Lowell (Orange) v LifeOfRyan **SET ASIDE**

[Undercover Elsa]

Re: Lowell (Orange) v LifeOfRyan **SET ASIDE**

Really chuffed for you Ryan, that's brilliant!

[SaltnVinegar]

Re: Lowell (Orange) v LifeOfRyan **SET ASIDE**

Great news - congratulations!

Could you please post on the success thread so thats this is kept for all prosperity?:

http://forums.all-about-debt.co.uk/s...e-your-Success

Best
SnV

[IF]

Re: Lowell (Orange) v LifeOfRyan **SET ASIDE**

Well done Ryan

I think Pompey posted it here SnV, I may be wrong mind --- > Success Story for Never-In-Doubt, ATW

[pompeyfaith]

Re: Lowell (Orange) v LifeOfRyan **SET ASIDE**

Yes I made that post when he got notification from BW Legal however it is now official with the order received from Northampton Court. Thanks Everyone

[pompeyfaith]

Re: Lowell (Orange) v LifeOfRyan **SET ASIDE**

As a side note this default judgement malarkey should be stopped and legislated against as not only does it waste court time or also worries many needlessly no creditor should be allowed to act in such a way and prove of said debt should accompany any N1

[ATW]

Re: Lowell (Orange) v LifeOfRyan **SET ASIDE**

Glad its all officially over and done with now.

[pompeyfaith]

Re: Lowell (Orange) v LifeOfRyan **SET ASIDE**

Right further communication on this despite it being set aside by the court and official documents received via BW Legal this I now consider harassment as the reasons for set aside are clear no proof yet they still send letter with a load of untruths

I mindful of sending them a warning that any further letters will be charged at £15 a time as my costs to deal with them and make it clear a strike out will be sort due to there abuse.

Suppose I could send a letter to the FCA as this is exactly why this forum is here.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Lowell (Orange) v LifeOfRyan **SET ASIDE**

No mate. Chill.

There are a batch of these wrong letters that's been issued. Don't get silly. You can't charge unless you create a contract that they agree to so don't look daft.

All you do is write back with a copy of the strikeout and add a one liner - please see attached. This matter is closed and any further harassment by your company will be reported to the regulatory bodies!

Thats all you gotta do.

[pompeyfaith]

Re: Lowell (Orange) v LifeOfRyan **SET ASIDE**

Niddy is OK just Joking m8 however if you need proof for the FCA as to why this forum is here you can use the above

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Lowell (Orange) v LifeOfRyan **SET ASIDE**

Haha --> http://forums.all-about-debt.co.uk/s...454#post458454

[pompeyfaith]

Re: Lowell (Orange) v LifeOfRyan **SET ASIDE**

BTW It does bug me when they hide behind the "WITHOUT PREJUDICE" as they know they are in the wrong.

[CleverClogs (RIP)]

Re: Lowell (Orange) v LifeOfRyan **SET ASIDE**

Right further communication on this despite it being set aside by the court and official documents received via BW Legal this I now consider harassment as the reasons for set aside are clear no proof yet they still send letter with a load of untruths

If they really had obtained a CCJ which had not been set aside, why would they accept only 50% in settlement thereof?

One hardly needs to be a cynic to wonder if they now know they've not a hope in hell of proving the alleged debt, so they're trying to bounce the defendant into paying money to settle a judgement that no longer exists.

BW Legal should be referred to the SRA.

[CleverClogs (RIP)]

Re: Court Claim from Lowell - Orange Contract

Why do creditors dish out N1 without prove of debt first?

They do it because they can.

it would save so much court time if they had to prove it owed first.

Yes.

It would also save court time if the worst culprits could be declared to be vexatious litigants. (link)

However, as that might result in poor, hard-working lawyers having to resort to food banks simply to survive, it's not likely to happen.

[pompeyfaith]

Re: Lowell (Orange) v LifeOfRyan **SET ASIDE**

If they really had obtained a CCJ which had not been set aside, why would they accept only 50% in settlement thereof?

One hardly needs to be a cynic to wonder if they now know they've not a hope in hell of proving the alleged debt, so they're trying to bounce the defendant into paying money to settle a judgement that no longer exists.

BW Legal should be referred to the SRA.

Would love to make a complaint to the SRA if it was worth doing and helped others what are your thoughts Niddy

[The Tech Clerk]

Re: Lowell (Orange) v LifeOfRyan **SET ASIDE**

complain to SRA they will acknowledge your complaint and say that it may be filled with others i..e. enough complaints of the same nature they may act, ???? they have a web site.