Here we have a thread where the debtor had a visit from DCBL with a writ in the name of a limited company. Although the poster started a thread on BHF, it looks like they had previously contacted Jason’s “helpline” directly, possibly via DWB. Jason was quick to say that the bailiff cannot attend the director’s home “because the company doesn’t live there”. Actually Jason, it often does. It’s not uncommon for companies to be registered at the director’s home address.
The debtor argued that the bailiff had pushed his way into his house and Jason said that this “revokes everything that followed”. He also offered a detailed assessment hearing and said that “the costs in bringing this proceeding is also charged to the bailiff company because they breached regulations.” and “Redress for the money taken is recovered in an action in the county court.” He told his client that, should he choose to bring proceedings, he could see DCBL “losing a lot of money and will have to pay back all the money taken.” On July 2nd 2016, Jason told his client that DCBL would pay for all his solicitors’ costs.
Jason then offered to draft all the court documents and then assign the case to a solicitor, which begs the question: if you are going to instruct a solicitor, why would you draft the court documents yourself? A solicitor representing Jason’s client wouldn’t care to appear in court with documents drafted by an unqualified lay person, would he? He then offers the client a “Damages Based Fee Agreement, often called ‘no-win no-fee'”. Only a few hours earlier, Jason had said that DCBL would pay for the solicitors’ costs. We have a bit of a contradiction here, because at 8:35, DCBL would pay the client’s costs, presumably after being landed with a costs order against them, yet at 3:18pm, he proposes a damages based agreement, where the client would be paying the solicitor from the money he recovers in damages. Not quite the same thing, is it?
Jason goes as far as to say the client can bring a claim against the bank! Then, on the 4th of July, Jason really goes to town with a long least of breaches, most of them related to the address. Despite having instructed a solicitor to deal with the case, Jason is still publishing the details on the forum. Then it all goes quiet and we here nothing further from the client until seven months later, when a mysterious newbie joins BHF and starts posting on the thread.
The mysterious poster said the following, addressing the client rather than Jason:
How did that work out for you? I heard the judge was most displeased with your comparisons to the
“Germans invading Poland” and other exaggerated claims. It’s a shame you were led down a path that was
only ever going to lead to failure, embarrassment and further financial loss. This is what Jason does; he
gives people false hope and makes them believe they have a case, so he can earn money by referring
people to solicitors. He contacts Mr Brown every now and then trying to get a reaction and trying to
convince him there are a number of cases waiting to go to court, but these cases never materialise. Maybe
it would help if people reading this forum didn’t automatically believe what a complainant says and
understand that there are always two sides to a story. Especially when the complainant is accusing a
“professional, polite, calm and courteous” (the judge’s words) Enforcement Agent of trying to “record his
wife getting dressed” and naming him in the letter to the court, “a sex case peeping tom pervert”. How
could you ever believe this kind of comment would go down well with a judge???
He ends his posts with the following:
Maybe if you hadn’t have blatantly lied in your letter to the court when you state you “shouted at Mr Brown
to move his car off your driveway” and “he refused to show me his ID or the writ” and “he pushed past me
to gain entry” and pretty much everything else you say from then on, you wouldn’t have burdened yourself further with over £4,000 in court costs.
Says it all really!