money. Simply because if enough people challenged them in this way, they would HAVE to change their practises.

Worst case for me, is that I lose the couple of hundred quid in fees. My understanding is that I won't be awarded costs as it will be small claim, and I have followed the CPR's. So I can live with this.

Maybe it's just me - but something very odd/wrong is happening here. Do you lie about sending out letters, and then instruct a barrister to write a letter when you employ in house counsel? I could understand if we were at court stage, but we are well off that. I think they are either scared of something, or they have decided to make an example of me.

For what it's worth Richard - I think what you did is pretty awesome. You stood up for the little guy. Admittedly it cost you dearly. But at least people like me now have something to help us fight with. Once people stop worrying about this and just go for these companies, the world will start to be a fairer and better place.

[Guest]

Re: O2 have set the dogs on me... Shock!!!

Perhaps an incompetent judge but injury regarding his creditabilty way be completly differnt to anothers, so how can it be quatified in law.
The answer is "Injury to credit".

Rico.

No such damage in law unfortunately, unidentifiable and inequitable. One persons injury after loss of credibility may be completely different to anothers so how can an individual damage assessment/award be made ?

We are back to common law precepts of identifiable damages and loss unfortunately.