Charging Order? The myth

eggbox wrote: »

Dakota

Good luck today and remember SJ is about the other side trying to prove you have no prospect of success at a full trial. So make sure you keep it simple and precise in explaining exactly why you do have a claim that should be heard.

Thanks for that, Eggbox…

The master had the full measure of him and he didn't get the SJ, where they said I'd been vexatious and frivolous and had no prospect of success... Or the 'stay' which he had asked for where I'd have to pay what I owe before I was allowed to continue with the claim… as the master said that would deprive me of the right to a justice...so that's a relief.

Not a complete success as the master has asked that I amend my claim, saying I can't claim the full amount of the loss, i.e., the £375k my purchasers would have paid.

So it now has to go back to court and i have to prove loss, which is the difference between what I was offered for the house and what it was actually worth.

The master has asked that I ask a surveyor to value it at what it might have been worth 3 years ago, but this would obviously entail them having to ignore improvements made since then, so not ideal.

I have a copy of a full survey which was carried out 6 months before the interference took place, so may ask if the other party will agree to that as I really can't afford to pay for a survey.

I'm thinking it might be better if the judgement creditor just made me an offer instead of throwing money at his lawyers who are happy for this to drag on forever.

But it's great that the master spotted the differences between the JC's bare denial and the evidence I provided from the purchasers, as he agreed that there had been fraudulent misrepresentations and malicious falsehood by the JC.

I feel as though I'm winning, for once… but a long way to go yet as I'm sure the JC will make further applications.

One day at a time….

D45

Thanks, Eggbox… yes… I'm thinking along the same lines as you. It would be much better to draw this mess to a close than drag it out for another year, because he is incurring huge costs which would probably exceed my offer to settle…
When the judge read out my evidence and said that I could rely upon certain authorities relating to fraudulent misrepresentation and malicious falsehood, his barrister, (quite rightly) looked embarrassed and concurred that there had 'obviously' been 'something' which gave rise to the claim….I must admit to feeling quite smug at that point… this bloke is a well qualified officer of the court and shouldn't be losing to a LIP.

At the time of his interference I was facing repossession… it was a very stressful time as i had no money to redeem the mortgage and the mortgage interest was £800 per month! Although the interest has now reduced because I receive pension benefit, I've had to continue to pay reduced mortgage interest for 3 years when I had intended to be mortgage free once I'd sold the house… I had already instructed a solicitor on another property…

I feel very happy with the result, but have a niggling feeling those underhanded lawyers of his won't advise him to settle as they should… they are lining their pockets and don't care who wins.

I will sleep much better tonight, though!

D45

Yes.. I'd be all for a tricksy solicitor if I only I could afford one… haha!
I think it is now up to me to prove actual loss before any offers are made… which I am able to do, as long as they aren't frantically searching for a legal loophole which will prevent me from amending my particulars of claim… although the master did say there would be permission to amend, but whether they can override that or attempt to set aside, or whatever… I have no idea which way it will go… but I am confident in that I can prove a 6 figure loss…

I'd rather settle out of court, though as this is going on 5 years and my health is suffering…

D45

eggbox wrote: »

They can't "set aside" or find a "loophole" around the Judge granting you permission to amend your POC, so don't concern yourself with that.

And I wouldn't worry about trying to "justify" any loss at this stage, either, as the other side will be aware you must have made losses as the sale was prevented? They will only, really, be concerned with you being able to prove the losses were as a result of your neighboured actions?

As the Judge has refused their strike out application on the basis it does appear their was interference in the sale they will be extremely nervous about going to trial? So you just need to make them realise how serious it could be for your neighbour if you win your claim?

I'm surprised he's not in clink already… he is a crook. I think you know that he stole the land from me (this is hat the proceedings related to initially)… He bribed the estate agent to reveal the sealed bids… mine was the highest and had I bought the land and moorings, it would have added hundreds of thousands to the value of my property. I can't believe, having cheated me already, he'd throw money at solicitors when I tried to retrieve a small bit of the land with my septic tank on it… land that was worthless.
But there you go…

Thanks for your help on here… so much more friendly than the 'other' place, and good, unbiased advice, too, although I did meet a wonderful person on there who is legally trained and who has been knight in shining armour, sticking by me these past 3 years without any payment and who just wants to see justice done and I would never have had the courage to take the claim into the High Courts without his support and advice. They broke The Mould when they made him

Onwards and upwards, hopefully...

D45

Directions received at last!

Judge allowed me to rely upon malicious falsehood and causing loss by unlawful means… He also dismissed the JC's allegations that my claim was frivolous or that I was being vexatious or that my claim had no merit… but still carried their costs over, which I don't understand as I seem to have won on points as the SJ application wasn't allowed including the stay that the JC had requested…
All I need to prove is my loss and that's easy…D45