Lloyds TSB Default Notice 2011

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Lloyds TSB Default Notice 2011

But then the claimant would need to be that individual NOT the (Unregulated & thus Unconnected) company.....

[ATW]

Re: Lloyds TSB Default Notice 2011

No. The claimant is Lloyds. Its who or what represents the claimant that is unclear.

[carol01]

Re: Lloyds TSB Default Notice 2011

i have a default notice from Lloyds tsb dated 8/07/2011 if that helps let me know and i shall scan it over

[ATW]

Re: Lloyds TSB Default Notice 2011

i have a default notice from Lloyds tsb dated 8/07/2011 if that helps let me know and i shall scan it over

Oooh yes please that one owuld be good. I just hope its full of holes.
Ive just been a sent a copy of Pauls case that he lost in October last year- Arrow v Frost which looks like worrying reading according to the summary that accompanied it.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Lloyds TSB Default Notice 2011

Oooh yes please that one owuld be good. I just hope its full of holes.
Ive just been a sent a copy of Pauls case that he lost in October last year- Arrow v Frost which looks like worrying reading according to the summary that accompanied it.

I mentioned this to you previously, as the judge allowed late submissions apparently. This needs appealing, a lender cannot keep creating new docs, that's not what Carey said.

[carol01]

Re: Lloyds TSB Default Notice 2011

email sent to andrew and niddy

[mystery1]

Re: Lloyds TSB Default Notice 2011

I mentioned this to you previously, as the judge allowed late submissions apparently. This needs appealing, a lender cannot keep creating new docs, that's not what Carey said.

I doubt they could now what with Mitchell et al.

M1

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Lloyds TSB Default Notice 2011

I doubt they could now what with Mitchell et al.

M1

[ATW]

Re: Lloyds TSB Default Notice 2011

It doesnt look like anything would have saved the day on Arrow v Frost. It seems to have been lost on every point that was taken and then the DJ found for Arrow on its back up points too just for good measure. The defence was annihilated. Ive sent Niddy a copy. Don't anyone read it at bed time unless you like having nightmares!!

[mystery1]

Re: Lloyds TSB Default Notice 2011

It doesnt look like anything would have saved the day on Arrow v Frost. It seems to have been lost on every point that was taken and then the DJ found for Arrow on its back up points too just for good measure. The defence was annihilated. Ive sent Niddy a copy. Don't anyone read it at bed time unless you like having nightmares!!

I haven't read it but i understand they were granted at least 1, if not 2, chances to reconstruct their agreement. Now correct me if i'm wrong but that can no longer happen after the Jackson reforms commencing in April 2013 and their application in Mitchell, Durrant etc as before trial a judge usually makes an order that all documents be served on the opponent before trial (14 days isn't it ?). Cpr 1.3, cpr 1.1 2 (f)

If Arrow try that now, as opposed to then when the rules and application of them were different they'd be in a world of pain.

M1

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Lloyds TSB Default Notice 2011

Ill post a copy of the judgment on AAD in due course, with a layman version as usual.

[ATW]

Re: Lloyds TSB Default Notice 2011

I dont think that Mitchel would have made any difference to the outcome on this one. It was lost on too many fronts and at too many levels. The defendants evidence and pleadings came in for a bit of stick and the court found for the Claimant on sections 61; 63;78;87;88;98A;140A;140B.

Mitchel will help on other cases but im not convinced it would have made any difference to the outcome on this one.

Instead of a laymans version just post a copy of a horror story (the thing from 20,000 leagues below the sea or somehting like that- it will have the same efffect. lol.).

[mystery1]

Re: Lloyds TSB Default Notice 2011

I dont think that Mitchel would have made any difference to the outcome on this one. It was lost on too many fronts and at too many levels. The defendants evidence and pleadings came in for a bit of stick and the court found for the Claimant on sections 61; 63;78;87;88;98A;140A;140B.

Mitchel will help on other cases but im not convinced it would have made any difference to the outcome on this one.

Instead of a laymans version just post a copy of a horror story (the thing from 20,000 leagues below the sea or somehting like that- it will have the same efffect. lol.).

They wouldn't have got an adjournment to rectify evidence that a judge had ordered be ready for trial and have been served on the defence before trial in my opinion.

When i say wouldn't, this judge might have but an appeal court wouldn't allow it.

M1

[mystery1]

Re: Lloyds TSB Default Notice 2011

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2014/41.html

M1

[Guest]

Re: Lloyds TSB Default Notice 2011

Sorry Andrew...mine's December 2010

Pixie, i have one from December 2010 too. Could i ask. there is a letter reference. I believe this indicates the template used. Mine is letter reference: CLDFN9. I assume its short for collections letter default notice 9. What is your reference ?