voss
Member of DD Central
Posts: 153
Likes: 84
|
Post by voss on Apr 2, 2019 11:43:23 GMT
Given the propensity of certain members of this forum to immediately blurt out any sensitive information they're provided without giving a second thought to the wider implications of making the information public (sometimes being more interested in being "first" to post about it), can I suggest that this thread is locked until such a time as the latest update has been received and the more knowledgeable members of the forum have had a chance to privately discuss with moderators any "rules of engagement" about how much of the information is suitable for public discussion? Edit: for clarity, I'm not counting myself amongst the "more knowledgeable members", as I have no direct experience of court or enforcement/recovery action.
I agree. Chat obscures information.
|
|
voss
Member of DD Central
Posts: 153
Likes: 84
|
Post by voss on Apr 1, 2019 15:58:13 GMT
It appears that we have not been joined to the claim by the deadline. But do we know yet if the SoC for the claim v Lendy has or has not yet been met?
|
|
voss
Member of DD Central
Posts: 153
Likes: 84
|
Post by voss on Apr 1, 2019 15:18:29 GMT
Mousey you spoilsport Well my solicitors confirmed that we will just apply for security of costs again and make her stump up the same amount if not more and it has precedent now - just trying to keep the positive vibes going a little longer. Not sure about the 'again' - AIUI, the SoC was for the action v Lendy, not us. So, no precedent?
|
|
voss
Member of DD Central
Posts: 153
Likes: 84
|
Post by voss on Apr 1, 2019 8:41:20 GMT
Hi csj - Search this thread using '1 April' (no kidding!) and look at the latest entry in the hit list.
|
|
voss
Member of DD Central
Posts: 153
Likes: 84
|
Post by voss on Mar 29, 2019 16:56:58 GMT
Run!
|
|
voss
Member of DD Central
Posts: 153
Likes: 84
|
Post by voss on Mar 18, 2019 17:48:49 GMT
The issue of fairness has come up before in the context of how likely it is that the judge is related to one of the 4000 defendants.
In a class action, the complainants join under one legal firm. Our situation here is the inverse of a class action but we can still join under one firm. The difference is that we are joining after commencement, not before. So the judge might want to allow significant time for the one (or a few) firms to mop up most (how many?) of the defendants.
But he can't insist that we join under one, or a few, firms and we can individually refuse to do it that way.
Or the issue may not arise ...
|
|
voss
Member of DD Central
Posts: 153
Likes: 84
|
Post by voss on Jan 29, 2019 15:12:31 GMT
A judge is required to run his case fairly. He might decide that there is no way that all of the 5000 defendants can get adequate representation or no way that the court can manage the case such that fairness is ensured. Our problem of how to defend ourselves then becomes a virtue rather than a vice.
I wonder if the judge might deal with this problem by deciding that the claim against Ly should be heard first. If it was, and the borrowers won, they would have to reissue their claim against the lenders (to take into account whatever damages the court had awarded the borrowers against Ly). The court might be more likely to dismiss such a claim than it is at present where it is entangled with other claims.
Edit: of course, there is no claim yet against the lenders.
|
|
voss
Member of DD Central
Posts: 153
Likes: 84
|
Post by voss on Jan 24, 2019 11:43:13 GMT
Chances of the borrower stumping up funds against potential costs: Nil, IMO But hasn't she got £7m of our money? She might see putting up funds as a good investment.
|
|
voss
Member of DD Central
Posts: 153
Likes: 84
|
Post by voss on Jan 24, 2019 11:42:06 GMT
On the whole, good news. Though I'm annoyed that Lendy agreed to stay the claim for 2 months. I don't see why a separate Police enquiry has any bearing on this case, and to be honest I have no sympathy for the borrower and I if I were here i'd have expected someone to take direct action. I also hope that Lendy reject the claim from the other party in relation to not being liable for the personal guarantee. Still doesn't explain why the property isn't on the market. Makes me suspicious that Lendy might not be strictly working in the interests of investors.
Perhaps it was not that Lendy 'agreed' but that the judge decreed.
|
|
voss
Member of DD Central
Posts: 153
Likes: 84
|
Post by voss on Jan 10, 2019 13:21:02 GMT
I've noted upthread references to the logistical problems of handling 4000 lenders defending a claim. Here's a related problem: what are the chances that one of the 4000 reveals a family connection to the judge in the case? Could they ask the judge to recuse himself?
Edit: And so on with the replacement judge ...
|
|
voss
Member of DD Central
Posts: 153
Likes: 84
|
Post by voss on Jan 7, 2019 17:29:15 GMT
Prima facie it is a breach of DPA/GDPR. Ly can't process our data except for the purposes which they have previously registered. Did they register the purpose of protecting our interests in any potential court claim? Unlikely. They have put their wish to protect us ahead of their duty to protect our data. But a wish, however commendable it might be, is subordinate to any legal duty.
|
|
voss
Member of DD Central
Posts: 153
Likes: 84
|
Post by voss on Dec 29, 2018 23:20:26 GMT
When a member invites others to PM him/her, why do other members then ask him/her to PM them instead? Seems discourteous to me but I may be missing something.
|
|
voss
Member of DD Central
Posts: 153
Likes: 84
|
Post by voss on Dec 28, 2018 9:05:40 GMT
If Ly is only an agent, how did that allow them to ignore the result of a vote earlier this year (can't remember which loan)?
|
|
voss
Member of DD Central
Posts: 153
Likes: 84
|
Post by voss on Dec 14, 2018 15:33:13 GMT
Perhaps she will now sue the hosting provider ...
|
|
voss
Member of DD Central
Posts: 153
Likes: 84
|
Post by voss on Dec 10, 2018 17:23:40 GMT
<snip> I have begun this process myself and some interesting facts have come to light (which I will keep until the next stage of this). <snip> Let's also not lose sight of the fact that we are the ones who are owed money! THE COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS IN MY POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL OPINIONS AND ARE PROVIDED IN GOOD FAITH.Some green ink might redeem the lack of emphasis.
|
|