High Court Appeal Office Clerks

Response to this request is long overdue. By law, under all circumstances, Ministry of Justice should have responded by now (details). You can complain by requesting an internal review.

Dear Ministry of Justice,
High Court Appeal Office Clerks

How many appeals to the Chancery Appeals Division from the county court have been rejected by the clerks after they have been received in time for an appeal by special delivery with the correct fee as listed on their website but nevertheless date stamped as out of time on 29th July 2015, so that the Chancery Division can reject the appeal application as out of time; and insist on an out of time application having to be completed before they will process the application.

Provide the date that the appeal from the county court that was date stamped as if received a day late, was apparently placed before the Chancery court in January 2016 and rejected for sending the increased fee demanded too late, when no increase is showing on their website. Please list the name of the judge who made this decision.

The link at the bottom of the page shows no increase in fee's.

http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/rcj-rol...

Please also provide a copy of the code of conduct that prevents such unfairness and lack of due process and stops collusion with the lower courts and councils avoiding justice.

Yours faithfully,

master powel

London RSU Kilo,

1 Attachment

Dear Master Powel
 
Please find attached an acknowledgement to your Freedom of Information
request.
 
Regards
 
Knowledge Information Liaison Officer
 

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of
the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying
is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy
all
copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message
could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in
mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message
by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be
monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail
monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be
read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not
broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

London RSU Kilo,

1 Attachment

Dear Master Powel,

 

Please see attached response to your freedom of information request.

 

Kind regards

 

 KILO  

3^rd Floor | First Avenue House | 42-49 High Holborn | London WC1V 6NP |
DX 160010 Kingsway 7

 

 

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of
the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying
is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy
all
copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message
could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in
mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message
by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be
monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail
monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be
read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not
broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

Dear London RSU Kilo,

It is not possible that you do not hold information inconnection to the request as this would be incompatible with the evidence held.

Please check the following dates 28th July 2015 when an Appeal was sent to appeal a Statutory Demand Set aside hearing heard at the county court in Maidstone on 7th July 2015 . Confirmed by special delivery to the Chancery division appeals yet the court stamp date shows the following day 's date of the 29th July.

Why would the Chancery divison appeals need to date stamp this as out of time, before sending it back with a letter dated 29th July 2015 ?

On the 11th January 2016 a further cheque was enclosed even though the Chancery division appeals failed to show where an increase in fees could be found on their website.

On 26th January 2016 Chancery division appeals wrote back that because they did not receive the increase in fee quick enough , although they still did not show anywhere an increase could be located , the 'Court' now considers the appellants notice as out-of-time . Just more excuses and with intention of a further attempt to complete an out of time application, when the application was recieved in time with the correct fee shown on their website.

On 29th February 2016 another letter was sent pointing out all of the above facts , that the correct fee showing on their website had been enclosed and recieved in time.

On 9th March 2016 the Chancery division appeals pushing yet again for an out of time appeal, this time because the fee was incomplete originally.

On 30th March 2016 another letter was sent pointing out all the above and a request for a copy of customer service excellence charter mark , still out standing .

All the above recieved from the Chancery divison appeals were signed but illegible apart from the last one listed below that was not signed but had the name Tony Christou .

On 5th April 2016 Chancery division appeals still pushing for to complete the out of time section.

Are the Chancery division appeals working alongside the county court and council to force people to fill in an out-of-time application , that would effectively remove their chance of an appeal, as an out-of-time application could just be dismissed ?

Yours sincerely,

master powel

London RSU Kilo,

Dear Master Powell,

 

Without the case number and name of the defendant it is not possible to
answer your query. Your original request was not for specific recorded
information and could not be fully answered  under the FOIA.

 

I can send your email to the Chancery Division to respond outside of the
FOIA but once again we will need the case number and name of the
defendants/litigants to be able to respond.

 

Regards,

 

Knowledge and Information Liaison Officer

London Regional Support Unit

3rd Floor, First Avenue House

42-49 High Holborn

London WC1V 6NP

 

DX 160010 Kingsway 7

show quoted sections

Dear London RSU Kilo,

The name of the defendant would be Maidstone Borough Council.

There is no case number because your clerks did not allocate a case number neither did they give any reference numbers , but instead repeatedly returned the application for appeal as out-of-time when in fact it was received in time.

This request is for all recorded information you hold and you are required to record all incoming and outgoing mail. You have been given ample details including dates of communications both sent and received including the name of the member of staff who sent out the last letter to be able to allocate the documents.

Yours sincerely,

master powel

London RSU Kilo,

Dear Mr Powell,

 

Your request was made under the FOIA which is for recorded information
only, the information you have requested is not specific nor is it for
recorded information. The FOIA also excludes any information held on court
files.

 

If you have a complaint about your own court case there is a separate
procedure for dealing with the matter. Please follow the attached link

 

[1]http://libra.lcd.gsi.gov.uk/hmcts/docume...

 

Kind regards

 

 

Knowledge and Information Liaison Officer

London Regional Support Unit

3rd Floor, First Avenue House

42-49 High Holborn

London WC1V 6NP

 

DX 160010 Kingsway 7

show quoted sections

Dear London RSU Kilo,

The link you have provided does not work and I am sure you are already aware that it has been sent back more than once , it can not be classed as anything other than a complaint.

What the MOJ is really saying , is send your appeal against a Statutory Demand hearing from the inferiorit county court, who work together with the council's, to the Chancery Division of the High Court ( of juistice?) and it will never see the light of day, because the clerks will use any excuse not to accept it, including date stamping it as out of time to try to force you to put in an out of time application, so it can be thrown out.

If my understanding is incorrect , that is evidenced by facts, please say so.

Yours sincerely,

master powel

master powel left an annotation ()

Is this really the best we can expect from the "Justice" system ?

Dear London RSU Kilo,

council tax unlawful bankruptcy merchants of menace shylock & shysters

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jo9ATAxt...

Yours sincerely,

master powel