Barclays High Court litigation documents

Med

If anyone is interested to see how Barclays Bank conducts itself during High Court litigation, I have recently uploaded a number of documents that were involved in claim onto a website

w ww.curriculumvitaesite. com

agsnu

Well, that's hilarious. Good job, Barclays. Mr Dean Wilson is clearly an entrepreneurially challenged twit who thinks that by setting up a web site he will magically get hundreds of thousands of pounds, and who has trouble admitting that he was wrong.

Should have just used PayPal or WorldPay or something.

Justicia

Just to check as reading the Home page for that site;

am I right in thinking that the website itself was set up for an initial purpose, but when there was a dispute with barclays and payment methods via this website that it was then diverted and used to contain the documents that we now see residing there instead of whatever it was originally set up for (a "business venture")..??

agsnu

Justicia wrote: »

am I right in thinking that the website itself was set up for an initial purpose, but when there was a dispute with barclays and payment methods via this website that it was then diverted and used to contain the documents that we now see residing there instead of whatever it was originally set up for (a "business venture")..??

It certainly looks that way, yes.

Extant

You told your whole story nine months ago, on these very forums. Nobody really cared then.

Might I suggest that you try condensing your story - perhaps a providing a nice summary - instead of posting a series of documents. I mean... in one of your own letters, you refer to yourself as a lay person. If you have trouble with these issues, what makes you think the average internet user will find these documents any easier to understand?

By the way, it's incredibly bad form to cite credentials at the end of any letter/e-mail unless they relate to the capacity in which you're writing.

At this point I would like to re-iterate that I in no-way represent Barclays plc.

davethorp

You filed a claim for approx £1M as a litigant in person without legal counsel in the high court on the multitrack which exposes you to costs, rejected an offer of £10k, lost, refused leave to appeal, abused the court process to attempt an appeal and are now £100k down and facing a bankruptcy petition.

Don't suppose anyone has nominated you for the Darwin Awards have they?

Scousebird_2

davethorp wrote: »

You filed a claim for approx £1M as a litigant in person without legal counsel in the high court on the multitrack which exposes you to costs, rejected an offer of £10k, lost, refused leave to appeal, abused the court process to attempt an appeal and are now £100k down and facing a bankruptcy petition.

Don't suppose anyone has nominated you for the Darwin Awards have they?

To The OP

Why would you set up a website with these things on?? This is between the High Court, Barclays and yourself.

To the rest of the forum living on Planet Earth...............

And reading though the documents listed-is there anyone in this entire case that the OP DID NOT wish to complain about......there are frequent ''pepperings'' of complaints letters flying around many departments!

This man has even tried to get the Lords involved and they have politely declined to get involved.....

For anyone who can't be bothered reading....I will save you the trouble.....read document 342 which is the order in final, and then the OP progresses to appeal THIS DECISION as well.

Suggestion to OP-give up now...otherwise you will be back in court applying for bankruptcy seeing as you owe Barclays' Solicitors money now.....and lots of it....and you also owe the High Court is after your TV as well judging by documents 325&331.

And all this over an ePDQ machine....!!

Med

Well, that's hilarious. Good job, Barclays. Mr Dean Wilson is clearly an entrepreneurially challenged twit who thinks that by setting up a web site he will magically get hundreds of thousands of pounds, and who has trouble admitting that he was wrong.

Should have just used PayPal or WorldPay or something.

Yes, I should have definitely used Paypal, WorldPay or something.
And no, I am not an entrepreneurially challenged twit, nor do I think that by setting up a website that I will magically get hundreds of thousands of pounds, and nor do I have any trouble admitting that I am wrong.
I am however able to look at all the facts of a situation before I make an opinion on it.

Just to check as reading the Home page for that site;

am I right in thinking that the website itself was set up for an initial purpose, but when there was a dispute with barclays and payment methods via this website that it was then diverted and used to contain the documents that we now see residing there instead of whatever it was originally set up for (a "business venture")..??

The original website was shut down. The domain name has been used for the new website because as it stands, it cannot be used for business purposes. The reason being that during the ePDQ application process, Barclays sent a number of emails containing confidential information to someone else by mistake. Despite doing so, they failed to let me know. Because of the risk caused by Barclays mistake, a chronology of events surrounding those emails is required for insurance purposes. To date, Barclays have refused to provide this.

You told your whole story nine months ago, on these very forums. Nobody really cared then.

Might I suggest that you try condensing your story - perhaps a providing a nice summary - instead of posting a series of documents. I mean... in one of your own letters, you refer to yourself as a lay person. If you have trouble with these issues, what makes you think the average internet user will find these documents any easier to understand?

By the way, it's incredibly bad form to cite credentials at the end of any letter/e-mail unless they relate to the capacity in which you're writing.

At this point I would like to re-iterate that I in no-way represent Barclays plc.

The post you refer to was removed by MSE because of their concerns at the time of libel. Thank you though, as it appears that you cared enough to read it.
With regards to condensing the story, you are aware that a summary is available on the home page on the website.
Although it appears that you have read the letter at number 270 on the website prior to giving your reply, I think that you have misunderstood what I wrote in that letter. With regards to ‘bad form’, I personally think that Barclays obtaining a judgment by fraud is a better example of bad form than the one you gave.
Your comments regarding the average internet user are nothing less than an insult to a very large number of people. What makes you think that people can't read a document? I assume that a certain number of people who use this forum would class themselves as an average internet user. The courts are there for everyone to use, not just those who are legally trained or who view themselves as an above average internet user. I do not see any harm in letting people see documents that they may have to come across at some point in their life. Perhaps if people were more familiar with the courts and the civil justice system, certain companies such as Barclays Bank wouldn’t exploit and abuse the legal process.
You don’t need be legally trained to be able to see if the High Court is being deceived and manipulated.

You filed a claim for approx £1M as a litigant in person without legal counsel in the high court on the multitrack which exposes you to costs, rejected an offer of £10k, lost, refused leave to appeal, abused the court process to attempt an appeal and are now £100k down and facing a bankruptcy petition.

Don't suppose anyone has nominated you for the Darwin Awards have they?

No, I didn't file a claim for approx £1M, nor did I abuse the court process, and nor am I facing a bankruptcy petition. The reason that I am not facing a bankruptcy petition is because Barclays Bank PLC are too frightened to enforce the Order for costs, because they obtained the judgment by fraud.
Barclays Bank PLC and its debt collection agents will chase someone relentlessly to recover just a few hundred pounds. Do you not find it odd that they suddenly can't be bothered to chase a bill of £100k?

To The OP

Why would you set up a website with these things on?? This is between the High Court, Barclays and yourself.

To the rest of the forum living on Planet Earth...............

And reading though the documents listed-is there anyone in this entire case that the OP DID NOT wish to complain about......there are frequent ''pepperings'' of complaints letters flying around many departments!

This man has even tried to get the Lords involved and they have politely declined to get involved.....

For anyone who can't be bothered reading....I will save you the trouble.....read document 342 which is the order in final, and then the OP progresses to appeal THIS DECISION as well.

Suggestion to OP-give up now...otherwise you will be back in court applying for bankruptcy seeing as you owe Barclays' Solicitors money now.....and lots of it....and you also owe the High Court is after your TV as well judging by documents 325&331.

And all this over an ePDQ machine....!!

I have put the documents on the website to show other people how Barclays Bank PLC obtained judgment by fraud. The matter of a solicitor being allowed to conduct himself or herself during High Court litigation without any fear of consequence is a matter for anyone who relies on the law and the civil justice system.
Referring to your comment about the peppering of complaints - I complained about the bank and its lawyers.
Thanks for the advice, but I won't be giving up. I don't think it is right that a bank should obtain judgment by fraud. If Barclays want to enforce their costs Order or file a bankruptcy petition, then I am more than happy to go back to court to discuss it.
I do not owe any money to Barclays solicitors and the High Court isn’t after my TV.
Thanks for the picture. The dispute is regarding an online ePDQ facility though, not a PDQ machine.

Scousebird_2

Referring to your comment about the peppering of complaints - I complained about the bank and its lawyers.
Thanks for the advice, but I won't be giving up. I don't think it is right that a bank should obtain judgment by fraud. If Barclays want to enforce their costs Order or file a bankruptcy petition, then I am more than happy to go back to court to discuss it.
I do not owe any money to Barclays solicitors and the High Court isn’t after my TV.
Thanks for the picture. The dispute is regarding an online ePDQ facility though, not a PDQ machine.

Ah-I couldn't post a picture of an ePDQ facility

ePDQ MPI enables you to take full responsibility for collecting cardholder details by creating and hosting payment pages on your own server and allows your website to communicate with our ePDQ payment engine.

I couldn't find a picture to tell everyone what this is so words will have to do. When I referred to a debt-I was referring to document 325 where it appears you owe money to the high court according to such a document. And document 331 very much states you owe money, and if you do not pay you could be made insolvent. And I know you will proceed to tell me that Barclays have not proceeded with the order (whatever the reasoning for that is unknown as neither ourselves or yourself is Barclays) but I somehow think that with a court judgement outstanding, they have a legal right to pursue you for the debt as per the order. I for one would not like to live my life knowing the court had ruled in their favour and I owe money to the amount that the court says you do.

never-in-doubt

Med wrote: »

If anyone is interested to see how Barclays Bank conducts itself during High Court litigation, I have recently uploaded a number of documents that were involved in claim onto a website

w ww.curriculumvitaesite. com

What you got to laugh at here, sorry for the pun, is the fact Barclays offered you 10 grand and you end up owing them just shy of 100 grand! That's justice for you.....

Not that I agree with Barclays but to be honest there is a point whereby you, as the claimant, have to realise they would never accept liability for loss of earnings and maybe the 10 grand would have been the best outcome... did that not cross your mind at all?

Just my opinion but the word 'greed' keeps springing to mind

davethorp

Ok you claimed for an unspecified amount and then tried and failed to convince barclays and the court this should be close to £1M.

As for not facing bankruptcy, you have been issued a statutory demand which is the first step in bankruptcy proceedings. No doubt you will complain to someone about this, try and get it set aside, fail, appeal, fail and then come up with some convoluted reason to appeal again. Or you could pay the money you owe barclays (if you have it). Failing that you may save a lot of time and hassle by making yourself bankrupt.

Continue your current behaviour and eventually a judge will get that fed up of you that he places you on the list of Vexatious litigants. Which you'll probably try to appeal!

You should have walked away at the 10k offer. You didn't and are now £100k indebted to them. You alledge they obtained the judgement by fraud, but haven't managed to submit one scrap of evidence to convince either an appeal judge, or the judge at your set aside hearing.