• Welcome to the LegalBeagles Consumer and Legal Forum.
    Please Register to get the most out of the forum. Registration is free and only needs a username and email address.
    REGISTER
    Please do not post your full name, reference numbers or any identifiable details on the forum.

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

Collapse
Loading...
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

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

    did they counter offer anything?
    #staysafestayhome

    Any support I provide is offered without liability, if you are unsure please seek professional legal guidance.

    Received a Court Claim? Read >>>>> First Steps

    Comment


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

      Originally posted by Amethyst View Post
      did they counter offer anything?
      It wouldn't have cost them anything to remove the default as requested. They didn't even offer that!

      All offers after failing to remove the default were derisory and in any case, came far too late.

      Comment


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

        Depends on what basis they were made I'd guess. It's horrid but you'll just have to wait for the costs guys to sort through everything. Did you have insurance or anything ?


        Your damages should be just under 18k with the stat interest from Aug 99. Doesn't help much if you're facing 100k costs.
        #staysafestayhome

        Any support I provide is offered without liability, if you are unsure please seek professional legal guidance.

        Received a Court Claim? Read >>>>> First Steps

        Comment


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

          Originally posted by Amethyst View Post
          Puts you off standing up for yourself and seeking justice somewhat doesn't it.

          Costs in Roberts v Bos were bonkers too, not quite 100k bonkers - about 35k as I recall - even though she won as well


          EDIT: just checked was 20k see attached ( mights as well been 100k though)
          Ooer - so the Court of Appeal dismissed BoS's appeal, awarded 7,500 to Roberts, and she still got a costs bill of 20K!?

          Does this include the original 10K or so that she owed the bank? With interest (contractual?) on top? Or is it purely legal fees?

          Seems a bit harsh

          Comment


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

            Just the legal fees.
            #staysafestayhome

            Any support I provide is offered without liability, if you are unsure please seek professional legal guidance.

            Received a Court Claim? Read >>>>> First Steps

            Comment


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

              After reading all the latest and what has happened elsewhere I can understand why the banking/finance industry behaves as it does, it realises it is un-touchable. When we these people truly pay the price for the things they have done?

              Comment


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

                Even in our case the Appeal Court went to the ends of the earth to try an rule against us on every single point.
                I still agree with pt and Tom's argument about the oral possession order not being lawful in that can be acted on immediately it is spoken, as it means that a bailiff can evict you from your home or repossess anything without a written Court Order just tell the owners the Court has said so.........and if you ask to see the Court Order tell you ..........we don't need a written order......Give us the keys to your house or car or what ever............and the lender can then apply record of the judgement and default your credit file.
                This is the Fair Unbiased English Justice System so admired and renowned through out the world.
                This justice system not only pulls the wool over our eyes but the rest of the world as well.

                Sparkie's weekly or daily rant over

                Comment


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

                  Originally posted by Sparkie1723 View Post
                  Even in our case the Appeal Court went to the ends of the earth to try an rule against us on every single point.
                  I still agree with pt and Tom's argument about the oral possession order not being lawful in that can be acted on immediately it is spoken, as it means that a bailiff can evict you from your home or repossess anything without a written Court Order just tell the owners the Court has said so.........and if you ask to see the Court Order tell you ..........we don't need a written order......Give us the keys to your house or car or what ever............and the lender can then apply record of the judgement and default your credit file.
                  This is the Fair Unbiased English Justice System so admired and renowned through out the world.
                  This justice system not only pulls the wool over our eyes but the rest of the world as well.

                  Sparkie's weekly or daily rant over
                  Hmm unfortunately there is no requirement for the order to be in writing in the CCA as there is in the case of a re-possession, it is a matter of interpretation.

                  Comment


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

                    [QUOTE=andy58;524108]Hmm unfortunately there is no requirement for the order to be in writing in the CCA as there is in the case of a re-possession, it is a matter of interpretation.[/Q UOTE]

                    HUllo andy.but if you study our judgement the judges refer to other verbal orders being actionable upon....not just possession orders and do not mention the CCA...furthermore .what they did not consider is M's Caravan had been repossesed by the Carvan Site owners some 2 months before even the oral order had been give...and they were " allegedly" agents of B/H. So they argued in Court when challenged about the 5,500 secret commission .
                    However this should be on the Caravan thread not Ricos.
                    This is about wrongful incorrect Defaults which M's Default entry on her credit file is still incorrect and inaccurate because their systems cannot record it caccurately....and our ruling says that if an accurate registration cannot be achieved .....it should not be recorded.
                    Sparkie

                    Comment


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

                      Yes sparkie but again if you study your case the reason the judge dismissed the section 90 claim was because there was a verbal order , as per your first post.
                      There is no requirement for a written order in relation to an order issued for repossession in the cca (the van was on credit covered by the CCA) there is a statutory requirement for a written warrant of repossession in the case of a house .

                      Comment


                      • Still seeking redress following Supreme Court cock-up.

                        Hi Folks,

                        HSBC still unwilling to pay appropriate redress.

                        I've started a seperate thread in my preparations for phase 2:

                        http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...487#post539487

                        If the politicians won't fix the judiciary, it'll end up even more of a bloody mess.

                        Let's see what the new lot do in May. If Labour or Tories get back in it's unlikely we'll see any convicted bankers.

                        Cheers,

                        Rico.
                        Last edited by Rico; 27th April 2015, 17:33:PM. Reason: Spelling

                        Comment


                        • Re: Still seeking redress following Supreme Court cock-up.

                          Hi Folks,

                          This month, I've ended up with a mortgage-sized legal debt. (300K+).

                          I managed to recover only 3K after my own lawyer closed the case on 28th December 2016, before I had a chance to lodge a motion for interest on outlays after taxation (200K down the tubes in one fell swoop). I only had 2 days and I was out of the country.

                          He had advised me that I needed to lodge the motion but gave me no opportunity to do so.

                          Just to add further injury he gave me a final bill of 15K and the judges also ordered me to pay PC World and HSBC 12K.

                          This case was far from won and I continue to struggle to find justice through the maze of dodgy judges, politicians and lawyers!

                          Rico

                          Comment


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

                            Oh hell, that is a crazy and unfair outcome Richard, I am so gutted for you. Do you have any case against your lawyer for closing the case with so little notice?? After all 28th December is right in the middle of the Xmas break? Most firms close between Xmas and first working day of New Year? XX
                            "Although scalar fields are Lorentz scalars, they may transform nontrivially under other symmetries, such as flavour or isospin. For example, the pion is invariant under the restricted Lorentz group, but is an isospin triplet (meaning it transforms like a three component vector under the SU(2) isospin symmetry). Furthermore, it picks up a negative phase under parity inversion, so it transforms nontrivially under the full Lorentz group; such particles are called pseudoscalar rather than scalar. Most mesons are pseudoscalar particles." (finally explained to a captivated Celestine by Professor Brian Cox on Wednesday 27th June 2012 )

                            I am proud to have co-founded LegalBeagles in 2007

                            If we have helped you we'd appreciate it if you can leave a review on our Trust Pilot page

                            Comment

                            View our Terms and Conditions

                            LegalBeagles Group uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience and to create a secure and effective website. By using this website, you are consenting to such use.To find out more and learn how to manage cookies please read our Cookie and Privacy Policy.

                            If you would like to opt in, or out, of receiving news and marketing from LegalBeagles Group Ltd you can amend your settings at any time here.


                            If you would like to cancel your registration please Contact Us. We will delete your user details on request, however, any previously posted user content will remain on the site with your username removed and 'Guest' inserted.

                            Announcement

                            Collapse

                            Court Claim ?

                            Guides and Letters
                            Loading...



                            Search and Compare fixed fee legal services and find a solicitor near you.

                            Find a Law Firm


                            Working...
                            X