WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

[Rico]

Re: Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court hearing 28th January 2014

No, it isn't, its the level of damages in Richards case, its not a general one size fits all. Imagine a default causes your business to collapse and you lose your home etc, is £8k sufficient compensatory amount?

I understand that the £8K is for damage to creditworthiness as per Kpohraror. Business collapse and lost home are specific damages that have been denied in my case (and Kpohrarors).

Rico.

[Rico]

Re: Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court hearing 28th January 2014

Amethyst/Andy,

Appeal was to reinstate lower court findings on the basis that "First Division" had no right to alter facts. (McGraddie - off the top of my head)

Seems to suggest that the "First Division" acted unlawfully?

Rico

[Sparkie1723]

Re: Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court hearing 28th January 2014

Amethyst/Andy,

Appeal was to reinstate lower court findings on the basis that "First Division" had no right to alter facts. (McGraddie - off the top of my head)

Seems to suggest that the "First Division" acted unlawfully?

Rico

Morning Rico,

What do your legal team think about all this?

Sparkie

[Guest]

Re: Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court hearing 28th January 2014

Amethyst/Andy,

Appeal was to reinstate lower court findings on the basis that "First Division" had no right to alter facts. (McGraddie - off the top of my head)

Seems to suggest that the "First Division" acted unlawfully?

Rico

Thanks Rico I will look that up.

[Rico]

Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

Sorry to be negative at a time of general rejoicing, but this isn't an especially good judgement for Richard or anyone else that has suffered substantial loss due to wrongfully recorded adverse data.

The First Division found no causative link between the data and Richard's losses, despite it being accepted earlier by the Sheriff and despite the evidence showing the probability of the loss. The fact remained that Richard was excluded from credit, and that exclusion led to the inability to realise investment sums that would otherwise have been available.

The old problem of having to prove loss appears to remain, although helped by the award made today for "injury to credit" at £8,000 plus interest.

So we have an "injury to credit" judgement, confirming what we all wanted re Kpohraror, while the difficulties of proving actual or potential loss remain, AFAICS.

IMVHO this is only a partial win.

It wasn't difficult to prove at all. The Scottish judges and possibly the English justices still don't understand the impact of a wrongful default on victims.

I wasn't trying to invest. Just to live. Nothing more. I tried. British justice doesn't exist despite being told otherwise as a child.

Cheers,

Rico.

[Rico]

Re: Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court hearing 28th January 2014

Morning Rico,

What do your legal team think about all this?

Sparkie

It's the end of the road.

McGraddie fell on deaf ears.

Defamation claim can't happen due to time limits (despite defamation effectively continuing?)

5 in a row for Andrew now. I can't say exactly what I've been told but this alone seems to confirm my suspicions that "First Division" can't be trusted.

Rico

[Amethyst]

Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

I wonder had the property you had been trying to buy had been in this country the press/judges etc might have been more on your side damages wise. I know when I first read a press article I thought you were trying to buy an investment property as opposed to a family home. Not that that's a bad thing but it is, I think, the automatic presumption because of all the mention of 'spanish property'. Not that it makes a blind bit of difference really.

[Guest]

Re: Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court hearing 28th January 2014

It's the end of the road.

McGraddie fell on deaf ears.

Defamation claim can't happen due to time limits (despite defamation effectively continuing?)

5 in a row for Andrew now. I can't say exactly what I've been told but this alone seems to confirm my suspicions that "First Division" can't be trusted.

Rico

I think it was more of a win of common sense really, the section 75 argument presented failed as I read it.

[Rico]

Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

Bloody criminals, the lot of them.

Agreed. What can be done?

It seems, given that the judicial system is protecting them, we are just waiting for someone to take the law into their own hands..

I've been warning about this for years and I believe it may already be in motion.

We need justice before this gets too far out of control. My MP doesn't seem interested. I wonder who's is?

Rico.

[Guest]

Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

I don't think it would have made a difference the SC said that it did not have the power to overrule a judgment of the Scotts court on the evidence only on a point of law.

I thin the case mentioned was about a point of law issue also , although i have only read a brief synopsis.

[Sparkie1723]

Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

Agreed. What can be done?

It seems, given that the judicial system is protecting them, we are just waiting for someone to take the law into their own hands..

I've been warning about this for years and I believe it may already be in motion.

We need justice before this gets too far out of control. My MP doesn't seem interested. I wonder who's is?

Rico.

Ever thought of George Galloway???..Big Wigs don't scare him too much.

Sparkie

[Rico]

Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

I wonder had the property you had been trying to buy had been in this country the press/judges etc might have been more on your side damages wise...Not that it makes a blind bit of difference really.

I couldn't buy in the UK due to the default (I didn't want to anyway).

Spanish banks could see that I could afford the repayments but they needed a hefty deposit that I couldn't raise due to the UK default.

It would have been preferable for the criminals not to have interfered in the first place.

Rico

[Rico]

Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

The SC said that it did not have the power to overrule a judgment of the Scotts court on the evidence only on a point of law.

The point was that the "First Division" acted unlawfully. That seems to be very much a point of law.

It's common sense that, if prices go up, the victim will have to pay more.

Rico

[Lord_Alcohol]

Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

Ever thought of George Galloway???..Big Wigs don't scare him too much.

Sparkie

Brilliant!

What about Panorama? A programme about how the financial establishment is removing millions from credit, presumably for that reason alone, and the costs incurred by those victims might be quite interesting...especially in relation to the ineffective and pro-bank arbitration service and the toothless ICO.

[Rico]

Re: WON !! Richard Durkin v HFC / PC World supreme court judgment 26/03/14

Ever thought of George Galloway???..Big Wigs don't scare him too much.

Sparkie

Great. That's a start. Now we need 300+ more to form a government that will put an end to the evil empire!

There seems to be even darker forces at work though and this might never be achieved in our lifetime.

Rico.