Egg counterclaim - Egg on their face?

[BankFodder]

After the court received an admission to a counterclaim by Egg, Egg are now trying to backtrack and are trying to withdraw the counterclaim!!! Surpise surprise.

More evidence that Egg in common with the othe banks and suported by their legal advisors are merely using the court process as a means of intimidation.

If Egg is reading this - you will soon see that the courts will start cottoning on to this systematic abuse of the court service.

Isn't it what is familarly known as "vexatious litigation"? Bang to rights, I would say.

[BankFodder]

This is the letter which says it all.
We don't know what the judge will say. maybe he will go ahead with the adjournment - it's not important. What is important is that he will understand more about Egg and the issues n general.

FAO District Judge
Urgent High Priority

Claim no. 6BRO2396 Yasmin V. Egg Banking Plc
Scheduled hearing date. 9th August, 2006

Dear Sir/Madam,

I have just received a telephone call to inform me that tomorrows hearing has now been adjourned at the request of the defendant.
I would like to put on record my great objection to this adjournment.
This case has been in progress since 04 April this year.
The defendants were in fact warned that a court action might follow from February this year.
The defendants have constantly conducted their dialogue and their subsequent litigation with me in a disorganised and shabby way.
Despite the fact that they are a large extremely well resourced British financial institution with unfettered access to the very best legal advice and representation that can be afforded whilst I am merely an unemployed single parent with no experience of this kind of thing trying to do her best. The defendants are fully aware of all the issues involved in this case. There are no complicated questions to be decided. It all turns on the simple question as to whether the defendants penalty charges merely cover their costs or whether their charges exceed their costs and make profits- All the law is well established for over 100 years and has been reinforced by the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations, 1998.
The defendants are a credit card company. The Office of Fair Trading investigated the charges of credit card companies for two years and in May of 2006, concluded that all of their penalty charges were unenforceable at law.
As I have pointed out there are no complicated issues here and frankly I am astonished that the defendants have had the front to sign a statement of truth on their defence.
I have kept to all the litigation deadlines set by the court. I have even supplied the defendants with my bundle of documents, over 14 days ago but I have received nothing from them. The defendants claim that they have had not enough time to prepare themselves yet they did find the time to harass me with distressing phone calls which only stopped after I complained to the court.
At one point the defendants even attempted to mislead the court by writing a letter, about a month ago, claiming that I had agreed to an adjournment-when I had agreed no such thing.
I would respectfully ask the court to agree with me that this last minute request by the defendant is an attempt to ambush the court and myself with what will amount to a de facto adjournment. It was clear that a month ago they were already fully aware of the timescales involved.
On the matter of the counterclaim I am astonished that the defendants are now saying they did not realise that the counterclaim was still active.
The court may be aware that there are presently a flood of county court cases against banks and credit card companies all on the issue of penalty charges. I am able to give the court a list of about eight hundred cases with their claims reference numbers. None of these go to court. The banks settle every one. I can provide the court with a list of about three hundred cases including claims reference numbers which have often gone as far as an allocation questionnaire, and yet have all been settled by the banks.
The fact is that neither the defendant nor the other banks are serious litigants. They are merely using the court process in an abusive way to intimidate the legitimate claimants into giving up all together or into accepting reduced payments.
The defendant routinely includes this standard counterclaim with every defence they file. Its effect is to frighten legitimate claimants-they do not expect to receive an admission by way of response to the defence and they at no time have ever intended to submit their costings to the scrutiny of the court for a true assessment of their costs despite what it says to the contrary in their counterclaim.
I would respectfully suggest to the court that if their request for an adjournment is allowed and if the defendants are allowed to withdraw their counterclaim that the defendants will merely breathe a sigh of relief, settle the matter and go on to try the same tactics against other customers.
I would certainly venture to suggest that if it were the claimants who were using these tactics the court would very quickly deem them to be vexatious litigants: Are defendants exempt from being considered as vexatious?
I would respectfully point out that the courts are being used as a mere tool of get avoidance by the banking industry and I would request the court not to allow this to be the case.
If the court is minded to award the adjournment, I would respectfully request that the court order that the defendants are given leave to defend on all issues, only on condition that they make standard disclosure. (However, I can guarantee that this will ensure the discontinuance of the action by the defendants very rapidly!)


Yours sincerely,

[Tobes]

YES YES YES!! I KNEW Egg were pussies! Thsi is fantastic...It shows that they were bluffing all along, but that they were willing to take it a bit further than most banks...However, that is their downfall because now they're in a corner!

It's really quite pathetic.

Bankfodder, well done for this; do you think I should send a similar letter to my court stating that I'm aware that Egg is being seriously naughty and pulling out at the last minute, if they request an djournment in this case please do not permit it? I'll CC it to Egg as well...Hmm, I might actually phone them up tee hee

Yasmin!! Come and gloat!!

[un1boy]

Bring it on - that is great!!!!

Any progress?

[BankFodder]

Tobes, did Egg countercalim against you?


========================= ==
By the way, I have just heard from Yasmin that Egg have been ordered into court tomorrow.

[Karnevil]

Fantastic. I really really hope they show up. What happens if they pay Yasmin on the court steps - is ordering them into court enough to ensure they actually try and defend her claim ?

They really are in a corner now. Well done !

[Tobes]

Yup, bankfodder, they've counterclaimed against me exactly as they did against Yasmin - they want my card balance and their actual costs if blah blah blah...I also got a snotty letter saying they were certain of victory because of some Bankers Act (18xx) etc etc but they would remove the counterclaim (as long as I paid for it) if I ended the claim and paid off the full balancei n instalments, less the fees-£16, the OFT amount...

[Tobes]

I'm afraid before my driving lesson I phoned up that St Clare Nelson legal counsel guy and left a snotty message on his direct answerphone!

'I shall be writing to the court to make sure that you do not apply for an adjournment at the last minute, your bluff has failed, see you in court' or some such lol I couldn't help myself, sorry

[lee6370]

I would assume that they can just pay up and slid away, i hope i wrong but even if they do, it'll make them think twice next time.

[Tobes]

Or it could turn into that Stephen v Abbey case where they paid him thousands more not to take it to court - not exactly sure how he swung that!

I mean, if they come and ask to settle on the court steps, and you say no, I don't see how that could get you into trouble - it's ridiculous to await the last minute and expect settlement, you've made the claimant come all the way to the court and prepare all the papers etc etc

[Karnevil]

I agree it would be very unfair of the court to accept the withdrawal of the claim at the very last minute. I assume Yasmin has some support going to court with her ? It must be quite scary.

[Tobes]

A couple of us offered but she hasn't got back to us yet so I'm not sure if she will have any support present!

[Tobes]

Bankfodder, your post in General is entitled 'Egg ordered to Court' - is that true? Or is that merely what we want to happen?

[Karnevil]

Originally Posted by BankFodder

========================= ==
By the way, I have just heard from Yasmin that Egg have been ordered into court tomorrow.

...

[Tobes]

Was that there before?! That tricksy double line played with my brain and made it invisible! Or something

<slinks away>

[Tobes]

ok, here's another one

Bankfodder, what is the strategy now? Yamin will go to court tomorrow and fight the claim as prepared? Or dso you think Egg will cave in...If then, can any pressure be brought to bear? Or must she just accept to settle...Or can she demand the hearing? Or ask for above and beyond what she's owed/claiming for?

What would you do, oh Nemesis of the banking industry?

[un1boy]

Call me thick but whats all this talk of yasmin? who is she? lol.

also, does this mean the court will stay other claims?

[BankFodder]

The court phined this afternoon and ordered both partiues to attend court.
Frankly I doubt that it will be a hearing but I do expect that there will be a rap on the knuckles for Egg and the judge will give directions if he is minded to.
We shall see.

I am sure that the judge must have been impressed by the letter or else he would not have refused the adjournment.

It will not mean the stay of other claims.
yasmin will be on her own but she is confident.


========================= ============
Anyone who receives the standard counterclaim from Egg shoujld admit it and then ask for the assessment of actual costs which Egg have offered.
Of course this is a bluff by Egg. Someone there has been very stupid and it is clear that it was intended merely to frighten legitimate claimants.

Goodness knows how many people have given up because of it.
Anyone who has and who reads this please contact me about trying again.

Tobes, what did you do about the