Clutching at straws

Clutching at straws

Here we have a thread going back a year, where the OP has just returned to say that their judgment was set aside but Mortimer Clarke have sent them a letter labelled WITHOUT PREJUDICE SAVE AS TO COSTS, with a settlement figure. As ever, Nemesis gets in first, his “advice”?

MC are clutching at straws.Nem

Clutching at strawsQUE? Is that the extent of his advice? He neither asks questions, nor does he suggest any course of action. The OP doesn’t need to read one more post saying all creditors/DCAs and their solicitors are useless, play tricks, try to turn you into a cash cow, etc. Anyone can write that, and that sort of thing went down well in the early days of consumer fora, when it was a bit of a novelty to have a new medium where you could vent and say everything you always wanted to say but didn’t. That was 10 years ago.

What they need is a little guidance, which cannot be given until the full facts are known. For a start, it would be appropriate to ask the OP to post up a redacted version of the letter. When it comes to legal matters, the devil’s in the detail and, without reading the wording, the meaning of the letter is anyone’s guess. Writing WP save as to costs is standard procedure during negotiations, in fact, the law recognises the without prejudice privilege surrounding genuine attempts to settle a dispute, even when the words are not explicitly used, while they are meaningless when used in any other context.

It’s not even clear whether the judgment was actually set aside and why. Once more, Nemesis45’s response is as much use as a chocolate fireguard.

How does he get away with it?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *