Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

[mufc1959]

This is a new twist on the prom note argument.

In 2017 Mr G decided to change the way in which he paid his mortgage. He provided Santander with what he claimed to be a promissory note to settle his mortgage. Mr G said that Santander could collect payment by sending a member of staff to his home to collect payment each month.

The promissory note Mr G gave Santander provided that payment had to be collected in person from his home address on the 7th of the month. Mr G followed this up with another letter. This second letter explained that, because nobody had been round to his house to collect the money, this meant that the promissory note had been accepted by Santander in full payment of the account.

Mr G didn’t accept the adjudicator’s findings. He considered the adjudicator to be biased and inexperienced and with little or no understanding of complex matters of this nature. So the complaint has been passed to me for a final decision.

I will explain at the outset that I am experienced in dealing with this type of complaint, and have detailed knowledge and
understanding of the issues that are of concern to Mr G.

My decision is that I don’t uphold this complaint.

http://www.ombudsman-decisions.org.uk/v ... eID=168971

[grixit]

http://www.ombudsman-decisions.org.uk/v ... eID=160152

Must be great fun at the Financial Ombudsman's Office - the same stupid, greedy idiot arguments being presented again and again.

And all answerable with the same 4th grade book report style. Wait-- were these all written on Take Your Kid to Work Day?

[Hercule Parrot]

Must be great fun at the Financial Ombudsman's Office - the same stupid, greedy idiot arguments being presented again and again.

And all answerable with the same 4th grade book report style. Wait-- were these all written on Take Your Kid to Work Day?

Mr G says he's very cross with the style of Financial Ombudsman's decisions, so he's asked Quatloos members what they think. And one member called Hercule Parrot has written a post to say that he agrees with Mr G. Hercule Parrot thinks that the Ombudsman's style of writing is forced and patronising.

But Mr G and Hercule Parrot don't work for the Ombudsman, so I can't take their views into account. We like this folksy, informal style, our only regret is that the civil service won't allow us to use Comic Sans as our official font. I know Mr G will be unhappy about that, and I'm sorry to disappoint him.

For the reasons I’ve given, my final decision is that I don’t uphold this complaint.

Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr G to accept or reject my decision before 18 April 2018.

[mufc1959]

And all answerable with the same 4th grade book report style. Wait-- were these all written on Take Your Kid to Work Day?

They definitely seem to have a 'house style'. We see lots of FOS decisions at work and they all follow the same format. The decisions are definitely more informal than they were 10 years ago, when they were far more legalistic in tone. The FOS decisions weren't being published then though, so maybe they've had to 'dumb down' for the general population, which is a shame. These are legally-binding decisions, and it's not always possible to deal with complex financial problems in Janet and John* language. I think a lot of businesses, mine included, have changed to a 'plain English' style - often fuelled by expensive external consultants.



*Janet and John - books children used in UK infant schools to learn to read aged 5 or 6.

[Dr. Caligari]

Janet and John

In the US, that would be "Dick and Jane." (Or at least it was when I was in 1st grade, many decades ago.)

[notorial dissent]

Ancient much??? I plead the Fifth.

[Famspear]

I was in the first grade in the 1950s. For me, it was "Alice and Jerry" and their friend "Jack." And a dog named "Jip."

"Run, Jip, run.

See Jip run."

[Burnaby49]

It was Dick and Jane here in Vancouver back in 1956 when I started school. Run Spot run, see Spot run!

[grixit]

I started a little later. I was aware of Dick and Jane, but my school used the McGuffy Reader.

[Pottapaug1938]

In my city, it was Houghton Mifflin's Tip, Mitten, Jack and Janet series.

[Wakeman52]

In the UK, Janet & John had other incarnations:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-35459202

[longdog]

I bypassed Janet and John and went directly to Dr Seuss.

Actually that might not be true but I could read and write before I went to school. Somewhere I have my first year report at age 5 with a reading age of 7. That was only time I was ever at the top of a class and to be honest my handwriting has barely progressed since.

[YiamCross]

..... This "random babblings" piece perhaps should never have been created and each incident involving a different player have its own thread - which I think is what happens in those Canadian cases and probably other sections of Q as well.

The clue is in the title. The thread was created to gather together occasional gems from the bit players on the freeman stage rather than have a mess of one or two comment threads cluttering up the index. It seems to have worked quite well over the years.

[hucknallred]

Not freemanism as such, but freeman like actions in making a small debt a very big one.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/m ... spartanntp

[SteveUK]

Not freemanism as such, but freeman like actions in making a small debt a very big one.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/m ... spartanntp

Great story. Every media outlet is pumping it as shes got the £30k costs because the husband refused to pay the ticket.
Not so, when she found out the car had been clamped, she then sued the bailiffs, and lost. Then carried on appealing. Not sure how this is all the husband's fault.

[Wakeman52]

And he is an immigration lawyer and she is in the final year of a law degree. You'd have thought they both might have known better. Clearly not.

[Hyrion]

Not sure how this is all the husband's fault.

Source: http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cg ... ry=(loson)

It is suggested that the facts supporting that are as follows: that in her evidence the claimant had absolutely no idea of how the litigation had been conducted, how her damages had been calculated and appeared bewildered as to what she was doing in court. It is unclear how and on what basis an appeal was mounted.

Mr Emezie makes the point that he plainly was acting as solicitor for his wife during much of the county court litigation;

It looks like he drove the entire thing and did his best to avoid direct legal liability for the costs.

With a husband like that, I don't think she needs any further enemies.

[SteveUK]

So yes - her fault entirely!!!1!!!

[longdog]

With a husband like that, I don't think she needs any further enemies.

Looking at that court transcript it seems the husband has spent the last seven years or so repeatedly throwing his wife under every bus available. Clearly a charming man.

[Hercule Parrot]

16. Mr Emezie has urged upon me that the level of costs incurred by the defendants is disproportionate. This case grew out of control. He says the defendants' solicitors ought to have advised the defendants that the case was flying out of control and that steps should be taken to bring it to an end.

Yeah, that would be because you escalated the dispute at every opportunity, matey. You stupidly assumed that Newlyns wouldn't risk £30k to defend their basic model of business, and you could scare them into an undeserved offer of damages. But worse than just stupid and greedy, you're also a coward - you abused your wife's name and reputation for this scam.