333

Mr.John Kenneth Browne

24 Bridgford Road West Bridgford

Nottingham NG2 6AB

P & F 0115 9142546 M: 07776 306668

Email: johnk2411@virginmedia.com

 

Wednesday, 02 September 2015

County Court Money Claims Centre

PO Box 527

Salford M5 0BY

For the special attention of

Deputy District Judge Simister

Dear Sir

John Kenneth Browne’s claim against British Gas Ltd. Claim No B40YM866

I am in receipt of your Order dated 01/09/15 and to say I am shocked and disappointed that this matter has been transferred to Nottingham in total contradiction to my specific wishes as detailed in my claim form and in the letter attached. I was not consulted or even advised but presented with a “fait accompli” and it appears that this was in response to a request by British Gas. Do I have any rights in this matter? It appears not.

I now request that DDJ Simister rescind his order and transfer the matter to London the home Court of British Gas and their agents. Sir please do not tell me to apply to Nottingham to transfer. They have refused to transfer me at least 20 times since Mar 13. Should the DDJ refuse to rescind his order and bring the matter back to Salford and transfer to London I will have no choice but to Appeal said order to a Higher Court. It does appear that British Gas have all the rights and 100% of the discretion of the Courts. This also applies in the Nottingham and Leicester Courts. Why do British Gas object to the matter been held in their local County Court and insist on Nottingham? Is it because I would get an impartial Judge in London? Even DDJ Simister must find it extraordinary, but British Gas knows all the angles but none of the principles. Right or wrong true or false does not enter into it.

I followed the rules, completing the claim form, paid the fee only to find my wishes and rights are flaunted and the wishes of British Gas, who paid nothing, made no application, is implemented without question. Is this right? It is the rule is it not that the hearing will be heard at the debtors home Court, this been London. Why did the DDJ transfer against my wishes and without consulting me in any way or from? Why does the debtor want it held in Nottingham instead of his home court? Is it possible it is due to the very favourable treatment they receive in Nottingham re their chronology where they win everything? Why did the British Gas find it necessary to produce a chronology in this small claims Court? Is it because, as solicitors, they can and do attract the 100% discretion of the Judges to which I become a victim of total injustice.

The worst part of this discrimination is the statement by Nottingham Judges that my case has no merit. They never even examine the evidence in 5 bundles, my defence documents, my skeleton argument.

All they have to do is look at the reports of OFGEM and the investigation by the Competition and Markets Authority that are precisely the same as my dispute with British Gas. In effect they are investigating my dispute with British Gas but not by name. This is ongoing to which I have contributed. They will report in December 2015. All ignored by the County Court at Nottingham due to the DJ Reeson matter attached, a brother Judge to all the Judges in the County Court at Nottingham. Has the learned Judge never wondered why I do not want my case heard in Nottingham or anywhere in the midland circuit? The answer is I suffer discrimination before all these judges.

Why is British Gas so determined to prolong and complicate matters? This is simply another matter now prolonged by British Gas for the umpteen time. Please note this dispute with British Gas started in 2006. The claim against me was not started until March 13 and it is still unresolved as the matter is now before the Lord Justices at the Civil Appeals Court,

I now have to do something I never wanted to do, and hoped would not be necessary. Unfortunately British Gas has forced me into it and Salford County Court by going along with them. In order for the Salford Court to understand why I am a marked man in the County Court at Nottingham and wish a transfer to London as per my Claim Form for a fair trial. British Gas likes Nottingham. Guess WHY?

Please see the attached statement of fact regarding my case against DJ Reeson in the Nottingham County Court and elsewhere in which 4 District Judges and 3 Circuit Judges attempted to dismantle an order of 2 Lord Justices in the Civil Appeals Court. I won the case but I never expected to be discriminated against as a result. Please read the attached and Order and the Article “British Gas fined £5.6m……………I know that DJ Reeson matter is a conflict of interest for Nottingham Judges and as such a valid and sufficient reason to transfer to London. Why don’t they agree to transfer?.

There have been 6 hearings of this matter so far and I have had to defend myself against the unwarranted attack by British Gas and condoned by Nottingham Judges. I am a marked man in the Nottingham County Court as is shown by the chronology supplied by British Gas. In effect I am demolished and penalised excessively in every case before every Judge. I am even lied to by the judges with impunity. Even my numerous letters requesting a transfer area\ refused Why? The DJ Reeson matter is sufficient to suggest the possibility of Bias. Still refused? The Nottingham Judges are so determined to see me off they never look at my evidence and only accept the evidence of British Gas. Please read the enclosed facts. I enclose a copy of the order they failed to dismantle.

Lord Woolf comments in his Interim Access to Justice Report [June 95] at Para 7 of chapter 17 :-“The situation is made worse for them [litigants in person] if they have tried to understand and comply with the rules, only to find that the rules are flouted by lawyers, and effectively condoned by the Courts [Judges]”.

Access to justice is a right not a privilege and as such cannot be interpreted to mean anything else. In that regard it will play an important part in helping to maintain the Courts commitment to access to justice as a right available to all. Lord Dyson, Master of the Rolls 11th December 2012

HRA Article 6. The right to a fair trial before an impartial Judge. The right to a level playing field. The right to having judges live up to their Oath of office.

Affirmation – Judicial
I, ____________ , do solemnly sincerely and truly declare and affirm that
I will well and truly serve our Sovereign Lady Queen Elizabeth the Second
in the office of DDJ___________ , and I will do right to all manner of
people after the laws and usages of this Realm without fear or favour
affection or ill will.

J K Browne 02/09/15

. Could it be I did . or consultation.ti to nottingamould the debtor want it heald in Nottingham. Could it possibly be due to the very favourable treatenmt that in debtorindicated my prefared Court.has just come to my notice the big bundle of defence documents submitted by British Gas Ltd.

Important: the hearing of this matter must be in London the home court of British Gas and their agents where I will get an impartial judgement. British Gas will try to change the venue. British Gas and their agents know all the angles but none of the principles.

British Gas has lost the plot. The facts: British Gas made an application for a restraint Order against me. This was a malicious action to say the least and repeated three times since. They clearly believed they would get away with it, due to the special treatment they had already received in the Nottingham County Court. HHJ Godsmark refused their application and awarded me costs that British Gas now refused to pay. It is as simple and straight forward as that.

There is no doubt whatsoever that British Gas owe me money. Should British Gas object to my bill of costs they have the option to apply to a costs judge, make a substantial offer to settle or apply to the mediation service to resolve the matter and avoid court action As they have not done any of these I had no alternative but to make a claim in the County Court where a Districts Judge will decide the issue and bring this matter to an end. That is the situation plain and simple and nothing whatsoever to do with any other matter that British Gas is trying to introduce. Nobody knows this better that British Gas. They only wish to muddy the water, stall and confuse as they have been doing for 9 years now. This defence is just wasting my time and more importantly the time of the Court.

British Gas is very economical with the truth. It is what they don’t say that is the most relevant. They are very selective in their submissions, and exclusions, and deceptive in their interpretation of same. I will not add anything further, unless requested to do so by the Court, as I submit it has nothing to do with this matter before this Court. Clearly British Gas expect to be able to influence the Court, as solicitors, by issuing what can only be called some kind of chronology over the past 9 years. In effect nothing to do with this matter. It must be noted that they have again submitted another request for a restrains order to prevent me defending myself. Why they feel it is necessary to pursue this is arrogance to say the least.

The order of DDJ Kitto/Piodevin at the substantive hearing is now before the Lord Justices at the Civil Appeals Court again nothing to do with his mater. They fail to mention that. They also fail to mention that British Gas is the subject of a deep investigation by the Competition and Markets Authority. I enclose a few copies of items that may be of interest. British Gas start this I must respond in kind.

Important: the hearing for this matter must be in London the home court of British Gas and their agents where I will get an impartial judgement.

Yours Faithfully

J K Browne 30/08/15

 

Be the first to comment on "333"

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.


*