yup Pt2537 is here now too

[Guest]

Re: Alexandra Slater v Egg Banking Plc August 9th 2010

No, the judgement was flawed!

Hi dont be rsdiculous not even PT thinks that,

there is as debt star says work to be done on shoewng top up loans ppi is a possible route to unenforceability .
Forn what it is worth i am looking at the possibility now no promisses but i have found something.
Peter
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------

Peter

A big pat on the back from me. You advised at the outset that the case was flawed and you've been proved correct.

Thank you means a lot seriously

was just about to pack it in also perhaps i will give it another go. sorry AC
Peter

Peter

[The Debt Star]

Re: Alexandra Slater v Egg Banking Plc August 9th 2010

was just about to pack it in also perhaps i will give it another go.

DON'T pack it in FFS Peter! We need your knowledge and expertise.

Lets get back onto what we like most, cracking Egg.

[banker_rhymes_with]

Re: Alexandra Slater v Egg Banking Plc August 9th 2010

DON'T pack it in FFS Peter! We need your knowledge and expertise.

Like we need a big hole in the head.

Cheers,
BRW

[basa48]

Re: Alexandra Slater v Egg Banking Plc August 9th 2010

Like we need a big hole in the head.

Cheers,
BRW

I always felt we all need an alternative viewpoint and Slater justified PBs reticence.

[Angry Cat]

Re: Alexandra Slater v Egg Banking Plc August 9th 2010

Like we need a big hole in the head.

Cheers,
BRW

Concur!

[pt2537]

Re: Alexandra Slater v Egg Banking Plc August 9th 2010

id prefer not to comment any further,

the cases i am now dealing with will be done so in private and when the judgments are released then i will provide them and people can then do with them what they will

[middenmess]

Re: Alexandra Slater v Egg Banking Plc August 9th 2010

id prefer not to comment any further,

the cases i am now dealing with will be done so in private and when the judgments are released then i will provide them and people can then do with them what they will

A not unexpected loss considering the remarks received here and 'there'--but a serious loss to many who have benefited from PT's observations and advice.

Some crowing will no doubt ensue from some quarters.

[WendyB]

Re: Alexandra Slater v Egg Banking Plc August 9th 2010

Never liked crows myself, especially since I found what the collective noun for them was......

[Angry Cat]

Re: Alexandra Slater v Egg Banking Plc August 9th 2010

Very wise move by pt!

[The Debt Star]

Re: Alexandra Slater v Egg Banking Plc August 9th 2010

Bloomin eck some of you people are so spiteful its unbelievable. I've only been using these forums for about 4 months and I'm shocked at how viscious and personal you get.

There's a principle here called freedom of speech and when you hear something you don't like you gang up together like a flock of birds.

PB was proved right.
PT did his level best and is continuing to fight cases. Great.

We need the dialogue as basa says. what we don't need is the bitching.

[WendyB]

Re: Alexandra Slater v Egg Banking Plc August 9th 2010

Yes AC we are all left in no doubt that there is bad feeling between the two "camps" as it were, but can we please please please just move on, stop trading personal insults and lay the whole thing to rest. Didn't a lot of people move over here from CAG because of all the arguing? So why be so intent on carrying it on now. It's in the past, leave it there.

[banker_rhymes_with]

Re: Alexandra Slater v Egg Banking Plc August 9th 2010

PB was proved right.

FFS. No, he wasn't, and that is the point.

He simply spouted off, turned it personal, then gloated when a perfectly valid and well planned Claim did not win.

If we all followed this so called advice, we may as well all bend over now, and take what is coming.

If this gets me banned from LB, so be it.

Cheers,
BRW

[Amethyst]

Re: Alexandra Slater v Egg Banking Plc August 9th 2010

Why on earth would that get you banned? Anyway regardless, PB has a point of view, PT has a point of view, you have a point of view, I have a point of view, lots of other people have points of view, be exceeeeeeeeeeeeeeedingly boring if we all agreed or if anyone who didnt agree with, ummm everyone else?, got banned wouldn't it ?

I never read the EGG thread that seems to be behind all of this over on CAG. I appreciated lots of you have left CAG over that and other issues. But do we really want the same thing on here ? PB has made his final point, PT has said he won't comment any further on the case, so I think it is time to just let it lie, and actually look at the judgment rather than picking on who said what when.

[TUTTSI]

Re: Alexandra Slater v Egg Banking Plc August 9th 2010

I believe that both Peter and PT have a lot of valuable advice to offer peeps in need of help. It would be absolutely great if they could put this behind them and give peeps advice that is badly needed.

CMC's have a lot to answer for as they have stirred up all this CCA flaws, which may or may not be valid. Unfortunately the general public do not understand and will be taken in by there heavy sales pitches.

Please Peter and PT try and work together instead of against each other.

Tuttsi

[Ihaterbs]

Re: Alexandra Slater v Egg Banking Plc August 9th 2010

I believe that both Peter and PT have a lot of valuable advice to offer peeps in need of help. It would be absolutely great if they could put this behind them and give peeps advice that is badly needed.

CMC's have a lot to answer for as they have stirred up all this CCA flaws, which may or may not be valid. Unfortunately the general public do not understand and will be taken in by there heavy sales pitches.

Please Peter and PT try and work together instead of against each other.

Tuttsi

Here, here