ChatterBank5 mins ago
Surely You'd Just Pay It Then Argue Later.......
20 Answers
https:/ /www.bb c.co.uk /news/u k-scotl and-gla sgow-we st-6376 6824
...incredible that it got to this stage.
...incredible that it got to this stage.
Answers
The problem here is simple human nature. People's perception of truth and fair play will always eclipse simple logic. That means the lady's belief in the rightness and honesty of her cause prevented her from taking the more practical, and less expensive route of paying, which in her view was wrong, and fighting retrospectiv ely. As the issue progresses, the...
10:19 Wed 15th Feb 2023
The problem here is simple human nature.
People's perception of truth and fair play will always eclipse simple logic.
That means the lady's belief in the rightness and honesty of her cause prevented her from taking the more practical, and less expensive route of paying, which in her view was wrong, and fighting retrospectively.
As the issue progresses, the sense of 'rightness' increases, in proportion to the rising costs, and heels are ever more firmly dug in.
And that's how the final situation occurs - a continuing belief in being 'right', and a heavy price paid for it.
People's perception of truth and fair play will always eclipse simple logic.
That means the lady's belief in the rightness and honesty of her cause prevented her from taking the more practical, and less expensive route of paying, which in her view was wrong, and fighting retrospectively.
As the issue progresses, the sense of 'rightness' increases, in proportion to the rising costs, and heels are ever more firmly dug in.
And that's how the final situation occurs - a continuing belief in being 'right', and a heavy price paid for it.
"Despite the ruling, she continues to insist she had paid the original debt."
as soon as you hear "no you havent" - it is time to pay.
I had a small claim ( which I won) against someone who averred 1) she had paid. 2) she didnt have the debt to start with. 3) it was in the cupboard in the bedroom
Judge spent 45 min ( 15min on each) 'sorting' it out. £600. She was the one who went bankrupt in the sum of £19 000. Not all me
as soon as you hear "no you havent" - it is time to pay.
I had a small claim ( which I won) against someone who averred 1) she had paid. 2) she didnt have the debt to start with. 3) it was in the cupboard in the bedroom
Judge spent 45 min ( 15min on each) 'sorting' it out. £600. She was the one who went bankrupt in the sum of £19 000. Not all me
and here is another mug
https:/ /www.th etimes. co.uk/a rticle/ star-la wyer-lo ses-12- year-le gal-bat tle-wit h-his-b uilders -6jrd5f j8hws
I was at law school with him.
https:/
I was at law school with him.
-- answer removed --
Like PP, I've used the "without prejudice" phrase when making a payment, then successfully got it back via a claim. It's a much safer route to take against the rogues and bullies.
I sometimes think "no win no fee" should be compulsory for lawyers and solicitors, that would stop them milking the innocent.
I sometimes think "no win no fee" should be compulsory for lawyers and solicitors, that would stop them milking the innocent.
///1) she had paid. 2) she didnt have the debt to start with. 3) it was in the cupboard in the bedroom ///
that sounds like the lawyer's child - "In the first place, there is no window; in the second place, it isn't broken; in the third place, I didn't do it; in the fourth place, it was an accident."
that sounds like the lawyer's child - "In the first place, there is no window; in the second place, it isn't broken; in the third place, I didn't do it; in the fourth place, it was an accident."