Loans being demanded - a summary

[eek]

Doesn't look like it..

https://www.courts.im/media/2523/civil.pdf

I think you can also safely assume that if they had won a court case, they would be emailing everyone the next day quoting their victory as leverage to get you to pay up.

What do you think that list is? As I suspect it's a very incomplete list

[WoffleCopter]

What do you think that list is? As I suspect it's a very incomplete list

It's a list of upcoming cases. Why would it be incomplete?

As for the list of historic judgements also available - only a very low number of family hearings and those that would prejudice ongoing/future cases are excluded.

The only other judgements not listed would have no judgement being "straight-forward" e.g. parking fines etc (which I doubt applies here).

There is also an electronic database of all cases searchable in person at the court public counter.

[eek]

It's a list of upcoming cases. Why would it be incomplete?

As for the list of historic judgements also available - only a very low number of family hearings and those that would prejudice ongoing/future cases are excluded.

The only other judgements not listed would have no judgement being "straight-forward" e.g. parking fines etc (which I doubt applies here).

There is also an electronic database of all cases searchable in person at the court public counter.

Because it will be incomplete - we know that from when the previous person said look at the list of cases there isn't any regarding Felicitas and someone immediately pointed out a few cases they knew about which weren't listed.

Heck it's actually incredibly obvious, the only cases listed are those where court dates have been set.

[WoffleCopter]

Because it will be incomplete - we know that from when the previous person said look at the list of cases there isn't any regarding Felicitas and someone immediately pointed out a few cases they knew about which weren't listed.

Heck it's actually incredibly obvious, the only cases listed are those where court dates have been set.

Well of course they can only list scheduled cases, otherwise how would people know when to turn up?

But we do know that there have been no victories for Felicitas and there are no future [scheduled] cases for them in the IOM.

[eek]

Well of course they can only list scheduled cases, otherwise how would people know when to turn up?

But we do know that there have been no victories for Felicitas and there are no future [scheduled] cases for them in the IOM.

So you agree that your answer to the question "Have they actually issued any court proceedings yet?" should have been that "you don't know but there aren't any listed" rather than the outright answer of None you actually gave as your answer...

Just so that everyone is aware of the actual amount of care (none) you take when answering questions until someone calls you out on your incorrect answer....

[WoffleCopter]

I already said the only judgments not listed are those involving family matters or affecting current litigation.

I think it's fairly safe to exclude Felicitas from those categories.

Also, what do you count as court proceedings prior to a hearing?

They could even issue a court claim just to scare people into paying. Until it gets to a hearing and a judge has his say, it means didly squat.

[eek]

I already said the only judgments not listed are those involving family matters or affecting current litigation.

I think it's fairly safe to exclude Felicitas from those categories.

And any case where no date has been set - which once again you've missed off the list to justify your incorrect argument.

Now I'm not saying that there are any cases pending but just because you can't see one listed that doesn't mean there isn't one or more pending...

[WoffleCopter]

So what you are suggesting is there was a hearing for Felicitas that for some reason never appeared on the schedule and for which a judgment was kept private because it could affect another case that has also failed to make the schedule and for some reason they haven't set a date for?

Oh... and the people involved haven't let the contracting community know anything about it.

[eek]

So what you are suggesting is there was a hearing for Felicitas that for some reason never appeared on the schedule and for which a judgment was kept private because it could affect another case that has also failed to make the schedule and for some reason they haven't set a date for?

Oh... and the people involved haven't let the contracting community know anything about it.

No quite - what I'm saying is that a case may be in preparation that isn't yet listed in the list of forthcoming cases WITH hearing dates - i.e. there are cases for which a hearing date has not been set.

Exactly how many times do I have to repeat the fact that a list of cases where hearing dates have been set != all cases due to appear before a court (which will by definition include cases where no hearing date has yet been set).

Now it may be that the lead time before a court case being requested and a hearing date being set is milliseconds but it's equally possible given the numbering system that is being used that it could be years.

[WoffleCopter]

I would count those as just "claims"...anyway we are getting into semantics.