Tweet
Dear Member's,
My friend has asked me to pass the below to me to your learned persons so I can help, below is was has been asked, as this matter has being going back and forth for near four years:
************************************************** ***
Mediation yesterday the initial stance from 2/3'rds = 400,000 being favourably towards (”A”), as the claim In total was well over 600,000 (Inc. fraudulent activity by ‘B’ and ‘B’ solicitors, found in ‘B’ Pre-Trial bundle and that more stated within the mediation).
‘B’ WOULD NOT during mediation throughout would not truly engage with fairness, willingness, or/and exchange to a true balance between parties ‘A’ and ‘B’ agreement to settle. This was so both ‘A’ and ‘B’ achieving a far happier equilibrium that parties after such walked away with something that was propionate, to save further litigation costs, and with a solid ‘handshake’, so to say.
The mediator asking ‘B’ first (this being the 1/3rds) their starting position asked ‘A’ to pay -38,000, relating to their solicitors fees and nothing else, this was a complete shock.
In doing, such starting point, ‘A’ who would hold an initial stance pre-mediation was a stance of 400,000. ‘A’ was advised that ‘B’ would never agree to ‘A’ (2/3rds stance) and ‘B’ (1/3rds stance) that in the mediators notes, ‘B’ will was going to an uphill challenge that day.
(Please Note) ‘B’ held personal funds in the bank of well over one/two million (as for ‘B’ this matter in essence would not really harm such loss of say 200,000 in this exercise, so-to-say). If ‘B’ won at TRIAL (although winning was not seen possible) then such ‘B’ personal monies would then would achieve, with costs, into another million into ‘B’ bank account. In addition, ‘B’ knew that ‘A’ held limited funds, if none, to continue with litigation without representation, which would move ‘A’ to High Court, as Litigant in Person.
(This would have being a nightmare to go against ‘B’ who did not care and would have legal representation in hand)
Therefore, ‘A’ took a massive step back from the 2/3rds, as advised as ‘B’ was relentless to budge to the aforesaid split and on that basis and that awaiting the Coroner’s answer. As if this was still under investigation, ‘A’ went to a massive step down to, due to further future costs, from 400,000 (the initial claim amount) down to 150,000 plus costs (this was ‘A’ the bottom line of acceptance) and this must be viewed. In much fairness, perhaps too much, in order to save further fees, costs, and ‘A’ limited money and with such vast reduction would be acceptable to ‘B’, as ‘B’ would get a lot more from this reduced offer amount to settle. However, ‘B’ stated no once again, which was confounding.
Untimely, ‘A’ was placed under undue pressure throughout the day and near the end of day in mediation ‘A’ went far down 35,000 for ‘B’ to accept or such mediation would be a ‘walk out’ by ‘A’.
(Please Note) this amount was with no costs from what ‘A’ had spent to this point of over 48,000 pre-paid to solicitors to get the stage of mediation.
Hence, ‘A’ had to consider proceed to Trial and try to avoid Bankruptcy, be Litigate in Person in proceeding hereafter due to depleted funds, regardless of the initial stance to win the 2/3rds 400,000.
(Please Note) Whilst others may say this was an unwise amount to settle ‘A’ being mindful for financial funds and was placed under severe undue pressure to agree at a negative result -10,000 opposed to ‘B’ opening stance of -38,000 to now to -10,000 (this ‘negative’ costs ‘A’ had incurred and including solicitors fees), hence the above paragraph.
‘A’ near the end of mediation was ultimately a farce and ‘A’ was placed under pressure (due to solid funds in the bank to continue with representation) and ‘A’ tiredness to sign a Tomlin Order to complete the mediation in to a lesser minus figure.
The agreement was by a Tomlin Order drafted up by the B’s solicitors even with errors (yes ‘A’ solicitors did have raise such due ‘B’ solicitors who clearly did not know how a Tomlin Order should have been drafted. This effect, in essence, caused ‘A’ further solicitors due to 2.5 hours wait, when ‘A’ asked solicitors it would taken ‘A’ solicitors in such draft ‘A’ solicitors said 30 minutes).
Therefore, ‘A’ had only signed this DRAFT Tomlin Order and leaving our solicitors ‘B’ together with ‘B’ solicitors and the ‘B’ yet to sign.
So the 35,000, due to this waste of time caused by ‘B’ solicitors will now be less of an extra unnecessary 2,500 of further costs = 32,500. All this time wasting was due to ‘B’ solicitors complete lack of incompetence a further loss to ‘A’ to re-pay time to ‘A’ solicitors.
(Please Note) ‘A’ would be far better stance (as ‘A’ was awaiting the Coroner’s decision to reopen a suspicious case but due to the complexity this is taking time and could be not provided before mediation, due to a stance that could have led to other party (“B”) significantly being the loser.
(Please Note) ‘A’ after leaving the mediation and only ‘A’ signature was still shown on the draft order and no other signatures, before driving home.
On ‘A’ return home (a few hours later) and revisiting/reflecting the day’s events ‘A’ was not happy about signing the aforesaid Drafted Order due to the points noted above, as follows:
‘B’ WOULD NOT during mediation throughout would not truly engage with fairness, willingness, or/and exchange to a true balance between parties ‘A’ and ‘B’ agreement to settle, achieving a far happier equilibrium that parties ‘A’ and ‘B’ after such. Both walking away with something that was propionate, to save further litigation costs, and with a solid ‘handshake’, so to say.
‘A’ being placed with undue ‘direct’ and ‘indirect’ Pressure, Reduced offer amount to settle so ‘A’ and ‘B’ walk away still having a considered non-reciprocated offers to settle during mediation by 'B' and within a few hours after leaving the mediation only my signature was still holding my signature). ‘A’ asked by a late e-Mail to ‘A’ solicitor can this draft Order be revoked/retracted as ‘A’ was not happy with the opposing parties greed and clearly holding 'upper hand' financial better to move matters forward to Trial.
************************************************** ***
Therefore, can this Tomlin Order for this message help and confirm if such can be revoked/retracted, due to the few hours passed?
If this can be revoked as this would be highly appreciated.
Thank you, in advance to your replies, in advance and kind regards to all who reply to help my friend.
My friend has asked me to pass the below to me to your learned persons so I can help, below is was has been asked, as this matter has being going back and forth for near four years:
************************************************** ***
Mediation yesterday the initial stance from 2/3'rds = 400,000 being favourably towards (”A”), as the claim In total was well over 600,000 (Inc. fraudulent activity by ‘B’ and ‘B’ solicitors, found in ‘B’ Pre-Trial bundle and that more stated within the mediation).
‘B’ WOULD NOT during mediation throughout would not truly engage with fairness, willingness, or/and exchange to a true balance between parties ‘A’ and ‘B’ agreement to settle. This was so both ‘A’ and ‘B’ achieving a far happier equilibrium that parties after such walked away with something that was propionate, to save further litigation costs, and with a solid ‘handshake’, so to say.
The mediator asking ‘B’ first (this being the 1/3rds) their starting position asked ‘A’ to pay -38,000, relating to their solicitors fees and nothing else, this was a complete shock.
In doing, such starting point, ‘A’ who would hold an initial stance pre-mediation was a stance of 400,000. ‘A’ was advised that ‘B’ would never agree to ‘A’ (2/3rds stance) and ‘B’ (1/3rds stance) that in the mediators notes, ‘B’ will was going to an uphill challenge that day.
(Please Note) ‘B’ held personal funds in the bank of well over one/two million (as for ‘B’ this matter in essence would not really harm such loss of say 200,000 in this exercise, so-to-say). If ‘B’ won at TRIAL (although winning was not seen possible) then such ‘B’ personal monies would then would achieve, with costs, into another million into ‘B’ bank account. In addition, ‘B’ knew that ‘A’ held limited funds, if none, to continue with litigation without representation, which would move ‘A’ to High Court, as Litigant in Person.
(This would have being a nightmare to go against ‘B’ who did not care and would have legal representation in hand)
Therefore, ‘A’ took a massive step back from the 2/3rds, as advised as ‘B’ was relentless to budge to the aforesaid split and on that basis and that awaiting the Coroner’s answer. As if this was still under investigation, ‘A’ went to a massive step down to, due to further future costs, from 400,000 (the initial claim amount) down to 150,000 plus costs (this was ‘A’ the bottom line of acceptance) and this must be viewed. In much fairness, perhaps too much, in order to save further fees, costs, and ‘A’ limited money and with such vast reduction would be acceptable to ‘B’, as ‘B’ would get a lot more from this reduced offer amount to settle. However, ‘B’ stated no once again, which was confounding.
Untimely, ‘A’ was placed under undue pressure throughout the day and near the end of day in mediation ‘A’ went far down 35,000 for ‘B’ to accept or such mediation would be a ‘walk out’ by ‘A’.
(Please Note) this amount was with no costs from what ‘A’ had spent to this point of over 48,000 pre-paid to solicitors to get the stage of mediation.
Hence, ‘A’ had to consider proceed to Trial and try to avoid Bankruptcy, be Litigate in Person in proceeding hereafter due to depleted funds, regardless of the initial stance to win the 2/3rds 400,000.
(Please Note) Whilst others may say this was an unwise amount to settle ‘A’ being mindful for financial funds and was placed under severe undue pressure to agree at a negative result -10,000 opposed to ‘B’ opening stance of -38,000 to now to -10,000 (this ‘negative’ costs ‘A’ had incurred and including solicitors fees), hence the above paragraph.
‘A’ near the end of mediation was ultimately a farce and ‘A’ was placed under pressure (due to solid funds in the bank to continue with representation) and ‘A’ tiredness to sign a Tomlin Order to complete the mediation in to a lesser minus figure.
The agreement was by a Tomlin Order drafted up by the B’s solicitors even with errors (yes ‘A’ solicitors did have raise such due ‘B’ solicitors who clearly did not know how a Tomlin Order should have been drafted. This effect, in essence, caused ‘A’ further solicitors due to 2.5 hours wait, when ‘A’ asked solicitors it would taken ‘A’ solicitors in such draft ‘A’ solicitors said 30 minutes).
Therefore, ‘A’ had only signed this DRAFT Tomlin Order and leaving our solicitors ‘B’ together with ‘B’ solicitors and the ‘B’ yet to sign.
So the 35,000, due to this waste of time caused by ‘B’ solicitors will now be less of an extra unnecessary 2,500 of further costs = 32,500. All this time wasting was due to ‘B’ solicitors complete lack of incompetence a further loss to ‘A’ to re-pay time to ‘A’ solicitors.
(Please Note) ‘A’ would be far better stance (as ‘A’ was awaiting the Coroner’s decision to reopen a suspicious case but due to the complexity this is taking time and could be not provided before mediation, due to a stance that could have led to other party (“B”) significantly being the loser.
(Please Note) ‘A’ after leaving the mediation and only ‘A’ signature was still shown on the draft order and no other signatures, before driving home.
On ‘A’ return home (a few hours later) and revisiting/reflecting the day’s events ‘A’ was not happy about signing the aforesaid Drafted Order due to the points noted above, as follows:
‘B’ WOULD NOT during mediation throughout would not truly engage with fairness, willingness, or/and exchange to a true balance between parties ‘A’ and ‘B’ agreement to settle, achieving a far happier equilibrium that parties ‘A’ and ‘B’ after such. Both walking away with something that was propionate, to save further litigation costs, and with a solid ‘handshake’, so to say.
‘A’ being placed with undue ‘direct’ and ‘indirect’ Pressure, Reduced offer amount to settle so ‘A’ and ‘B’ walk away still having a considered non-reciprocated offers to settle during mediation by 'B' and within a few hours after leaving the mediation only my signature was still holding my signature). ‘A’ asked by a late e-Mail to ‘A’ solicitor can this draft Order be revoked/retracted as ‘A’ was not happy with the opposing parties greed and clearly holding 'upper hand' financial better to move matters forward to Trial.
************************************************** ***
Therefore, can this Tomlin Order for this message help and confirm if such can be revoked/retracted, due to the few hours passed?
If this can be revoked as this would be highly appreciated.
Thank you, in advance to your replies, in advance and kind regards to all who reply to help my friend.
