Points of Law

[Kati]

Re: Points of Law

:bump2: :bump2:

anyone have any ideas??

[Reluctant]

Re: Points of Law

I would think there was a good legal reason why the Judge wasn't go to go over what had happened.
Uses Court time and may cost you more or wasn't going to dispute anything the 1st Judge had decided.
Have to find out what a Judge can & cannot do when looking at a case and learn that really.
Here is website if it is found that the judge was failing to do his job properly.
I doubt they were and may have been acting in your best interests too just that it wasn't explained how.
If a complaint seems the only recourse to the Law.
https://www.gov.uk/government/organi...mbudsman/about

And other thing I read on wiki about the Burden of proof.

Legal Burden of proof.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balance..._probabilitiesHe who does not carry the burden of proof carries the benefit of assumption, meaning he needs no evidence to support his claim. Fulfilling the burden of proof effectively captures the benefit of assumption, passing the burden of proof off to another party.
and
Preponderance of the evidence, also known as balance of probabilities is the standard required in most civilcases. This is also the standard of proof used in grand jury indictment proceedings^{[citation needed]} (which, unlike civil proceedings, are procedurally unrebuttable),
The standard is met if the proposition is more likely to be true than not true. Effectively, the standard is satisfied if there is greater than 50 percent chance that the proposition is true. Lord Denning, in Miller v. Minister of Pensions,^[7] described it simply as "more probable than not."

The above made me think about how much is owed originally.
and this.
Neither the seriousness of the allegation nor the seriousness of the consequences should make any difference to the standard of proof to be applied in determining the facts. The inherent probabilities are simply something to be taken into account, where relevant, in deciding where the truth lies."

It made me think of the risk you took in not paying the debt in the 1st place.
If you had known the Bill was going to escalate to the point where you could lose your home then you would have paid the debt if it was yours to pay.
If you can (could have shown to the Court) that you had made every attempt to pay because your intention was honourable and you can show how much you did owe originally and were prepared to pay a certain amount over the top.
Then it should stand to reason that you are the one with 'more right' because you had too much to lose.

I might not have explained that well. Debt collector loses one contract & a few thousand pounds.
You stand to lose your home and all that means to an individual.
At the end of a day, one job is not a mans whole livelyhood but ones home is his castle.

[PAWS]

Re: Points of Law

Haven’t seen you on for a while Jazz; Hope you are taking the weekend off as suggested and haven’t given up on LB’s. Get ready to rumble!
xxxxxxx

[Kati]

Re: Points of Law

Get ready to rumble!

me too I might not know much, but I'm more than willing to help xx

[jazzhands]

Re: Points of Law

I am going to see if I can borrow the money for the original debt from a family member and pay them off in a lump sum. If I do this, can they still carry on with the bankruptcy for the Court charges?(£2,800) In my mind, they took me to Court to get that money (£2,400). if I give them it, I have done my duty towards them. If Court fees have accrured then surely thats up to them as they initiated the action?

[Kati]

Re: Points of Law

It can't hurt to try [MENTION=51068]jazzhands[/MENTION] - if you are only in debt for the charges (if you are liable for them) them it's got to look better for you xx

[wales01man]

Re: Points of Law

Think you will find fees are still payable .You have to remember if there was nothing owing they would have no reason to take you to court.
Heed the advice from others on here it should help .

[Crazy council]

Re: Points of Law

I am going to see if I can borrow the money for the original debt from a family member and pay them off in a lump sum. If I do this, can they still carry on with the bankruptcy for the Court charges?(£2,800) In my mind, they took me to Court to get that money (£2,400). if I give them it, I have done my duty towards them. If Court fees have accrued then surely thats up to them as they initiated the action?

Hi jazzhands. Take some advice of the members of here before you ty settle with them, you may be able to settle without costs. Any offer you make them, mark it, without prejudice save as for costs.

If you can get a lump sum, simply offer it as full and final settlement. see what they come back saying. But mark it as advised above

[Robert Bell]

Re: Points of Law

What do you think about bankruptcy,
What bankruptcy case is best opinion in insolvency in Hanford, California ???
Any suggestions....Plz.

[MissFM]

Re: Points of Law

Hi Robert Bell

and welcome.

With all due respect - HTF would we know? This is the UK:whoo

[Kati]

Re: Points of Law

Hi from me too [MENTION=54624]Robert Bell[/MENTION]
While I cannot advise you myself, you might find THIS LINK useful??

K x

[Robert Bell]

Re: Points of Law

Thanks Kati.... Very nice link about legal activities.

[Guest]

Re: Points of Law

oops wrong thred