Tempty V Natwest

[Amethyst]

Re: Tempty V Natwest

Dear District Judge Meredith

Tempty -v- Natwest Bank Plc
Claim No:********

I, the Claimant, refer to the claim as detailed above and specifically the order made by District Judge Meredith dated 03/09/2007.


“ Each party shall deliver to every other party and to the court office copies of all documents (including any expert witness’s report) which he intends to rely on at the hearing no later than 25th September 2007’’

I wish to inform the court that the defendant has not complied with the order in that it has not served upon me the evidence, or any such documents, on which it intends to rely at the forthcoming hearing.

No application to set aside this order has been made by the Defendant.

I can confirm that my documents were filed on 14/08/2007 and served to the Defendant on 14/08/2007. This was in compliance of the order made by Judge ********* on **/**/2007.

It is submitted that the Defendants failure to comply with the order dated 03/09/2007 creates a significant imbalance between the parties in light of the forthcoming hearing, which I believe to be contrary to the overriding objective. This imbalance is particularly exacerbated by the fact that the Defendant is represented by specialist solicitors, whereas I am a litigant in person.

Accordingly, it is respectfully suggested that the court may be minded to make an order pursuant to Rule 3.4(2)(c) of the Civil Procedure Rules.

Yours faithfully

[enaid]

Re: Tempty V Natwest

oh I say :okay:

[Amethyst]

Re: Tempty V Natwest

lol.

Okay letter to court, to be cc'd to cobbetts.

Its an informal letter not an application which I feel is most appropriate under the circumstances.

We have not mentioned CPR 3.9 as there are no sanctions from which to be relieved.


Also on 3rd September there were TWO orders from DJ Meredith - one was that the stay be lifted - this one has been applied to vary by cobblers. The other is for the hearing date and for the bundle submission date - which has not been appealed. Hence the letter.

Long shot I know but worth a try.

[Tempty]

Re: Tempty V Natwest

Great stuff Ame hun
I'll get that printed out and sent in the morning

[Amethyst]

Re: Tempty V Natwest

Okay - Tools is going to have a look at it later, and maybe add some wee touches so hold fire till after 8 :kiss:

[Tempty]

Re: Tempty V Natwest

ok hun np
the day's earlier events have finally caught up with me anyway. too tired to do anything about anything right now anyway
I'll hold off until given the all clear

[Tools]

Re: Tempty V Natwest

Hopefully the finished result T , so fingers crossed

Dear District Judge Meredith

Tempty -v- Natwest Bank Plc
Claim No:********

I, the Claimant, refer to the claim as detailed above and specifically the order made by District Judge Meredith dated 03/09/2007.


“ Each party shall deliver to every other party and to the court office copies of all documents (including any expert witness’s report) which he intends to rely on at the hearing no later than 25th September 2007’’

I wish to bring to the courts attention that the Defendant has failed to comply with the order in that it has not served upon me the evidence, or any such documents, on which it intends to rely , at the forthcoming hearing, to be held on 25th October 2007.

No application to set aside this order has been made by the Defendant.

I can confirm that my own documents were filed on 14/08/2007 and served to the Defendant on 14/08/2007. This was in strict compliance of the order made by Judge ********* on **/**/2007.

It is submitted that the Defendants failure to comply with the order dated 03/09/2007 creates a significant imbalance between the parties in light of the forthcoming hearing, which I believe to be contrary to the overriding objective. This imbalance is particularly exacerbated by the fact that the Defendant is represented by specialist solicitors, whereas I am a litigant in person.

Accordingly, it is respectfully suggested that the court may be minded to make an order pursuant to Rule 3.4(2)(c) of the Civil Procedure Rules;

3.4 (2) The court may strike out a statement of case if it appears to the court –
(c) that there has been a failure to comply with a rule, practice direction or court order."

Yours sincerely

[Amethyst]

Re: Tempty V Natwest

I can confirm that my own documents were filed on 14/08/2007 and served to the Defendant on 14/08/2007. This was in strict compliance of the order made by Judge ********* on **/**/2007.


That judge and date should be the judge and date of the ORIGINAL directions ORDER (we couldnt find the copy soz hunny)

[Tempty]

Re: Tempty V Natwest

Thank you, you little stars
looks fantastic, I'll print it out and take it in to the court in the morning
coblers will get a copy in the post...lol.

you do know of course if i win this you will have to put up with me arriving to celebrate at the next meet pmsl

[Amethyst]

Re: Tempty V Natwest

errrrrrrrrr IF ????????????????????

[Tempty]

Re: Tempty V Natwest

Well yes I'm still saying IF at this stage...... I really am beginning to lose all faith in our court system, it seems fine for the likes of Cobbetts to abuse it at every turn and the courts will grant them what they want every time.

Just rang the court and found out Coblers have their hearing it's set for 23rd Oct at 2pm. So no doubt the letter asking for a strike out will now be ignored ffs.

[iancognito]

Re: Tempty V Natwest

I think this definitely calls for another go at the press now, it's one thing getting a stay overturned but when they are flouting the guidance of the FSA and taking the p*** out of the court, it's another matter.

[Tempty]

Re: Tempty V Natwest

well I'm willing to give anything a go right now
getting really fed up with all this...... really not looking forward to having to go to court.... don't even know how coblers are trying to defend it.... had nothing from them at all.... what possible argument could they have?? Do they know something I dont ?? who knows.

[enaid]

Re: Tempty V Natwest

So sorry tempty, can't believe they have got away with it again.
I really thought you was home and dry especially as they had not complied with the bundle again.
I don't know either what their argument could be, they should not stay hardship cases, they should not take charges from benefits, they have done both these things to you. Then when it comes to following the rules from the courts the things they must most definitely must be doing they get away with not doing, not once but in nearly every stage of the claim.
I hope you do go to the papers tempty, I hope that they are shamed into not only paying you but also letting everyone and his dog know that these people can not carry on treating decent people in the way that they do.

[Tempty]

Re: Tempty V Natwest

well the official notification arrived today. just 6 lines of text I'll type it exactly as it is lol

TAKE NOTICE that the HEARING OF APPLICATION will take place on
23 October 2007 at 2:00 PM
at Torquay & Newton Abott County Court, Nicholson Road, Torquay, Devon. TQ2 7AZ
when you should attend
30 MINUTES has been allowed for the HEARING OF APPLICATION
Please Note: This case may be released to another judge, possibly at a different Court


ok the last line bothers me...... why???
it's still too early to say weather my request for strike out will have any effect whatsoever although i suspect that it wont at all.
oh and no surprise here either........ still not a peep from Coblers!!