eSignature Legitimacy for Addressing Harassement in United Kingdom with airSlate SignNow

How to eSign a document: e-signature legitimacy for Addressing Harassement in United Kingdom

here are seven common things that are going to help you lose your court case and even if it's not your court case if it's an argument with a friend argument with a company argument with anybody these are seven things that people do that help you lose in any of those situations grab a pen and let's get going number one fundamental mistake that most people do is they ignore it this is especially detrimental if it is a court claim because you only have a limited amount of time to respond to a court claim before the other side gets judgment in default first of all you get 14 days that is either to find a defense or to file an acknowledgement of service this is known as responding to the claim or responding to the claim form you can file your defense within that time or you can file an acknowledgement of service that gives you an additional 14 days but doing simple maths that gives you a maximum of 28 days within which you need to file your defense if you fail to file a defense or within the first 14 days if you fail to file either the defense or the acknowledgement of service then the other side is going to get judgment in default they win without you even going to court but this is also true if you're having any kind of argument with companies and other people as well if you ignore the complaint in the first instance and it does eventually end up in court then it's going to look bad that you didn't cooperate in the first place the court is not going to look kindly on you simply ignoring the company and not let's say availing yourself of any kind of appeal opportunities particularly if we're talking about parking charge notices and things like that see my other videos for more details number two when you do respond don't make it up don't make up a response because if you make something up then obviously it won't be true or it's unlikely to be true you're not likely to be able to find evidence for it and any decent lawyer or a judge is going to cut straight through something that you've made up and at worst case you could be held in contempt of court if you do have a real reason for defending the claim and denying the claim against you then use that and use it in as much detail but i'm coming back to that in a moment number three talking about whether you do or you do not have a defense to this claim or this complaint don't admit it if it isn't your fault because if you make an admission at any early stage this cannon probably will be used against you even in the civil courts as well if you've made an admission to all or part of the claim or complaint if it's in its early stages then again this is going to be put in evidence before the court and is likely to help you lose your claim in court it's very difficult if not impossible to come back later and change your story but again i'm coming back to that one number four contrary to number three you cannot simply deny it either the civil procedure rules require that you put detail as to why you deny this claim it isn't sufficient to just have a bare denial of all the claims set out against you you have to set out your version of events if somebody else alleges a claim against you you have to deny it with reasons it is sometimes enough just to give the gist of what that reason is but you do have to give the reason if possible you have to give as many details as possible to make this as credible as possible in your defense which will be your statement of case these will be the fact upon which you rely to defend this claim especially if there's a counter claim which will take roughly the same format as a normal claim in the first instance number five is don't get angry now this applies whether you're doing it in writing in correspondence between the parties it applies whether you're doing it formally by way of a defense or defense encounter claim but it also applies when you're talking to them on the phone because if you get angry with somebody and they make evidence of it particularly if you make threats about it then again this is going to come back in evidence and it's going to look bad for you and it's going to make it look more likely that you are not telling the truth and the other side's claim is valid from the outset number six is you must be consistent one of the fundamental underlying principles of a legal case which is successful is consistency what you say at the outset is the same as what you say at trial and at the very end of the trial and what the judge is summing up at the very end if what you've said has been the same all along logic will tell you that that is more likely to be true it is more likely to be credible and if it is true and credible you will win in your defense or in your claim if it's you that's bringing the claim you may recall that the criminal caution right at the outset before someone is questioned you do not have to say anything but it may harm your defense if you do not mention one question something that you later rely on in court that is because it's giving you an early opportunity to say something which can then be consistent all the way through or it may not be consistent all the way through in other words if someone gets to a criminal trial and they say actually your honor this was self-defense but at the outset they said that it just wasn't them at all then that's not consistent those two are completely different things one of them is saying that it is not them one of them is saying that yes it was me but it was in self-defense why did they not say that at the outset that's an inconsistency that is more likely to be incredible meaning not credible and the jury is not likely to believe that unless of course there's a very good reason why they weren't saying it in the first place but that's difficult to prove and number seven is don't get personal unless of course it helps your case let me explain if you attack somebody personally you attack their personal credibility you attack their personality or you're downright rude or you're bringing in irrelevant claims or something they've done before not only is this irrelevant but it also looks badly on you unless of course like i said it helps your case for example if someone is claiming against you but they are proven to be dishonest let's say they have a conviction for theft or robbery or one of the other many dishonesty offenses you can assert in your response to the claim that they are a dishonest person and here's a really interesting bonus one even if this person claiming against you has been prosecuted beforehand for a dishonesty offense even if they were not convicted they were acquitted of that offence they were found not guilty then you can in the civil courts still assert that you consider them to have been guilty of that offence why because in the civil courts the standard of proof is very much lower in the criminal court the standard of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt or as it is put to a jury the jury must be sure that the person is guilty in the civil court it is on the balance of probabilities like you see on the scales this means just more likely than not which is literally 51 as against 49 so you can assert in the civil courts that you believe someone to have been guilty of a dishonesty offense in the past and that is why you believe them to be dishonest now so make a list of these things make sure you keep them in mind if you are actively involved in any kind of claim whether that's a civil claim a criminal claim an employment tribunal or you're just having a spat with a company and you want to get the righteous result take note of all of these they will help you make sure you subscribe like the video and thank you for watching