I Am Going To Sue ORANGE!

wannabe_sybil

Um...

Well, I am not legally qualified, so I can be safely ignored, and you were under constraints with the space to write the claim.

Can you break down the £450 to recognisable chunks in the event of a hearing - ie x amount phone calls, x amount postage? You cannot claim for distress or inconvenience in the Small Claims, only tangible loss (I may be wrong, and with a bit of luck I am). This way the judge may be able to allow part of your claim even if he or she feels that the majority cannot be allowed. Any evidence that a credit check would have adversely affected interest rates you were being charged? Any incidental expenses such as buying an ansaphone to avoid unpleasant calls or the cost of changing a number? Appropriately dated evidence would be required.

Lots of firms like Orange do not defend an action like this as it is not cost effective. They just pay up. They have filed an intention to defend, but they may just send in documents and not have a representative in person. It depends whether they have a team in house and how cost effective it is to them to send someone.

Also, while yours is a genuine complaint, I suspect that there are a lot of speculative claims going in, which may make Orange more willing to defend to discourage anyone else following suit.

Also, be careful about putting your game plan on here as it is a public forum and they may spot it.

I think a lot will depend on the judge.

I really hope you win, as I loathe Orange. Refusing £50 will not look good necessarily, as it means that you have not taken an opportunity to avoid court. Being able to quantify the £450 will help at a hearing. Don't try and blag a judge - the regular ones have seen EVERYTHING and the deputies are either semi retired judges who have seen everything and a bit more or wannabe district judges who may feel that they have to prove themselves by really doing everything by the book and have seem almost everything while in private practice anyway.

I can't add anything, it is a while since I was working at a Court. Good luck.

Crazy_Jamie

taxiphil wrote: »

13.3 actually says the court may set aside, not will set aside a judgment if the defendant has a real prospect of successfully defending the claim. So it's still a highly discretionary thing which takes a range of factors into account.

I wasn't quoting 13.3 when I said 'will'. I was being realistic. In reality if a real prospect of success is shown the judgment in default will be set aside, barring any other extreme circumstances.

taxiphil wrote:

The defendant still has to explain the first and most obvious question the judge will always ask: exactly why did they fail to enter a defence or show up in court the first time around? – and this where they would probably come unstuck unless they're prepared to lie to a court.

Yes, they do, but under the CPR they judge does not actually have discretion to reject the application on those grounds, and in reality will rarely do so. The delay between judgment being entered and an application being made to set aside is a relevant factor to that decision, but not why judgment was entered in the first place. In practice this is not the barrier that you're making it out to be.

taxiphil wrote:

I was just trying to rebut the idea that having a judgment set aside is a simple rubber stamping exercise; it's not. And don't forget that a hearing has to take place, to which the claimant is also invited and can raise their concerns if they think the defendant is "trying it on".

It certainly is not a rubber stamping exercise, but at the same time your original post on the matter was at best misleading (albeitly probably unintentionally) and at worst inaccurate. It gave the impression to those reading that may not be legally trained that such an application would be decided on why the claim was not responded to in the first place. That is an incorrect impression, and one that I was seeking to correct. In reality the Defendant does not have to 'convince' the judge that the papers were not received. The reasonable prospects of success test is the main part, with the reason for the delay in bringing the application potentially being a secondary issue. The judge will often ask why judgment was allowed to be entered in default in the first place, but you are overplaying the significance of that question in the context of the hearing. Any half baked solicitor/barrister/advocate will knock that question out with little difficulty, again barring extreme circumstances.

As Tozer said earlier, if reasonable prospects exist the application will be allowed in practice in the majority of circumstances. And it certainly would here.

boozercruiser

Wannabe Sybil. Thank you for your very considerate opinion and time spent writing it.

I hear what you say and will keep it in mind.

boozercruiser

facetheglue wrote: »

Is this what all retired people do?

If it is I want to work till I die.

Listen Moonshine:rolleyes: This claim is just a little, itsy bitsy part of my very settled Happily Married Life. :j:beer::j

I have absolutely no money worries, no mortgage on a lovely property with a river at the bottom of the garden and sheep on the hills all around our small Welsh Village. My Wife and I socialize, have many many interests, go on lots of lovely holidays and are in reasonably good health having only retired a couple of years ago. We escaped to the Country.:j

I don't know how I ever got time to work. BUT....in work I tackled any person or organisation that tried to Dump on me, and I don't intend to start now.

You carry on working 'till you die m8. It will suit you.;)

P.S. Are you a Labour MP by any chance?

boozercruiser

wannabe_sybil wrote: »

Um...

Well, I am not legally qualified, so I can be safely ignored, and you were under constraints with the space to write the claim.

Can you break down the £450 to recognisable chunks in the event of a hearing - ie x amount phone calls, x amount postage? You cannot claim for distress or inconvenience in the Small Claims, only tangible loss (I may be wrong, and with a bit of luck I am). This way the judge may be able to allow part of your claim even if he or she feels that the majority cannot be allowed. Any evidence that a credit check would have adversely affected interest rates you were being charged? Any incidental expenses such as buying an ansaphone to avoid unpleasant calls or the cost of changing a number? Appropriately dated evidence would be required.

Lots of firms like Orange do not defend an action like this as it is not cost effective. They just pay up. They have filed an intention to defend, but they may just send in documents and not have a representative in person. It depends whether they have a team in house and how cost effective it is to them to send someone.

Also, while yours is a genuine complaint, I suspect that there are a lot of speculative claims going in, which may make Orange more willing to defend to discourage anyone else following suit.

Also, be careful about putting your game plan on here as it is a public forum and they may spot it.

I think a lot will depend on the judge.

I really hope you win, as I loathe Orange. Refusing £50 will not look good necessarily, as it means that you have not taken an opportunity to avoid court. Being able to quantify the £450 will help at a hearing. Don't try and blag a judge - the regular ones have seen EVERYTHING and the deputies are either semi retired judges who have seen everything and a bit more or wannabe district judges who may feel that they have to prove themselves by really doing everything by the book and have seem almost everything while in private practice anyway.

I can't add anything, it is a while since I was working at a Court. Good luck.

Thank you for all of that valuable input.:T

I have been assured that in the event of a hearing then it would take place in Aberystwyth. Do Orange have a team of Solicitors or whatever there? I doubt it.:D

boozercruiser

Court battle: Tom Prescott and his girlfriend, Catherine Thomas

£500 victory over a lack of Orange signal

Mark Prigg, Technology Correspondent
19.02.09

A MAN who successfully sued his mobile phone firm for failing to provide coverage in his home today urged other Londoners to follow suit.
Tom Prescott, 32, took Orange to court after they refused to cancel his 18- month contract, even though he could not get a signal either at his Richmond home or in his office.
This week he won his case at Brentford county court and was awarded £500. He slammed the phone networks for using "bullying" tactics.
"As soon as I realised I could not get a signal, I tried to cancel my contract," said Mr Prescott, a biochemist who lives with girlfriend Catherine Thomas.
"However, it has taken me three months in court to get it cancelled. I felt bullied by the company, and dealing with Orange was awful. I hope people who have the same problem now realise they can do something about it."
Mr Prescott, who represented himself in court, argued that having been sold an 18-month contract by the mobile phone operators there should be a reasonable expectation of service.
Orange refused to comment on the case but a spokesman added: "Continuous network coverage cannot be guaranteed and network coverage can be affected by factors outside of our control."
The ruling could have implications on all those who suffer from poor signal and for those looking for compensation.

boozercruiser

taxiphil wrote: »

So can I ask you why you signed up to a Consumer Revenge website?

Yes, I reckon this person should very very slowly move the Eyes over to the right hand column........This way.................This way.............This way...........This way->...........................................................->...........................................->...............................................THIS WAY.....................->

It says. "Consumer Revenge ":rolleyes: Does he see it? I reckon he should join a............... .....................................

"Consumer roll over and have your Tummy Tickled Forum".:p

boozercruiser

taxiphil wrote: »

So can I ask you why you signed up to a Consumer Revenge website?

Yes, I reckon this person should very very slowly move the Eyes over to the right hand column........This way..........This way.....THIS WAY->

It says. "Consumer Revenge ":rolleyes: and it is the Forums Motto. Does he see it? I reckon he should join a............... .....................................

"Consumer roll over and have your Tummy Tickled Forum".:p

DebtHater

wannabe_sybil wrote: »

You cannot claim for distress or inconvenience in the Small Claims, only tangible loss.

Refusing £50 will not look good necessarily, as it means that you have not taken an opportunity to avoid court.

Correct, the judge will only award claims for actuall losses, not just because someone claims their time is worth £450.

Orange made an offer of two times the original debt amount and you refused, to be honest I think £50 would be the best you could hope for.

Jokaty82

It amazes me how many 'haters' there are on these forums.

I nearly didn't join because every time someone posts they seem to get shot down for doing so.

Constructive criticism that will help a poster is brilliant, bring it on. People will learn from these comments.

But comments such as 'if this is what all retired people do then il carry on working' and 'prat' how is that helpful. I actually find it highly distasteful and hurtful.

Dont we teach our kids not to call people names. For god sake, people come on here for help and advice, not abuse.

Whether the OP is right or wrong, it helps to be supportive!!!

Good luck on your case, Orange are in the wrong!! These mobile companies get away with murder. I dont know the law, so I dont know all the ins and outs. But you have my support!! :beer: