OV9

John wrote: Sat May 30, 2026 10:41 pm the wheels on the trolley jack sink in with the weight of the car but they return to shape afterwards without any damage. There is no movement at all from the tiles when going from lock to lock, just lots of squeeking

I think this would freak me out. Trolley jacks need to roll as freely as possible as they lift as the saddle moves backwards a little as you raise it. Cos geometry.

Industrial distribution centres - with fork lifts running around and heavy crap being dropped etc tend to go for resin floors - often with more than one pour and with some sand-like thrown on for grip.

Tile floor, the best thing I ever did in my garage.

If you back butter, ooh sexual, the tile they don't crack when you drop heavy stuff on them.

Dave!

mik wrote: Sun May 31, 2026 12:02 pm

John wrote: Sat May 30, 2026 10:41 pm the wheels on the trolley jack sink in with the weight of the car but they return to shape afterwards without any damage. There is no movement at all from the tiles when going from lock to lock, just lots of squeeking

I think this would freak me out. Trolley jacks need to roll as freely as possible as they lift as the saddle moves backwards a little as you raise it. Cos geometry.

Industrial distribution centres - with fork lifts running around and heavy crap being dropped etc tend to go for resin floors - often with more than one pour and with some sand-like thrown on for grip.

I've probably made it sound worse than it is and I'm very risk averse in my old age when working on cars. They don't totally bury themselves and it still rolls freely when jacking up a car

In a wild flurry of last minute activity, my lovely neighbours have submitted no fewer than FOUR applications to the court in recent weeks. We've got a court hearing on Tuesday hearing the first of those applications, and will also be asking for the subsequent three applications to be dismissed too - hopefully totally without merit. We're also requesting a civil restraining order, in an attempt to kerb their abuse of the courts and prevent this outright harassment. If that happens it means his usual access to the courts/justice system is removed and he is assigned a judge who becomes the bouncer that decides whether he can use the courts for any given claim.

Absolutely fcuking bonkers. Also the stakes are incredibly high now. After seven years of this nonsense which has been the most enduringly stressful thing I've had to do, and getting close to six figures in costs, it is all very, very nearly over.

Seven years, that’s insanity. Probably been answered before but will they be on the hook for your costs?

240PP wrote: Sun Jun 14, 2026 9:01 am Seven years, that’s insanity. Probably been answered before but will they be on the hook for your costs?

And if so do you actually stand a chance of getting a single penny out of them

I've been awarded around 50% of the costs, which they have not, and likely will not pay a single penny of. However because its Gavin the freeholder they took took court vs themselves as leaseholders, the penalty they've faced is forfeiture, which means their lease has been deleted by the courts for failure to comply with many, many court orders, and as such they're going to be evicted from their home. The property then reverts to me, the freeholder. It's an ugly, messy situation, and I'm under no illusions that it's absolutely horrendous for them. Yet, it's utterly unbelievable that they're still fighting it, and completely refusing to listen to a single judge they've been in front of, or take the advice of the two separate legal firms that have represented them - one of whom is massive and well respected.

Its a terrible abuse of process by them isn't it. The judge to intermediate seems like a good idea but what they should really be doing is saying they need to place a bond to cover costs that have been awarded against you thus far - if they can't do that then they should be barred from filing any further claims as they are effectively waging litigation warfare (without merit) at your cost and that should quite simply not be allowed.

Totally, it's an utter waste of the court's time. The last four applications are all largely the same too, it's like they're trying to bury me in baseless claims, however because it's forfeiture, the courts are understandably very lenient on them.

I like the idea of a bond. In hindsight that should have been put in place after the first few costs judgements went unpaid. It was clear it was going to continue happening.

What a PITA.

Fingers crossed it is over soon (we've said this before, but still).

Thanks guys, will see how it goes tomorrow in court

Fingers crossed for you Gav - this must feel like it's dragged on forever.....

Yes good luck with it…

Are they paying their own costs? Surely they can’t keep this up forever if they are? I have lots of questions.

IIRC they are representing themselves after their own legal advisors fucked them off.

Best of luck Gav! They need sending to debtors prison until they’ve paid you back!

240PP wrote: Mon Jun 15, 2026 11:04 am Yes good luck with it…

Are they paying their own costs? Surely they can’t keep this up forever if they are? I have lots of questions.

They were representing themselves at first, then they appointed a solicitor for a while back around 2022. We don’t quite know what happened without seeing their communications, however it appears they disagreed on how to approach things and eventually parted ways.

Then, in late 2024, they suddenly had a new ‘friend’ at a massive legal firm based in the Shard, who were going to provide funds to clear my costs, as well as pro bono legal representation. At the three subsequent hearings they were accompanied by two solicitors and one barrister from said firm. This is when they agreed to a consent order which set out the pathway to end this whole process, including a very final date by which point they needed to meet several terms as set out in that consent order.

The day before that final date, they sacked the very valuable pro bono legal team and submitted a whole new defence and counterclaim against the previously mentioned consent order, and also stated they refused to pay the costs orders too.

Appalling Gav. I hope tomorrow goes well.

I can understand the leniency given the context of forfeiture but you aren't a provider of social housing!

This, and fvck em, they’ve had their chances. It’s just taking the piss now.

It baffles me how wasting police time is a criminal offence but wasting court time isn’t. I’m also amazed that no judge has seen the bullshit they’re spouting and put some sort of a screening committee in place before now at the courts request, rather than your team having to request it