Tweet
Hello everyone! I'm new to the forum and would be most grateful for some insight, as I'm beginning to panic.
I'm suing my former stockbroker for fraudulent mis-selling and I've got interlocutory judgement in default of Defence. The Defendant's application for a set aside and relief from sanctions will be heard next week.
Although I lost around 30k, I limited the value of my claim to £10,000 in an effort to get the matter assigned to the small claims track. Unfortunately, however, to date, that tactic hasn't worked - probably due to the complexity of the case. As a result, I'm claiming less than I'd like to be claiming and am still at risk on costs, which is very bad news for me. In fact, I'm beginning to feel that this is a battle I should have let go, irrespective of the rights and wrongs of the situation.
I've done my research and am satisfied that there's no good reason for the Defendant's default and no good reason for the delay in applying for the set aside either. I obtained judgement last September, so it's been a while. My worry is the all the circumstances of the case test. The Judge appears not to be strict and I have a feeling that she'll be tempted to award relief on the basis that the Defence has merit.
Does anyone have any ideas as to how I should best approach this?
Regarding the merits, the Defence has raised the issue of limitation, but, if I can establish breach of fiduciary duty/ fraudulent breach of trust, it's arguable that there is no limitation period applicable - S21(1)a Limitation Act 1980.
In any case, my argument is that I became aware of the fraud less than three years before I issued.
If a stockbroker recklessly recommends Principal shares that are unsuitable, resulting in loss, would that amount to a fraudulent breach of trust?
A point in my favour is that the stockbroker has twice been fined by the FSA for unacceptable sales practices.
Any thoughts would be most welcome.
I'm suing my former stockbroker for fraudulent mis-selling and I've got interlocutory judgement in default of Defence. The Defendant's application for a set aside and relief from sanctions will be heard next week.
Although I lost around 30k, I limited the value of my claim to £10,000 in an effort to get the matter assigned to the small claims track. Unfortunately, however, to date, that tactic hasn't worked - probably due to the complexity of the case. As a result, I'm claiming less than I'd like to be claiming and am still at risk on costs, which is very bad news for me. In fact, I'm beginning to feel that this is a battle I should have let go, irrespective of the rights and wrongs of the situation.
I've done my research and am satisfied that there's no good reason for the Defendant's default and no good reason for the delay in applying for the set aside either. I obtained judgement last September, so it's been a while. My worry is the all the circumstances of the case test. The Judge appears not to be strict and I have a feeling that she'll be tempted to award relief on the basis that the Defence has merit.
Does anyone have any ideas as to how I should best approach this?
Regarding the merits, the Defence has raised the issue of limitation, but, if I can establish breach of fiduciary duty/ fraudulent breach of trust, it's arguable that there is no limitation period applicable - S21(1)a Limitation Act 1980.
In any case, my argument is that I became aware of the fraud less than three years before I issued.
If a stockbroker recklessly recommends Principal shares that are unsuitable, resulting in loss, would that amount to a fraudulent breach of trust?
A point in my favour is that the stockbroker has twice been fined by the FSA for unacceptable sales practices.
Any thoughts would be most welcome.
