Solicitor Anthony Joyce recommends against using independent appeals panels

gahfan

Frequent Poster
Messages
96
Hi Andy836, yes I understand so unless we lose the case. AJ's office are confident that we won't lose on the basis that the bank have admitted liability
 
S

SirMille

Guest
Four hundred is not reassuringly expensive. And he has no cases to point to.

What does the 400 get apart from processing a paperload?
 

Andy836

Frequent Poster
Messages
370
Four hundred is not reassuringly expensive. And he has no cases to point to.

What does the 400 get apart from processing a paperload?
€400 is all it might cost gahfan unless they loose then gahfan would be liable for the €400 plus the Bank's costs (although what's the liklihood of the judge awarding costs against gahfan in this day and age?)

Would it be possible that if Gahfan wins, then the Bank will be held liable for cost and then gahfan's lawyers can bill the full amount to the Bank, which could be higher than €400?
 

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
40,892
AJ's office are confident that we won't lose on the basis that the bank have admitted liability
You are not arguing about the liability.

You are arguing about whether the 10% paid was enough or not.

You have not gone to the Independent Appeals Panel, which the Judge will take a poor view of.

Brendan
 
S

SirMille

Guest
Brendan Burgess, why are you certain the judge will take a dim view of bypassing the "independent" panel?

You have repeated yourself ad nauseum, but you never provided a reason, other than "it's a free go", which is not a strong reason.
 

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
40,892
Sir Millie

Having a free go at something is a very good reason. There is no downside whatsoever to the person affected in appealing this. There is a huge downside to the legal profession in that the person may have their appeal upheld and have no need to pay them legal fees.

Brendan
 

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
40,892
Hi Sarenco

That is interesting. I would have thought that a judge would ask someone how they progressed their complaint. If they did not make a complaint to the defendant but went straight to law, the judge should certainly take it into account. But then I am assuming common sense on behalf of the judges. Maybe that is not a reasonable assumption?

I would have thought that it would strengthen your legal case to have your appeal rejected by ptsb without ptsb giving any valid reason.

Brendan
 

Sarenco

Frequent Poster
Messages
6,252
Hi Brendan

This isn't actually an appeal from anything - these are brand new proceedings.

We all have a constitutional right to access the Courts. "Common sense" doesn't come into it.

None of which is to suggest that it was necessarily sensible to avoid the process set up by PTSB.
 

RedOnion

Frequent Poster
Messages
4,534
If it were me, I'd be worried about the potential liability to pay bank costs if I lost the case, and hadn't followed an appeals process the bank had put in place free of charge.
In my view, that's when a judge might have a dim view of it.
 

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
40,892
The first thing is that it is clear that one should always use the Independent Appeals Process.(Sorry for having to repeat this ad nauseam but a very small number of people still don't get this and have lost out as a result.)

There is nothing to lose. If you have received a refund of €40,000, you have automatically received compensation of €4,000.

If you have a good case for getting €50,000 compensation, then there is a real chance that the Independent Appeals Panel will give you €50,000 or something close to it.

If you have no case at all, you are very unlikely to get an increased award, but you might, so there is nothing to lose.

You can still go to the FSO or the Courts.

If you have no case, there is no cost or risk in going to the FSO.

If you have no case, you can certainly try the Courts. ptsb may cave in beforehand. But if you have no case at all, then they probably won't and you might get stuck with costs.

I simply can't conceive of any situation where going to the Courts directly is the right thing to do. Possibly if the solicitor agrees to pay any costs awarded against you, but I doubt if they would do that.

I am surprised that the judge wouldn't pay any attention to it. But I presume that a Judge wouldn't hold exhausting the Independent Appeals Panel against the complainant.

Brendan
 
W

Wardy7

Guest
I just wish the whole damn thing would hurry up and reach a conclusion.

Still no idea of a possible date for court.

It's appalling that so many of us are in limbo with life on hold waiting for an outcome.

Frustration at its best!
 

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
40,892
Still no idea of a possible date for court.
Which is the big disadvantage off the court.

Those who made successful appeals, are done and dusted and have the money in their pockets.

Those who went to the FSO are probably going through the mediation process now.

Brendan
 

gahfan

Frequent Poster
Messages
96
I take your point Brendan but I can't do anything about it now. I was about to go through the appeals and then came across Anthony Joyce's existing cases.
Hopefully it's not something I'll regret but I can't change the past.
 

joe351980

Frequent Poster
Messages
95
I'm similar to gahfan but when you see all the cases taken to the FSO that found in favour of the bank it doesn't leave confidence in appealing, (free shot or not) to same
 

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
40,892
Hi Joe

You have no free shot at the FSO.

If the FSO finds against you, that is effectively it. Technically you can appeal to the High Court, but the costs are prohibitive and the hurdle to cross to overturn an FSO decision is huge.

You had a free shot at the Independent Appeals Panel.

If they found against you, you could then go to court or the FSO.

Brendan
 
Top