Cashing out because of court case (UB)

Mousey Disclaimer: If you rely on the notes of an unknown person called ‘Mousey’ on some internet forum to give technical and accurate details of a legal case then you are very naive! If you wish to rely on these notes then please don’t – go to the court and obtain the transcripts. Do not make ANY assumptions or speculations with regards what I’ve said.


The Rolls Buildings, Hearing Room 2

Before DEPUTY MASTER A*****

On behalf of CHIEF MASTER M****

Wednesday 22 May 2019

At 02:00 PM

Application Hearing

FS-2019-****** A***** M**** v Open Access Finance Limited


The 1400 hearing started at 1440 due to the previous case over-running.

The claimant introduced himself as someone who wore three hats:
- An antiques collector
- A solicitor
- The sole case handler at his firm
He was therefore representing himself.

Open Access Finance were represented with three members of their legal team in court. The co-founders were present at the hearing.

The borrower borrowed some £150,000. His claim was for >£200,000
The fine details of the claims were not discussed so I’m unable to comment on them. I understand one claim was for the refund of overpaid interest.

Nov 2018 – Letter before action issued
5/3/19 – Claim form issued

The hearing concerned two applications:
1 – Disclosure of the names and details of the 612 lenders
2 – Transfer to the county court

Application 1
The borrower relied heavily on the Z******* judgement created as part of the Lendy London Loan litigation:
*Website redacted*

That judgement allowed for the disclosure of the details of the lenders in a P2P situation.

The defence pleaded that all the claims made by the borrower were exclusively against the platform and not against the lenders. For instance, one allegation made by the claimant involved an “authorised person” under the FCA rules. The defence explained that the only entity who was authorised was the platform.

The claimant currently has access to a list on a website of borrower references (a series of numbers and letters) and amounts invested.

The claimant could not show that any of the claims were specifically against the lenders.

The defence pleaded that the claimants motivation in seeking disclosure was to “cause mischief”.

The Z******* judgement allowed disclosure where there was “an arguable cause of action against the lenders”. The Master of this hearing was “unhappy” and “not confidant of claims against lenders”.


The Master instructed that the application for the disclosure of lenders be adjourned.

The claimant must file a Particulars of Claim setting out his claims against:
- The lenders
- OAF
To include the causes of action upon which he relies.

This has to be submitted by 1600 on July 2nd 2019. We’ll be able to obtain a copy at this point.

The hearing for joinder/disclosure will for ½ day not before 16th July and not after 30th September 2019


The arguments for application for transfer to the county court were largely procedural and has no relevance to the lenders.

Costs were reserved

You're a diamond Mousey, "Thank you."

Collect your free pint when yer next in West London.  

I understand his behaviour now, as a solicitor it's not costing much to bring this case. So he mays as well waste everyone's time its not costing him much. He's probably used to bullying people with threats of taking them to court. What a <removed by mod>!

Thanks for the updates Mousey.