Wrongful default ratified - Redress still denied.

[Rico]

Re: Wrongful default ratified - Redress still denied.

Trouble is, if its something which could and more importantly should have been brought in the previous proceedings then it becomes an abuse of the process to attempt to have a second bite of the cherry

Great stuff PT. The first bite should have been sufficient had it not been for a massive abuse of process.

The trial court awarded me specific damages the first time.

The Court of Session, through misconduct and incompetence, ruled that I'm not entitled to anything. The "supreme" court then ruled that they're wrong but couldn't do anything about it (except that they could). The judiciary has abused the process rotten!

I'm just trying my damndest to find a way to achieve justice despite all these processes being abused.

Fighting fire with fire seemed like a good plan. Surely, given all the circumstances, justice will prevail ahead of process?

Or, what else can you think of?

Cheers,

Rico.

- - - Updated - - -

I see your point PT, Rico says that the court was not unable to "award specific damages as it did not have jurisdiction" and relies on this to justify this action.
I see the point in this as well, but would the court?

nem

Worth asking I reckon.

Rico

[Rico]

Re: Durkin v HSBC - Second phase.

Do you still have a legal team behind you?

nem

No. Andrew's lost faith. He doesn't think that anything can be done. It's up to me to keep the flag flying.

We can't continue with the absurdity that a default doesn't prevent a mortgage.

The "supreme" court knows that that's not true! So does HSBC!

Rico

[nemesis45]

Re: Durkin v HSBC - Second phase.

No. Andrew's lost faith. He doesn't think that anything can be done. It's up to me to keep the flag flying.

We can't continue with the absurdity that a default doesn't prevent a mortgage.

The "supreme" court knows that that's not true! So does HSBC!

Rico

That's a great shame Rico!!

All that has gone on is not inline with the ethos of Scottish or English Civil Law, the blatant bias in favour of the bank, is a worrying feature, given that it's HSBC involved.
On would hesitate to accuse their Lordships of a conflict of interest but is poses questions to my mind.

I'll keep following the developments!!

Good luck!!!

nem

[Rico]

Re: Wrongful default ratified - Redress still denied.

This is how things are at the moment.

Cheers,

Rico

[Rico]

Re: Wrongful default ratified - Redress still denied.

Hope v Henderson!

http://www.hardwicke.co.uk/insights/...-re-litigation

Cheers,

Rico.

[stevemLS]

Re: Wrongful default ratified - Redress still denied.

The Supreme Court rules on points of law, generally, if it thinks there is outstanding injustice which can be corrected in the light of its rulings it will remit part of a case back to one of the lower courts.

I can see how this will have taken over your life for a number of years and you must have been devastated by the whole process but I truly and sadly think you are on a mission which will destroy you eventually, sorry.

Have now read the Supreme Court judgment and am even more convinced that you simply are throwing good money after bad and that you have no chance of success - to use that favourite judicial expression any further action would be "doomed to failure".

All over buying a bloody laptop on tick.

[Rico]

Re: Wrongful default ratified - Redress still denied.

The Supreme Court rules on points of law, generally, if it thinks there is outstanding injustice which can be corrected in the light of its rulings it will remit part of a case back to one of the lower courts.

I can see how this will have taken over your life for a number of years and you must have been devastated by the whole process but I truly and sadly think you are on a mission which will destroy you eventually, sorry.

Have now read the Supreme Court judgment and am even more convinced that you simply are throwing good money after bad and that you have no chance of success - to use that favourite judicial expression any further action would be "doomed to failure".

All over buying a bloody laptop on tick.

I didn't buy the laptop.

The PC World Manager acting for the bank is being investigated for creating a false account in my name., (Albeit at snails pace)

Supreme Court got it wrong.

Further action will be doomed only by a corrupt judiciary continuing to support criminals.

A default WILL prevent a mortgage.

It's unlawful for appeal judges to edit facts without good reason (Supreme Court didn't even mention our submissions on that)

We'll give it a go anyway. Eventually someone will have to take notice.

The banks must pay redress to those that they have wronged. It's pretty simple. Anything less is unacceptable.

Cheers,

Rico

[Rico]

Re: Wrongful default ratified - Redress still denied.

Latest story.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ear-later.html

Rico

[Sparkie1723]

Re: Wrongful default ratified - Redress still denied.

Latest story.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ear-later.html

Rico

Hi Rico,

Some of those people commenting on the Mail website should read the complete evidence before making comments about a subject...... knowing nothing about the whole issue....take no notice ...I received similar quotes on our story.......I'm still fighting ....you ain't alone mate
Sparkie

[Rico]

Re: Wrongful default ratified - Redress still denied.

Hi Sparkie,

I think the editor's mostly to blame. Although I'm grateful for the coverage, it's frustrating that the whole truth is being covered up and untruth's are insisted upon. I try and answer readers concerns in the comments to no avail.

Heavily censored supporting the theory that the banks also have control over the media.

Cheers,

Rico

[Rico]

Re: Wrongful default ratified - Redress still denied.

Anyone else denied a mortgage because of a default?

Please annotate this:

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/reque...#comment-59605

Cheers,

Rico

[Lord_Alcohol]

Re: Wrongful default ratified - Redress still denied.

I'm a bit out of my depth here Rico but, from what I've seen of lenders' lending criteria, there are (apparently) mortgages available for people with defaults.

However, it also seems that the default needs to have been "small" (eg, £100), reported > a minimum period of time ago, and satisfied. Even so, I cannot see a mainstream (ie, low cost) lender being interested. The upshot is that even if a mortgage was granted it would be through a specialist firm and therefore more expensive.

Is it not possible to go to Europe with the bigger issue? Some interesting stuff in Vidal-Hall (http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2015/311.html).

LA

[Rico]

Re: Wrongful default ratified - Redress still denied.

Hi Folks,

Fresh writ submitted to local court. It has jurisdiction where Supreme Court didn't!

It's attached here along with defence.

David v Goliath round 2. DIY this time though.

22nd October is the closing date for making adjustments to the writ.

Government still refuse to intervene, allowing bankers to carry on terrorising us.

Rico

[Rico]

Re: Wrongful default ratified - Redress still denied.

Is it not possible to go to Europe with the bigger issue?

LA

The UK must sort it's own mess out.

[judgemental24]

Re: Wrongful default ratified - Redress still denied.

I think the UK does not want to sort itself out

To much vested interests me thinks