Re: Perverting the course of justice?

On Jan 14, 11:08 pm, "The Boss" <yoursuper...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Tommo" <sxt2...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:1dce9be8-58e9-4952-bd77-3209e055cddd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Jan 14, 10:19 pm, "The Boss" <yoursuper...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:





"Tommo" <sxt2...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:469f226c-4804-444f-b01b-00a22a8eda19@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

It seems to me that you are either very naive about the workings of
the legal process, or are incapable of viewing this matter rationally.
Actually, I think it is probably both.
A number of the complaints you are making are nothing untoward at all.
The suggestion of them having perverted the course of justice by
making an offer of settlement (no doubt to get you out of their hair)
is nothing of the sort. Not even close.

Actually, if company B takes over your supply of electricity from company
A
due to forging your signature, and then states you don't have to pay them
for the period they supplied you, and company A then demands payment from
you for that period even though they never supplied you with electricity,
you *would* pay them? And then company B takes you to court for that
payment, and loses?

This appeared in the Mirror, remember the late Gary Jacobs, the
solicitor?:

" FLAMING GAS

Apr 11 2002

TELL THESE CONMEN TO STICK IT IN THEIR PIPES

Dear Gary...

I need your advice about where I stand legally after British Gas took over
my supply without my consent.

They telephoned to offer me savings if they supplied my electricity. I
declined.

Then they said they'd send me details of the savings. I agreed to read
this.
In fact, they sent me a contract which I ignored.

Next they said they wanted to read my meter, which I also ignored and they
then telephoned to arrange to read the meter and I told them I hadn't
changed my supplier.

Then they sent a supply transfer form. I did not sign this.

I have since received a letter from my supplier with a final account. They
said there was nothing they could do and advised me to put the phone down
when energy suppliers telephone.

Now British Gas want 28 days notice to cancel the contract they claim I
have
with them. I've been hijacked. Surely this can't be legal?

D Cooke, Boreham Wood, Wilts

Gary says...

I'm now convinced that all the major energy suppliers and telephone
companies are run by bent fat cats. They are nearly all doing this and
they
are acting illegally.

They try to use their own erroneous interpretation of the law and, to be
honest, you have no one at the moment to pay and your supply will continue
to be free until British Gas respect your rights and reverse the
situation.
They will lose the cost of all the electricity they purport to supply and
if
they sue, you must go for their throat. Let me know and I'll come to court
with you. I mean it." [I WISH I KNEW WHAT HE WAS GOING TO SAY IN COURT,
ANY
IDEAS?]

"I've had hundreds of letters about the dishonest tricks these public
companies resort to, including an identical one from Mrs F Holland from
Hanwell.

I agree with your chosen electricity supplier that you should tell all
utility companies to get stuffed if they call you, write, or doorstep you
again. The doorstep merchants are on commission and there have been
thousands of fraudulent forgeries of contracts. It's commonplace for the
crooked salesman to ask you to sign a piece of paper to confirm they
called.
This is codswallop. Sign nothing and they will go back where they deserve
to
be - on the dole.

It's a waste of time for me to speak to British Gas or any other supplier
as
they all hide behind their arrogant abuse of the law. I received a call to
change and when I asked for the details in writing to be sent to The
Occupier, they refused. This is because they can't have a contract with
The
Occupier. Had I given my full name I'd be receiving the same treatment as
you.

I would not hold back on the expletives - strong language seems
appropriate
to make sure they get the message.

These companies should be ashamed of themselves. Let's renationalise the
lot
of them." Well?

It also seems to me that you are demonstrating a lack of good faith in
approaching this matter. It is clear to me that the company was trying
to agree that they would not pursue you for costs if you drop the
claim.

You know, we're talking about an electricity company here?

By re-litigating the matter by issuing the Court proceedings you would
be breaching that agreement. It would either be able to argue that the
claim has been compromised according to the terms of the
correspondence; or alternatively that the new proceedings would be an
abuse of process.
If you carry on in this way I expect that you will end up with another
costs order against you, and don't expect that the other side would be
as charitable to you.

OK, but would you care to comment on the electricity companies conduct, in
light of the above, then?
The purpose of your thread wasn't to solicit observations on the
conduct of power companies.

It's like first relating to you the conclusion of a book, and then referring
back to the opening chapter.

Frankly, I don't see the relevance of all
the text you pasted in to your reply. You asked a specific point about
a situation you find yourself in, and all of the answers I have read
seem to concur with my view.

Well I thought it would have been obvious: it *all* follows on from a
criminal act which the electricity company refuses to take into account,
iow, from its argument, it is trying to ignore that crucial fact so that it
can argue in a different direction.

*sigh*. I feel that I'm not getting anywhere (the feeling may be
mutual). All that I will add is that if you do wish to continue to
pursue this matter you need to improve on your skills at identifying
and explaining the legal issues relevant to your case. If you go
before a Judge and start quoting letters published in The Mirror 6
years ago don't be surprised if you end up with another hefty costs
order against you.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Jeppeson
    ... it costs. ... It doesn't really matter whether the supplier makes a 10% profit ...
    (rec.aviation.piloting)
  • My thoughts on the Terry Schiavo case
    ... without also acknowledging that for a Christian this life isn't all there ... The Christian point of view about ... Christian is not some horror to be avoided at all costs. ... matter how debilitated I am and no matter how much technology it takes," we ...
    (sci.med.transcription)
  • Re: Interesting article: In the Beginning: An RDBMS history
    ... For that matter, I don't know what the sql standard would mean by "table". ... Without those differences, I imagine an sql table still couldn't stand for any relation we choose because at least when I was using it ten or more years ago a row-column intersection contained only a single value, ie. some relations can't be expressed as one table. ... For example pi21(supply{project, supplier}) appear to be ...
    (comp.databases.theory)
  • Re: Small Claims Track
    ... arbitration service in order to resolve the matter. ... If they don't pay the amount plus costs then you can allow ... The amount in dispute is less than 300 pounds - hence my understanding ...
    (uk.legal)
  • Re: [Fwd: What do people think about not installing a stripped /kernel ?]
    ... I'm going going to take exception that it isn't a disk space ... > issue or that size doesn't matter. ... > opportunity costs. ... jamie rishaw at google mail aka mitigator /@/ gmail dot you-know-what ...
    (freebsd-arch)