discussion

[Guest]

IN my admittedly limited experience Judges are not on the side of the underdog- unless you have been watching Judge John Deed or Judge Rinder

Thank you for you comment warwick65 and I agree with you, most people do not understand how the Courts/Legal Society operates so the DJ will side with the plaintiff.
It's a court and like any court, tennis court, badminton court, you bat points of law and evidence to each other and the DJ is the referee.
The DJ first duty is to the Law Society the same as the lawyer/s so you need to know how conduct yourself in court with honor and clean hands.
You mention you have experience dealing with personal debt, with respect I don't think you understand the order of authority in a court, the jurisdiction or how to represent yourself.
I have attended court and found DJ's very helpful with successful results but you do need to know what to say to them to retain your standing in court.

[warwick65]

Re: Letter of claim from Restons Solicitors

What is your obsession with the law society - or do you think they are some kind of secret society associated with the running of the country. I am however glad that you see in many cases the Judges do not look 'favourably' on us. Of course I am not expecting favouritism just equality but I am aware that fairness does not happen in society, only conflict.

Having said that, I have come across senior judges who are fair and proportionate

I know perfectly well how to handle myself in court and how it works, my point was, in my case the other sides representative made some claims which the Judge seemed to acknowledge were likely on balance but my barrister was able to show this was not so and the case was adjourned for the refiling of documents.

[nemesis45]

Re: Letter of claim from Restons Solicitors

Hi,
you are under no obligation in Law to fill out any financial statement/paperwork to a solicitor.
Write a nice polite letter to Restons Solicitors explaining your financial situation is not good at this moment in time and offer what ever you feel is good for you even if it's only a pound a week until your circumstances improve in the future.
They may write back refusing your offer.
Fine send them another letter saying o k see you in court.
Refusing an offer to pay means the debt is no longer owed.
The Judge in court will be on your side because you offered all you could afford at that moment in time...tell the Judge you pay all your debts it's just a bad time for you at the moment and you have offered all you can afford until things improve.
Normally they love helping the under dog especially if you are up against big companies like Banks.

This post is utter rubbish!

" Refusing an offer means the debt is longer owed" is nonsense. Where did this come from?

nem

[Guest]

Re: Letter of claim from Restons Solicitors

Yet another intelligent response....utter rubbish......well if it is utter rubbish why are debts Statute Barred....if you make an offer regarding a debt you owe and it is refused you have acted in honour at all times and enter the court with clean hands. The claimant can take you to court but you can only pay what you can afford, the judge will not order you to pay more just because the claimant has taken court action. In my experience if a judge can see you are acting in an honourable way they may order you pay an even lower amount than your offered to the claimant and dismiss the claimant's court costs/fees to help you. The claimant can not force payment in full which is often requested by a creditor threatening to take court action. I think this answers the question that was posted.

[nemesis45]

Re: Letter of claim from Restons Solicitors

Yet another intelligent response....utter rubbish......well if it is utter rubbish why are debts Statute Barred....if you make an offer regarding a debt you owe and it is refused you have acted in honour at all times and enter the court with clean hands. The claimant can take you to court but you can only pay what you can afford, the judge will not order you to pay more just because the claimant has taken court action. In my experience if a judge can see you are acting in an honourable way they may order you pay an even lower amount than your offered to the claimant and dismiss the claimant's court costs/fees to help you. The claimant can not force payment in full which is often requested by a creditor threatening to take court action. I think this answers the question that was posted.

The refusal of an offer of payment question:

1. The offer can be seen as an admission of liability.

2. The civil law in England and Wales is based on the balance of probabilities and a judge may well decide that the offer is on the balance of possibilities admission of liability for the debt and make judgment in favour of the claimant.

3. Statute Barring, simple principals ( IT can be more complicated) (a) No unequivocal written admission of liability in 6 years ( the start of the 6 year period can vary depending on the type of account/contract.

(b) No payments /offers made in the relevant 6 year period .

Refusal of an offer of payment will not affect the status of the debt,

Also unless you are under Scottish Law a debt still exists after becoming statute barred and can be pursued by any means other than court action.

nem

- - - Updated - - -

Yet another intelligent response....utter rubbish......well if it is utter rubbish why are debts Statute Barred....if you make an offer regarding a debt you owe and it is refused you have acted in honour at all times and enter the court with clean hands. The claimant can take you to court but you can only pay what you can afford, the judge will not order you to pay more just because the claimant has taken court action. In my experience if a judge can see you are acting in an honourable way they may order you pay an even lower amount than your offered to the claimant and dismiss the claimant's court costs/fees to help you. The claimant can not force payment in full which is often requested by a creditor threatening to take court action. I think this answers the question that was posted.

The refusal of an offer of payment question:

1. The offer can be seen as an admission of liability.

2. The civil law in England and Wales is based on the balance of probabilities and a judge may well decide that the offer is on the balance of possibilities admission of liability for the debt and make judgment in favour of the claimant.

3. Statute Barring, simple principals ( IT can be more complicated) (a) No unequivocal written admission of liability in 6 years ( the start of the 6 year period can vary depending on the type of account/contract.

(b) No payments /offers made in the relevant 6 year period .

Refusal of an offer of payment will not affect the status of the debt,

Also unless you are under Scottish Law a debt still exists after becoming statute barred and can be pursued by any means other than court action.

nem

[warwick65]

Re: Letter of claim from Restons Solicitors

Tony
The problem is that your arguments do not follow any logic

Firstly you say that a refusal of an offer will mean the debt is no longer owed but then you say that they can take you to court (for what- you said there is no owed debt?) followed by if a Judge sees you have acted with honour he will only make an order you can afford. Now why would a Judge make an order for you to repay a debt that isn't owed?

You ask how a debt becomes Statute barred
Well the answer is for many reasons
Some may be
1) The creditor can not evidence your liability for the debt
2)The creditor may decide it is uneconomic to pursue you for a debt that they may have only paid £20 for if they know you have no money or assets
3) There may be many other reasons why they do not take you to court
4) In the 1000's of agreements they own, maybe yours is one that gets lost at the bottom of the pile

As already said, any payment or written acknowledgement will reset the SB clock so why make one unless you have to.

I do not disagree with arguing about your liability for debt but only when it is practical to do this
You say you are not a FMOTL however your arguments are similar to the ones they use
Of course you may not live in the Cotswolds at all as I know of someone else with a similar stance to you who is actually a Staffs boy

[nemesis45]

Re: Letter of claim from Restons Solicitors

Yet another intelligent response....utter rubbish......well if it is utter rubbish why are debts Statute Barred....if you make an offer regarding a debt you owe and it is refused you have acted in honour at all times and enter the court with clean hands. The claimant can take you to court but you can only pay what you can afford, the judge will not order you to pay more just because the claimant has taken court action. In my experience if a judge can see you are acting in an honourable way they may order you pay an even lower amount than your offered to the claimant and dismiss the claimant's court costs/fees to help you. The claimant can not force payment in full which is often requested by a creditor threatening to take court action. I think this answers the question that was posted.

1. You say " refusal of an offer means the debt is no longer owed" = Utter Rubbish.

2.The civil law in England and Wales is decided on " the balance of probabilities" so an offer of payment may well be in the balance of probabilities and admission of liability and if put before a judge likely to result in judgment for the claimant.

3. Statute Barred in England and Wales ( simple explanation) = No unequivocal written admission of liability ( Offer).

4. No payments/offers in the relevant 6 year period. ( the start of the relevant 6 year period can vary according to the type of account/contract.

5. A claimant is not precluded from looking to enforce payment in full e.g. applying for a warrant of control.

I think this explains it simply for you.

nem

[Guest]

Re: Letter of claim from Restons Solicitors

Molly2012 post made it perfectly clear they want to pay the debt by installments so have admitted liability for the debt but wanted information how to pay which I have given.
This post is about repaying a debt not defending the case.
The claimant can win their claim but the important part to the person owning the debt is how much they can afford to pay as Molly2012 explained in the post.
You have clearly outlined my point the debt is not owed which I should say will not go to court, if you make an offer to the original creditor and they refuse you can then ignore them resulting in your debt being sold to a three party who you can also ignore then after 6 years it's Statute Barred.
I am fully aware of the details of Statute Barred Rules and all the points you have raised.
The Law Society love to diminish my standing as a man which is totally understandable and call me a FMOL which I am not but I am a man they do not like to go up against in court.
If you are legally trained you will understand my standing as a man as will a DJ and respect me as I do you, so stop trying to group me with someone from Staffs or FMOL group this only shows how determined you are to over power me.

[Kati]

Re: discussion

posts moved to their own thread [MENTION=55034]nemesis45[/MENTION] [MENTION=98117]warwick65[/MENTION] [MENTION=112247]cotswoldtony[/MENTION] ... if you want to continue this discussion (which is not helping the OP in her original thread to any great extent) may I suggest you keep it on here. Thanks

[warwick65]

Re: discussion

Its fine [MENTION=49370]Kati[/MENTION]

I am not sure I can hold a coherent discussion with Tony because he has views which I can not agree with and do not believe. He seems to be of the opinion I have something to do with the law society and also of the opinion that if an offer of payment is made and refused it will never go to court- well I have news for him ....

I also find this whole insistence on the fact he is a man to be rather disconcerting - his biological sex has absolutely no meaning to the issue

[nemesis45]

Re: Letter of claim from Restons Solicitors

Molly2012 post made it perfectly clear they want to pay the debt by installments so have admitted liability for the debt but wanted information how to pay which I have given.
This post is about repaying a debt not defending the case.
The claimant can win their claim but the important part to the person owning the debt is how much they can afford to pay as Molly2012 explained in the post.
You have clearly outlined my point the ********debt is not owed **** Explain How the Debt is Not Owed *****which I should say will not go to court, if you make an offer to the original creditor and they refuse you can then ignore them resulting in your debt being sold to a three party who you can also ignore then after 6 years it's Statute Barred.Ignoring the DEBT BECAUSE AN OFFER HAS BEEN REFUSED? LEADS TO SALE OF THE DEBT TO A DEBT PURCHASER, continuing to ignore the debt may lead to a claim being issued and ignoring the claim gets a judgment by default.
I am fully aware of the details of Statute Barred Rules and all the points you have raised.
The Law Society love to diminish my standing as a man which is totally understandable and call me a FMOL which I am not but I am a man they do not like to go up against in court.
If you are legally trained you will understand my standing as a man as will a DJ and respect me as I do you, so stop trying to group me with someone from Staffs or FMOL group this only shows how determined you are to over power me.

I sincerely think the last paragraph above shows you have no idea of the Civil Law of England and Wales! I guess you are getting into the other internationally discredited " straw man " theories.
The strange statement " group me with someone from Staffs or FMOL" odd indeed.

What you are posting is dangerous and misleading and may easily see someone getting a judgment by default.

nem
.

- - - Updated - - -

Its fine @Kati

I am not sure I can hold a coherent discussion with Tony because he has views which I can not agree with and do not believe. He seems to be of the opinion I have something to do with the law society and also of the opinion that if an offer of payment is made and refused it will never go to court- well I have news for him ....

I also find this whole insistence on the fact he is a man to be rather disconcerting - his biological sex has absolutely no meaning to the issue

"Straw Man " theory maybe!

[charitynjw]

Re: discussion

Meads v Meads

http://canliiconnects.org/en/summaries/24966

[nemesis45]

Re: discussion

Meads v Meads

http://canliiconnects.org/en/summaries/24966

Thanks [MENTION=5553]charitynjw[/MENTION]!

I had forgotten about the Canadian ruling. I believe when the judgement was made it was said it would have impact world wide.

nem

[charitynjw]

Re: discussion

Thanks @charitynjw!

I had forgotten about the Canadian ruling. I believe when the judgement was made it was said it would have impact world wide.

nem

Hi Nem

There is also http://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtopic.php?t=11582

[nemesis45]

Re: discussion

Hi Nem

There is also http://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtopic.php?t=11582

That reads like a " Ealing Farce" from the 50's [MENTION=5553]charitynjw[/MENTION] the terminally bewildered get more bewildered day by day.

nem