Following on from the previous questions regarding my Bailment case, and the first hearing which went like this:
Alex Watts says:
Hello Trevor and thanks for requesting me.
What reasons did the judge five? Did you ask permission to appeal?
well, I think I've covered it in the last mail. No contract. family property. no evidence Miss Hale accepted the Bailment or responsibilty. no expressed consent.no steps to collect my goods. passage of time implies abandonment.
i did not ask for an appeal.
Did you not have a copy of the statement or written submissions?
no I did not nor do I have a copy. I have not seen them.
Ok then you have ground of appeal. You should have been given disclose of the documents.
This is a point of procedure and also article 6 human rights act, that is a fair trial.
So yes you have a ground to appeal, based on the above,
Can I clarify anything for you about this today please?
well, that has a certain authority. I forgot to say that the Judge said that she felt that I had no likelihood of winning.
in my application for an appeal, do I introduce the evidence that counteracts the points raised by the defence?
Yes but raising new evidence can be hard is an appeal.
An appeal is usually a review of the decision below.
Does that help?
it does. but to show that my ex gave me no opportunity to retrieve my stuff proves bailment. and the Judge made a big thing about the furniture not being worth much, so Ifeel the need to present pictures of similar stuff that is on sale. etc etc......
I will come back to you later, and let you relax. I will want fill in the form Nxxx. and include the 'kitchen sink'. thank you.
Sure. if I can clarify anything else please let me know.
If this answers your question could I invite you rate my answer before you leave today.
If the system won’t let you please click reply.
Please bookmark my profile if you wish for future help: http://www.justanswer.co.uk/law/expert-alexwatts/
Hi Alex, I trust you had an excellent Christmas, and New Year. I will add my best wishes to the copious greetings you may already have received.
I am filling in the N164 form.
Sections 1 and 2 ok
3) I am asking for permission to appeal
4) Human Rights Act - Yes
21 days - yes
other applications - no
5) Grounds for Appeal 1) Procedure Rules 31.6 Standard Disclosure requires a party to disclose the documents on which he relies 2) Human Rights Act 1998. Articles 6. The right to a Fair Trial.
The defence relied upon a submission (s)to the Judge which was not disclosed to the Claimant either before or during the hearing
6) Set Aside
7) a) The Judgement was wrong
It appeared from the undisclosed submission from the defendant that she claims the furniture was jointly owned family property. The defendant has not claimed that she was a initial recipient or a part recipient of the furniture. I was given the furniture at the funeral of my sister-in-law Gillian, after her suicide. My late brother asked me to take it in a private conversation, and I arranged the collection. I can produce witnesses that this took place. I am the sole owner of the furniture. I should remind the court that the defendant and I were unmarried cohabitants and this transfer of personal ownership has no legal framework.
Acceptance of responsibility for the furniture.
The fact that I did not intend to leave the family home and that it was in fact the defendant’s choice for me to leave and at her request is documented in Doc 1, and remains uncontested. I was prevented from visiting the property at the defendant’s request in the following year, and this is confirmed in an email from her dated 17 January 2001, where she also admits constantly talking privately to my boss until I was dismissed unfairly a few weeks later. I tried to get the defendant’s agreement to sell the house in 2007, and this would have provided an end point to her possession of my personal goods and chattels, and this is confirmed in Doc 3. This letter to the defendant also refers to the defendant retaining the contents of the house in their entirety, although that is not the main thrust of the letter.
The de facto annexation of my house, assets and personal property in May 28 2000 placed an automatic responsibility on the defendant for my personal property including the furniture.
The refusal to allow the sale of the house in 2007 renewed this acceptance of the Bailment, more so in that a definite end was in sight with the absolute necessity to sell the house at the end of the mortgage term.
At all times the defendant, and the children, had my contact information. This included where I worked, personal, home, mobile and work telephone numbers. It also included my home addresses. So frequent was the defendant’s use of my work telephone numbers, that when I contacted Jason Sen (an ex-colleague from 2005) recently (in 2012) via LinkedIn, he immediately asks “Does Pauline still badger you on the phone”. This is shown in Doc 4.
The phone calls continued so often that when I started work at my current employment, ALH Systems, I had to ask the Director to prevent personal phone calls being put through to me, and instruct any new office staff of the situation. This is confirmed in Doc 5, a letter from the Director Mr A Cousins.
Because contact was regular, via telephone calls and emails almost exclusively from the defendant to the claimant, the claim of abandonment is disproved as it would have been a simple thing to ask for the furniture to be removed. The sideboard and dresser were actively in use beyond 2007. The table and chairs were stored in the garage from around that date.
Steps to Collect
To provide some sort of stability the use of the furniture by the children after I left was important. As I lived in inadequate rented accommodation, eventually with another family with their own furniture, it was never important to take my furniture away from the children. Why would I pay for storage or collection of the furniture at considerable cost when I had an empty garage at the 49 Goylands Close property, for which I was paying the whole of the mortgage for the period from 2000 to 2014 and additionally rent for my own living accommodation? After 2007 the Table and Chairs were stored in the garage and had I suspected that the furniture was no longer in use, then I would have requested that it be stored in elsewhere in my property i.e. the garage. Also Doc 6 shows a list of all of my personal property that I can remember being left in 49 Goylands. There are some very important items passed down to me from my forebears. The fact that these are now ALL missing indicates something a lot more malicious than has been hitherto considered.
The Judge relied on the submission from the defendant claiming that the charity Phoenix Community Furniture, of Newtown, had declared the furniture valueless. On 19 December 2014 I phoned Phoenix Furniture twice. In those conversations the Manager Mr Richard Osborne said that neither he nor his employees and drivers had visited 49 Goylands Close, Howey, and that threy had only been to Howey once to see some furniture in a council house. He and his staff had looked at pictures of the 49 Goylands Close house on the internet and could state that they had not been there. He also said that they kept records of where they go, and no such visit was on record. Mr Osborne said that they did not do valuations, and that he would certainly have taken the furniture if asked. A letter recording the initial conversation with Mr Osborne is signed and dated by him in Doc 7.
Docs 8, 9, 10 11 and 12 show online commercial sales of furniture identical to mine, which has been or is being sold at prices equal or greater than those I have claimed.
I was ejected from the house and because I was living in hotel rooms, then bedsits, plus I was asked not to go 49 Goylands Close, I could not get my personal property.
The furniture was being used by the family.
It was not unreasonable to leave it in a house that I own.
There was value to the furniture, beyond the obvious sentimental value that has not been considered.
The defendant has escaped answering why she got rid of the furniture, when it would have been simpler to put it in the garage, especially if it had no value.
The defendant has not said when she got rid of the furniture.
The defendant has not said where she got rid of the furniture.
The defendant made no attempts to offer me the opportunity to collect the furniture.
How does this look?