GDPR Cookie Consent by SimpleServe Privacy Script HFO Capital v Roland Wegmuller - AAD Consumer Forum

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

HFO Capital v Roland Wegmuller

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 5
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 template Next
  • #31
    Re: HFO Capital v Roland Wegmuller

    Originally posted by Paul. View Post
    lol, the other side pays the legal bill if we win, and this case was under no win no fee too, so in real terms it didnt cost roland a penny although it was his bill
    no win no fee now thats wishfulls language
    at the start of this journey i owed
    £52000.00 UNSECURED £5000.00 SECURED
    £0000.00 secured debt as of 17/12/2010 fingers crossed
    on 14/07/2012 i now have £32.000 unsecured and £15.000 unenforceable [thanks to niddy and aad ]
    as of 17/03/13 its now £26K AND £15K UE
    ITS COMING DOWN SLOWLY WHILE STILL ENJOYING MY LIFE

    Comment

    • #32
      Re: HFO Capital v Roland Wegmuller

      Originally posted by wishfullthinking View Post
      no win no fee now thats wishfulls language
      This would only apply to claims of £5k or more since in the Small Claims Court (under £5k) neither party pays the other sides costs win or lose

      Luckily for me I don't have any debts under £5k

      Comment

      • #33
        Re: HFO Capital v Roland Wegmuller

        Originally posted by PlanB View Post
        This would only apply to claims of £5k or more since in the Small Claims Court (under £5k) neither party pays the other sides costs win or lose

        Luckily for me I don't have any debts under £5k
        and above all, no win no fee is not free, free is called pro bono.

        The liability for the bill remains with the customer but thanks to the indemnity principle the loser pays the bill

        Comment

        • #34
          Re: HFO Capital v Roland Wegmuller

          Originally posted by Paul. View Post
          and above all, no win no fee is not free, free is called pro bono.

          The liability for the bill remains with the customer but thanks to the indemnity principle the loser pays the bill
          Golly, does that mean if the loser can't pay the bill or goes bust the client would still have to pay the solicitor's bill

          Comment

          • #35
            Re: HFO Capital v Roland Wegmuller

            Originally posted by PlanB View Post
            Golly, does that mean if the loser can't pay the bill or goes bust the client would still have to pay the solicitor's bill
            technically yes,

            It is clearly set out in the CFA, the Law Society notes, and the client care letter as far as i know.

            So technically the liability lays on the client, however, its unlikely the bank will go bust so its not really a problem

            Comment

            • #36
              Re: HFO Capital v Roland Wegmuller

              Originally posted by PlanB View Post
              This would only apply to claims of £5k or more since in the Small Claims Court (under £5k) neither party pays the other sides costs win or lose

              Luckily for me I don't have any debts under £5k
              most of mine are over 5k but think i will write to my crediters who are under 5k and ask them to start adding interest and charges again
              jesting aside well done paul good result
              still cant add smillies
              at the start of this journey i owed
              £52000.00 UNSECURED £5000.00 SECURED
              £0000.00 secured debt as of 17/12/2010 fingers crossed
              on 14/07/2012 i now have £32.000 unsecured and £15.000 unenforceable [thanks to niddy and aad ]
              as of 17/03/13 its now £26K AND £15K UE
              ITS COMING DOWN SLOWLY WHILE STILL ENJOYING MY LIFE

              Comment

              • #37
                Re: HFO Capital v Roland Wegmuller

                Originally posted by Paul. View Post
                technically yes,

                It is clearly set out in the CFA, the Law Society notes, and the client care letter as far as i know.

                So technically the liability lays on the client, however, its unlikely the bank will go bust so its not really a problem
                Banks goes bust? Like that never happens

                Comment

                • #38
                  Re: HFO Capital v Roland Wegmuller

                  Originally posted by wishfullthinking View Post
                  most of mine are over 5k but think i will write to my crediters who are under 5k and ask them to start adding interest and charges again
                  jesting aside well done paul good result
                  still cant add smillies
                  Actually in my case even though the claim was for over £5k (just) the Claimant got it allocated to the Small Claims Track so they wouldn't be at risk of my legal costs if they lost. But we applied to the court to get it re-allocated to the Fast Track (over £5k cases) and they had to pay for that hearing too.

                  At the last count the bill they'll be paying is in excess of £50k so that'll teach them to play silly buggers with Paul's firm

                  Comment

                  • #39
                    Re: HFO Capital v Roland Wegmuller

                    money is created as debt anyway, so the bank will just tap a few more zero's into their computer and cough up haha
                    I'm an official AAD Moderator and also a volunteer, here to help make the forum run smoothly. Any views or opinions are mine and not the official line of AAD. Similarly, any advice I have offered you is done so on an informal basis, without prejudice or liability. If in doubt seek advice from a qualified insured professional - Find a Solicitor or go to the National Probono Centre.

                    If you spot an abusive or libellous post then please report it by Clicking Here. If you need to contact me, for instance if I've issued you a warning, moved, edited or deleted your post, please send me a message by clicking my username.

                    Comment

                    • #40
                      Re: HFO Capital v Roland Wegmuller

                      Originally posted by Never-In-Doubt View Post
                      I'm pleased to announce that the following victory was a result of our forum, our preferred solicitor and the forum user that came to us with the problem in the first place, who for the purposes of discretion shall remain anonymous here unless they decide to confirm who they are. This resulted in not only some new case law surrounding unenforceability but also details how to royally screw the DCA's with costs.
                      Any chance our member could be coaxed out of anonymity to share his/her experience of this important case with others

                      The issue of the right (even recon) Ts & Cs being sent to the customer at the wrong time (i.e. after they've signed the agreement or filled in an application form) is cropping up time and time again and his/her contribution would be really useful

                      Comment

                      • #41
                        Re: HFO Capital v Roland Wegmuller

                        Look up Fribourg. And you shall find him

                        Comment

                        • #42
                          Re: HFO Capital v Roland Wegmuller

                          allaboutFORUMS
                          Originally posted by Paul. View Post
                          Look up Fribourg. And you shall find him

                          Comment

                          • #43
                            Re: HFO Capital v Roland Wegmuller

                            Originally posted by Paul. View Post
                            allaboutFORUMS
                            I've posted on Fribourg's 'Unenforceable Diary' so even AAD members who don't have a Password to the Legal Protected Section can benefit from reading the judgment

                            Any reason why the Santander vs Mayhew judgment isn't posted in the Case Law section
                            Last edited by PlanB; 21 July 2012, 18:11.

                            Comment

                            • #44
                              Re: HFO Capital v Roland Wegmuller

                              dunno i sent a copy to noddy but he obviously forgot

                              Comment

                              • #45
                                Re: HFO Capital v Roland Wegmuller

                                Maybe as Niddy wanted to keep copies to the watermarked PDFs at the time?
                                I'm an official AAD Moderator and also a volunteer, here to help make the forum run smoothly. Any views or opinions are mine and not the official line of AAD. Similarly, any advice I have offered you is done so on an informal basis, without prejudice or liability. If in doubt seek advice from a qualified insured professional - Find a Solicitor or go to the National Probono Centre.

                                If you spot an abusive or libellous post then please report it by Clicking Here. If you need to contact me, for instance if I've issued you a warning, moved, edited or deleted your post, please send me a message by clicking my username.

                                Comment

                                Previous 1 2 3 4 5 template Next
                                Working...
                                X