Page 3 of 10

Re: R4C - Refusal for Cause

PostPosted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 4:02 pm
by free_spirit
Would you adam and eve it. Just got this today and it's going off to them
within the next hour :grin:

I've attached a mail tracking sticker and will have it and my copy date stamped at the post office.

Must get a stamp, my writing is shit due to using the keyboard too much. But methinks even my
shit writing gets the point accross.

J

Re: R4C - Refusal for Cause

PostPosted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:02 pm
by kevin
is there a bit missing off that ticket?

it says " A request for a hearing involves prosecution and on conviction liability to a substantial fine"

Re: R4C - Refusal for Cause

PostPosted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:14 pm
by free_spirit
Hi Kevin,
no thats the lot if you look there's a perforation for a tear of and that's it. I believe that bit was on the back
and I seem remeber prison being mentioned.

Anyhow it's gone now and here's the copy date stamped by the post office. I hope this
is now water tight?

J

Re: R4C - Refusal for Cause

PostPosted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 6:22 pm
by the_common_law_reverend_kenny
Jayen4 wrote:
Not entirely sure what you're getting at here.... .

the bank and the courts are 'in bed together' !




That's what I was getting at, really, you put your finger on it already. Proving that the land charge is illegal would be a good(great) and powerful thing

:peace:

Re: R4C - Refusal for Cause

PostPosted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 7:31 pm
by free_spirit
I just had a "lateral" thought on this.

I'm wondering if I should've left out without prejudice on the ticket?

My thinking is, neither they nor I can produce this as evidence (of a rejected contract) but they
they could produce their "clean" copy i.e without my refusal written
on it.

Just a thought.

J

Re: R4C - Refusal for Cause

PostPosted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 7:38 pm
by huntingross
My position remains un-altered in regard to Without Prejudice.....there isn't a single thing I would write that I wouldn't want to produce if required.

Re: R4C - Refusal for Cause

PostPosted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 7:41 pm
by free_spirit
huntingross wrote:My position remains un-altered in regard to Without Prejudice.....there isn't a single thing I would write that I wouldn't want to produce if required.


I get your point, I think I'll leave it out in future.

J

Re: R4C - Refusal for Cause

PostPosted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 8:07 pm
by Jim
huntingross wrote:there isn't a single thing I would write that I wouldn't want to produce if required.


Agreed. I don't think it matters if you include "Without Prejudice" or not. Your adversaries are going to do whatever suits them regardless. If that means leaving your carefully annotated document in the office and claiming you ignored their communications then that's what they'll do. What matters is that you've kept a copy and, if required, you can prove that you didn't dishonour their attempt to get you to contract with them and that they are, in point of fact, playing at silly buggers. If someone's determined to trample all over your rights they're going to attempt it whether you've stated that you reserve all of your rights or not. I like the statement that V's started using (check her latest blog post for details) along the lines of "All rights reserved with no admission of liability whatsoever at any time under any circumstances"

Peace

J

Re: R4C - Refusal for Cause

PostPosted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 8:09 pm
by free_spirit
Thanks Jim!

J

Re: R4C - Refusal for Cause

PostPosted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 10:26 pm
by Jayen4
the_common_law_reverend_kenny wrote:
Jayen4 wrote:
Not entirely sure what you're getting at here.... .

the bank and the courts are 'in bed together' !




That's what I was getting at, really, you put your finger on it already. Proving that the land charge is illegal would be a good(great) and powerful thing

:peace:




Oh,I see... How would I go about 'proving it' ?? I know very well that the title number that the bank is using to bring this action was never included on the re-mortgage of the now re-posessed house ! They confirmed that at the beggining,when the original solicitor rang me and asked ''Would you mind signing over ownership to this title number''. My problem as I see it,is the fact that the court is being biased and refusing to enter into evidence such things as 'Stat Decs',which I produced at the original re-posession hearing. How can I FORCE them to take notice ?
When I go in this time,if the judge starts that behaviour again,I am of a mind to tell him to his face that he is acting in a biased and corrupt manner and that if he is not going to listen to anything I say,then I shall ignore him too !! Might get me some jail time,but bollocks to them !! It's all too obvious what a farce this court thing has become.
Any advice much appreciated.