IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including QR codes, number plates and reference numbers.

Civil Enforcements / Norwich Pharmacal Order

Options
1…1011131516…26

Comments

  • esmerobbo
    esmerobbo Posts: 4,979 Forumite
    First Post First Anniversary
    edited 4 July 2011 at 7:29PM
    Options
    notts_phil wrote: »
    His post doesn't say that though.....


    Indeed HO87 was confirming the case not the decision, I wrongly assumed he was confirming the outcome too.

    If they would not give HO87 details at the court I would say your assumption was correct over the phone call!
  • nicechap
    nicechap Posts: 2,852 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post
    Options
    Strong sniff of a set up from the lack of transparency around the case.
    Originally Posted by shortcrust
    "Contact the Ministry of Fairness....If sufficient evidence of unfairness is discovered you’ll get an apology, a permanent contract with backdated benefits, a ‘Let’s Make it Fair!’ tshirt and mug, and those guilty of unfairness will be sent on a Fairness Awareness course."
  • notts_phil
    notts_phil Posts: 1,087 Forumite
    Options
    nicechap wrote: »
    Strong sniff of a set up from the lack of transparency around the case.

    Possible but expensive
    Hi, we’ve had to remove your signature. If you’re not sure why please read the forum rules or email the forum team if you’re still unsure - MSE ForumTeam
  • peter_the_piper
    peter_the_piper Posts: 30,268 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post
    Options
    If its a decision in their favour, expensive or not, if it convinces a few dozen extra to just pay up it would have been money well spent, if you see what I mean.
    I'd rather be an Optimist and be proved wrong than a Pessimist and be proved right.
  • peter_the_piper
    peter_the_piper Posts: 30,268 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post
    Options
    I would have thought that the OP would be back to
    1) gloat being a ppc.
    2) boast that they won
    3) groan that they lost.

    Does smell to me.
    I'd rather be an Optimist and be proved wrong than a Pessimist and be proved right.
  • notts_phil
    notts_phil Posts: 1,087 Forumite
    Options
    peter_the_piper wrote: »
    I would have thought that the OP would be back to
    1) gloat being a ppc.
    2) boast that they won
    3) groan that they lost.

    Does smell to me.

    It is strange.they removed the docs from Photobucket so I can't find case number and make a sneaky phone call
    Hi, we’ve had to remove your signature. If you’re not sure why please read the forum rules or email the forum team if you’re still unsure - MSE ForumTeam
  • AlexisV
    AlexisV Posts: 1,890 Forumite
    edited 5 July 2011 at 3:30PM
    Options
    I fail to see how such an order could be complied with if the defendant has no knowledge, information or documentation.

    I also fail to see the purpose of another hearing 14 days later. If an order is being sought, the claimant has already acknowledged the current defendant has never entered into a contract with them.
  • Sir_Roger_deLodger
    Sir_Roger_deLodger Posts: 992 Forumite
    Options
    If a NPO had been granted, I'm sure Perky and/or Hasbeen would have been on here crowing about it by now.
  • nicechap
    nicechap Posts: 2,852 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post
    Options
    Unless they have learned from their previous set up cases and have deliberately taken the long game/ innocent abroad strategy. Not following advice here, or allowing help from pepipoo to refute the NPO application suggests set up to me.

    Why on earth would a genuine person want to part with their money so readily?
    Originally Posted by shortcrust
    "Contact the Ministry of Fairness....If sufficient evidence of unfairness is discovered you’ll get an apology, a permanent contract with backdated benefits, a ‘Let’s Make it Fair!’ tshirt and mug, and those guilty of unfairness will be sent on a Fairness Awareness course."
  • Sirdan
    Sirdan Posts: 1,323 Forumite
    edited 5 July 2011 at 5:58PM
    Options
    nicechap wrote: »
    Unless they have learned from their previous set up cases and have deliberately taken the long game/ innocent abroad strategy. Not following advice here, or allowing help from pepipoo to refute the NPO application suggests set up to me.

    Why on earth would a genuine person want to part with their money so readily?

    But in the case of an NPO the "genuine person" pays nothing , the claimant has to pay the costs of seeking the NPO and any incidental costs incurred by the respondent.

    The NPO hearing could actually aid this" genuine person" as Alexis suggests, because it implies that the claimant accepts that the person against whom the NPO is sought is a third party who may have information as opposed to the actual "wrong doer". That being the case how can they ask for an NPO and claim against the same person ??

    PS:
    I have politely asked the OP by PM to post the decision on here ...will be interesting to see if they respond ..if they don't what we have is what we suspected "a set up" and one that has failed.
This discussion has been closed.
★ ★ ★ Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 343.3K Banking & Borrowing
  • 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.7K Spending & Discounts
  • 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 608.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 173.1K Life & Family
  • 248K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards