Quatloos!

Here we go, folks. After 400 posts, perhaps we'll get to something resembling proof. If you can link to them, please do. If you can't, PM me.

When you say "court docs", what are you referring to? I hope it's not their personal stuff. Is it really relevant to even mention whether one has "convictions" for unpaid road tax or the other a liability order for child maintenance? Neither is remotely related to their ability to provide help and advice with bailiff issues.

If you are referring to cases involving their clients, only a minority would have gone to court. To clarify, I mean in the sense of the client (or debtor) taking the bailiff company to court. Bailiff action usually originates from a court order against the debtor, and these two advisors deal mainly with action taken in the Magistrates Court, which deals with minor criminal offences punishable by fines and liability orders for non payment of council tax. Bailiffs can also be issued to enforce County Court judgments but these are much easier to sort out, and I don't think either Harding or Bennison have had a lot of involvement in that area.

Only a small minority of debtors facing bailiff action would have taken it to court, and most county court judgments are unreported, leaving little scope for the provision of court documents as you've requested.

ForumWars wrote:When you say "court docs", what are you referring to? I hope it's not their personal stuff. Is it really relevant to even mention whether one has "convictions" for unpaid road tax or the other a liability order for child maintenance? Neither is remotely related to their ability to provide help and advice with bailiff issues.

Which if you'd read up on what was going on, was specifically noted as not being wanted nor relevant. If it is a published court proceeding it is public information.

This thread is pointless.

[Guess we'll see, won't we? Mod deletes remainder of off-topic bilge. - WS]

I am just waiting to copy one more judgment and I can then email them to the moderator.

[Great. Mod deletes off-topic remainder. - WS]

I cannot give you that evidence because you and the owner of this board have concealed their own identities,

[As I have posted before, PM me if you have court docs and are unable to link to them yourself. I have never concealed my identity; a little more reading and a little less whining and you would know. Off-topic remainder deleted. - WS]

jasonDWB wrote:

ArthurWankspittle wrote: Are you saying you have never had a CCJ against you? If you have had a CCJ then at some point "I had unpaid county court judgments" would be true.

None that I am aware.

Only been accused, and I have searched court records, both Kingston and Brighton Courts, they do not have any records of unsatisfied county court judgments.

The child maintenance is also false because there is no outstanding claims.

It is not for the accused to prove his innocence.

I am perfectly willing to accept that you have no outstanding CCJs. The question was have you ever had any? I note you refer to no "unsatisfied" or "outstanding" claims.

jasonDWB wrote:

ArthurWankspittle wrote: Google that somewhere on this site there is something not correct about you and Google will drop everything and de-list us?
We are going over old ground, no further posting off the subject of the thread please.

If I upload evidence it is defamatory. That is what usually happens.

I have now uploaded that evidence, and we can let nature run its course.

"If I upload evidence it is defamatory" Wow you really are full of yourself aren't you?

jasonDWB wrote:You demonstrated selective moderating on this website. Anyone can accuse by presumption, and its for the accused to show evidence to the contrary.

You demonstrated yesterday an ability to control published content on this website and I asked you to do the same. That was all I had to show. Now you have a problem with that as your full of youreself comment suggests.

Just tired of your constant threats and whining.