• Welcome to the LegalBeagles Consumer and Legal Forum.
    Please Register to get the most out of the forum. Registration is free and only needs a username and email address.
    REGISTER
    Please do not post your full name, reference numbers or any identifiable details on the forum.

Litigants in person……..my worst nightmare

Collapse
Loading...
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Litigants in person……..my worst nightmare

    Over the past 8 years i have dealt with a number of consumer credit litigation matters. Many of the case have arrived on my desk at an early stage and it has been possible to knock the case into order promptly. A case that is shambolic is every lawyers worst nightmare, the last thing you […]
    Over the past 8 years i have dealt with a number of consumer credit litigation matters. Many of the case have arrived on my desk at an early stage and it has been possible to knock the case into order promptly. A case that is shambolic is every lawyers worst nightmare, the last thing you want to have to do is hit the ground running and trying to get proper discovery of core documents with less than 2 days before the Defence needs to be filed and served.
    I know its possible to apply to the Court for an extension of time, but the truth is that you really shouldnt have to if youve followed the CPR and the Pre Action Protocol Practice direction.
    This is fundamentally where consumers go wrong, most people are too trusting for starters, so i have decided to bullet point some of the chaotic things litigants in person do and the difficulties it causes.
    1. LIPs generally are too scared of replying to a claimants letter of claim. Often it is to avoid limitation, or at least thats the explanation often offered. “I didnt reply because i didnt want to reset the statute barred clock” well news flash, if you dont reply to a pre action letter not only are you risking prejudicing your ability to defend the case you are also placing yourself at the risk of adverse costs. Wake up and smell the coffee.
    2. Litigants in person also seem to be like rabbits in the headlights when it comes to litigating, yes i know we go to law school and a lip doesnt, but there plenty of advice on the numerous internet forums and people often fail to follow it or read the Civil PRocedure Rules etc. A prime example, a claimant fails to serve documents requested under rule 31, so the LiP agrees an extension of time for the Defence, up to the maximum 28 days, then sits on his hands until day 28 and panics because he has 8 hours to lodge his defence. A better way would be to agree an extension of 28 days, tell the claimant he has 14 days to serve documents and at the point of failure lodge an application which will then give you 14 days to prepare, draft and finalise the application and get it to the Court in time.
    3. Another litigant in person failing, the Court makes an order to exchange statements by 4pm on xxxx, however the Claimant fails to serve his statement in accordance with the order, so the Lip Decides not to send his statement too. Fatal breach of the rules, and will undoubtedly leave the LIP needing to apply for relief from sanctions, and in reality the lip would have no real prospect of overcoming these problems. Point of order, comply with the bloody Court order without exceptions and sod what the oppo does, if the oppo fails to comply then get a letter into the Court telling them youve complied the oppo hasnt. If the Court asks for an application then lodge one, spending £155 on an application could be the best £155 you will ever spend in the proceedings, especially if it gets the Claimants claim thrown out.
    4. Use the rules, comply with the rules, a prime example here was a case where the Lip had been presented with a summary Judgment application, purely because they had not followed the rules, in essence the Claimant was taking the LIP as a mug. They were arguably entitled to do so as well, although you may say its a lawyer taking an unfair advantage, in reality it isnt, the litigant had presented a defence so incoherent that the lawyer was entitled to apply for judgment. The problem the LIP had was that his case was a corker, he hadnt pleaded it properly (first mistake) he hadnt made it clear to the Claimant what his case was (second mistake) he had ignored all correspondence (third mistake) and his biggest error was the fact that he had not lodged any evidence in opposition of the summary judgment application. A witness statement opposing summary judgment is essential in such circumstances, setting out at least why the Defendant has a real prospect of success in Defending the Claim. Fail to prepare then prepare to fail.
    The above 4 points are the main problems i see with LIP Cases.



    More...
    I work for Roach Pittis Solicitors. I give my free time available to helping other on the forum and would be happy to try and assist informally where needed. Any posts I make on LegalBeagles are for information and discussion purposes only and shouldn't be seen as legal advice. Any advice I provide is without liability.

    If you need to contact me please email me on Pt@roachpittis.co.uk .

    I have been involved in leading consumer credit and data protection cases including Harrison v Link Financial Limited (High Court), Grace v Blackhorse (Court of Appeal) and also Kotecha v Phoenix Recoveries (Court of Appeal) along with a number of other reported cases and often blog about all things consumer law orientated.

    You can also follow my blog on consumer credit here.
    Tags: None

  • #2
    Re: Litigants in person……..my worst nightmare

    Some of us are doing our very best & this will get worse in my opinion as people are divided in support/affordability.........in my case the regulatory bodies don't even support those perhaps they should.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Litigants in person……..my worst nightmare

      I am one of the peeps pt refers to and I admit it.....SO.......my advice to other LIP's........ Is......... to read what pt says over and over again and take it all in ........you'll find it good stuff.

      Sparkie

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Litigants in person……..my worst nightmare

        £155 yes well that's a lot of money .

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Litigants in person……..my worst nightmare

          Originally posted by seduraed View Post
          £155 yes well that's a lot of money .
          The above blog, despite its name, is not meant to be read as a criticisim, what i want to do is make an issue out of things which i see as being the part where the consumer turns his case from a winner to a loser.

          I accept £155 is a lot, heres a thought though, infact, heres a fact, a claim went to court, the value was £18k, had the consumer made the application and paid the £155 the claim would have been brought to an end, instead the consumer ended up with judgment, and the threat of bankruptcy.

          If made bankrtupt the home would have been gone, all assets gone, infact life ruined. I know £155 is a lot to pay, but the problem is made much worst if you dont take steps to protect yourself.

          As it happened, this case was turned around, the fee paid, the app made, the claim discontinued and my point proven to a degree.
          I work for Roach Pittis Solicitors. I give my free time available to helping other on the forum and would be happy to try and assist informally where needed. Any posts I make on LegalBeagles are for information and discussion purposes only and shouldn't be seen as legal advice. Any advice I provide is without liability.

          If you need to contact me please email me on Pt@roachpittis.co.uk .

          I have been involved in leading consumer credit and data protection cases including Harrison v Link Financial Limited (High Court), Grace v Blackhorse (Court of Appeal) and also Kotecha v Phoenix Recoveries (Court of Appeal) along with a number of other reported cases and often blog about all things consumer law orientated.

          You can also follow my blog on consumer credit here.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Litigants in person……..my worst nightmare

            Thanks for the advice, and if I ever become involved in consumer credit problems I'll bear it in mind (actually I'll probably refer it here for advice!)

            I note you recommend responding to a claimants letter before claim, but what if that letter does not comply with CPR Pre action conduct?
            Recently a friend received a total of 4 letters from Foot Anstey before they lodged a claim. Because they were not identified as LBC & did not comply, and were in fact just an attempt to bully and browbeat him, I suggested they were ignored. In due course we explained our reasons. The claimant eventually filed for discontinuance.
            In those circumstances is it your opinion that a defendant should reply to such letters?
            I'm not starting an argument, just asking if my advice should have been different, Still learning!

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Litigants in person……..my worst nightmare

              Originally posted by des8 View Post
              Thanks for the advice, and if I ever become involved in consumer credit problems I'll bear it in mind (actually I'll probably refer it here for advice!)

              I note you recommend responding to a claimants letter before claim, but what if that letter does not comply with CPR Pre action conduct?
              Recently a friend received a total of 4 letters from Foot Anstey before they lodged a claim. Because they were not identified as LBC & did not comply, and were in fact just an attempt to bully and browbeat him, I suggested they were ignored. In due course we explained our reasons. The claimant eventually filed for discontinuance.
              In those circumstances is it your opinion that a defendant should reply to such letters?
              I'm not starting an argument, just asking if my advice should have been different, Still learning!

              It's a bit of a gamble. On one hand the reason most ignore letters is to achieve statute barred status. On the other hand if you go to court you may need to face scrutiny from the opponent who will say to the judge that they had no choice but to litigate as you ignored them completely and it may cause prejudice in the mind of the judge as well as expose you to costs.

              A letter that doesn't comply with the PAPs may mean you escape from the penalties that they provide but if the judge thinks you are a filthy debt avoider, it may not.

              Of course, Paul being someone who has to sweep up when the shit hits the fan, isn't really a fan of anything that doesn't help him get a result. None of us like people who make our jobs harder or more complicated. It has to be said though that if you employ Paul and you've made his job harder that you've also made it harder for yourself.

              M1

              Comment

              View our Terms and Conditions

              LegalBeagles Group uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience and to create a secure and effective website. By using this website, you are consenting to such use.To find out more and learn how to manage cookies please read our Cookie and Privacy Policy.

              If you would like to opt in, or out, of receiving news and marketing from LegalBeagles Group Ltd you can amend your settings at any time here.


              If you would like to cancel your registration please Contact Us. We will delete your user details on request, however, any previously posted user content will remain on the site with your username removed and 'Guest' inserted.
              Working...
              X