To be helpful and show you that I am not just being an asshole here are the facts of the shit job done by the Junkaroos lawyer See highlights:
"The action was begun in the Supreme Court on 3 October 2014, and a month later, on 5 November, UBS applied for summary judgment. The application came before Evans J on 23 March 2015. It is apparent from the transcript of the hearing, which has been put before the Board, that no real attempt was made to present the defendants’ case at this hearing. Counsel for the defendants had by mistake put the hearing into his diary for 25 March, as a result of which Mr and Mrs Starostenko were not present and Counsel Page 3 was not properly prepared. An affidavit had been sworn on behalf of the defendants which, when read with the voluminous correspondence exhibited, could be said to support the defence to which the Board has referred. However, it was still in the process of being filed and was not before the court. Counsel for the defendants observed that “to that extent” the application for summary judgment was opposed. But he added that Counsel for the Bank had drawn his attention to certain authorities to which, he said, he had no answer. This appears to have been a reference to authorities such as National Westminster Bank Plc v Skelton [1993] 1 All ER 242, 246 (per Slade LJ) to the effect that a counterclaim was not normally a sufficient basis for resisting a mortgagee’s summary application for possession. It appears not to have been appreciated that the defence which the defendants wished to raise was not just that the debt was abated by the cross-claim, which might in some circumstances have amounted to an equitable setoff, but that the event of default which was said to have made the debt payable was brought about by UBS’s breaches of duty. This may or may not have been a good point, but Counsel’s concession meant that that was never decided. Evans J gave judgment for the debt claimed and for possession in default of payment, without prejudice to the defendants’ right to pursue their counterclaim.
In my honest opinion @CSEtrader ...your lawyer is an idiot and fucked you over bigtime. You have a seemingly good case for malpractice against your own lawyer because they are the reason you got a summary judgement against you. Your lawyer screwed up the hearing date and then failed to file the defense papers. Your lawyer also had no counter argument when UBS lawyer shot him down.
SUMMARY: UBS did not fuck you....your LAWYER did! Go after him.
EDIT: If your lawyer raised the above defense in green you might have stayed the summary judgement order against you. YOUR LAWYER FUCKED YOU. GO get another lawyer and sue the first one for malpractice but you will not be able to undue the summary judgement against the house.
"The action was begun in the Supreme Court on 3 October 2014, and a month later, on 5 November, UBS applied for summary judgment. The application came before Evans J on 23 March 2015. It is apparent from the transcript of the hearing, which has been put before the Board, that no real attempt was made to present the defendants’ case at this hearing. Counsel for the defendants had by mistake put the hearing into his diary for 25 March, as a result of which Mr and Mrs Starostenko were not present and Counsel Page 3 was not properly prepared. An affidavit had been sworn on behalf of the defendants which, when read with the voluminous correspondence exhibited, could be said to support the defence to which the Board has referred. However, it was still in the process of being filed and was not before the court. Counsel for the defendants observed that “to that extent” the application for summary judgment was opposed. But he added that Counsel for the Bank had drawn his attention to certain authorities to which, he said, he had no answer. This appears to have been a reference to authorities such as National Westminster Bank Plc v Skelton [1993] 1 All ER 242, 246 (per Slade LJ) to the effect that a counterclaim was not normally a sufficient basis for resisting a mortgagee’s summary application for possession. It appears not to have been appreciated that the defence which the defendants wished to raise was not just that the debt was abated by the cross-claim, which might in some circumstances have amounted to an equitable setoff, but that the event of default which was said to have made the debt payable was brought about by UBS’s breaches of duty. This may or may not have been a good point, but Counsel’s concession meant that that was never decided. Evans J gave judgment for the debt claimed and for possession in default of payment, without prejudice to the defendants’ right to pursue their counterclaim.
In my honest opinion @CSEtrader ...your lawyer is an idiot and fucked you over bigtime. You have a seemingly good case for malpractice against your own lawyer because they are the reason you got a summary judgement against you. Your lawyer screwed up the hearing date and then failed to file the defense papers. Your lawyer also had no counter argument when UBS lawyer shot him down.
SUMMARY: UBS did not fuck you....your LAWYER did! Go after him.
EDIT: If your lawyer raised the above defense in green you might have stayed the summary judgement order against you. YOUR LAWYER FUCKED YOU. GO get another lawyer and sue the first one for malpractice but you will not be able to undue the summary judgement against the house.
Last edited:
