car2403 -v- GE Capial Bank (Default removal) - Page 4

majorclanger100 · 20th June 2008, 08:34

Thanks Car!!!

car2403 · 4th July 2008, 16:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by car2403

I'm now nibbling at my finger nails to see GE's submission, which I should also receive by 20th. I'm particularly interested in seeing their breakdown of the actual pound amounts that they incurred each time I "paid late", which is specifically mentioned in my reply to their defence. (The original document served on them on 4 June, which is restated here, just in case they missed it)

I now have no fingers left, (I'm writing this with speech recognition software, before you ask!) as GE Money have failed to comply with the first set of directions from the Court. They should have filed their submissions with me by 20th June - they ain't!

Not to worry, as the next set of directions, (which clearly didn't override the first set, BTW) state they need to serve their submissions on me and the Court by 11th July - that's one week away, GE, if you're watching

All I have to do is reprint what I sent to them on 20 June and send that to the Court by 11 July, then wait out the final hearing date of 25 July, when GE will be forced to show the actual amounts they incurred when they applied the default charges to the account.

Not long to wait now, then...

IdaInFife · 5th July 2008, 18:28

Just subbing and as may have to go down similar path.

Well done so far and with you adding ur bits i can understand whats going on

and help others like me

Good Luck

idax

car2403 · 5th July 2008, 19:46

They always try to overly complicate matters, Ida - it's their way of confusing you with jargon and legal mumbo-jumbo, in the hope that you will curl up and die.

It's obvious to me that they don't really know how to behave when you offer a decent defence, (or go the extra mile and take action against them, such as I have, rather than waiting for them to take it against you) that much is evident in all my threads.

"Knowledge is power" - that has never been more apt than when looking through CAG.

If you are prepared to put some hard work in to understand the, actually quite simple, legal arguments, you are on a winner, IMHO.

Now all I need to do is wait these next 2 weeks out, along with the rest of you, to see how this one turns out.

Interesting, isn't it?

Goldlady · 5th July 2008, 19:53

Car are you coming to the Newcastle meet? There is a thread about it somewhere if you haven't found it yet? Aug 16th.

IdaInFife · 5th July 2008, 19:56

Too true.

Next and JD willaims cannot produce a CCA but won't remove any details on my CF even tho 1 account i have never even used as I didn't req it. nO issues with balance or payment or charges (oredered and paid in full at time of order). Why don't they just remove the blooming stuff. It's no skin of their nose.

Once i have dealt with them

then BG is next. I have a default for ...wait for it......... £31 than I didn't even know was due. As soon i knew about it 2 weeks ago, i paid it but will kick them around until they remove it!!!!

Why make life so hard???

Just trying to clean up my CF as hoping to apply for a mortgage next year as my bubba is starting school after holidays and will be working full time and my unpaid ccj (which i could get removed but due to drop off in dec) will disappear this year.

Why oh why oh why

watching you with interest :o

ida x

car2403 · 5th July 2008, 23:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goldlady

Car are you coming to the Newcastle meet? There is a thread about it somewhere if you haven't found it yet? Aug 16th.

Typical! I'm working away right now and won't be back for 16th.

Goldlady · 5th July 2008, 23:24

Oh shame, but there will no doubt be another one. It is 16th August not July BTW - are you away all that time?

car2403 · 6th July 2008, 11:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goldlady

Oh shame, but there will no doubt be another one. It is 16th August not July BTW - are you away all that time?

Yup - only back 1 day a week until October

car2403 · 17th July 2008, 08:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by car2403

I now have no fingers left, (I'm writing this with speech recognition software, before you ask!) as GE Money have failed to comply with the first set of directions from the Court. They should have filed their submissions with me by 20th June - they ain't!

Not to worry, as the next set of directions, (which clearly didn't override the first set, BTW) state they need to serve their submissions on me and the Court by 11th July - that's one week away, GE, if you're watching

All I have to do is reprint what I sent to them on 20 June and send that to the Court by 11 July, then wait out the final hearing date of 25 July, when GE will be forced to show the actual amounts they incurred when they applied the default charges to the account.

Not long to wait now, then...

Despite me fully complying with all Court Orders, GE now have failed to comply in return. This just isn't acceptable.

They now have failed to pre-disclose their case in defence of my claim, which they should have done before 20 July. They have also failed to pre-disclose the documents they intend to rely on at the trial, which they should have done before 11 July.

Tsk, tsk, GE...

I think there'll be a nice little email going of to Salans today, with a scanned copy of all Court Orders they have failed to comply with, seeking an explanation and asking them to comply within 7 days.

The hearing is next Friday - 25 July.

I won't be bothering contacting the Court about all this. I'll just turn up on the day, ask the Court to award Judgment for me, as they haven't complied with the Courts orders, and pointing out that they failed to comply and had several of these nudge letters from me. There can be no excuse for not complying. I also don't want the Court to consider re-ordering disclosure directions, especially given GE's dispicable behaviour in this case so far, as that will extend the amount of time it takes to deal with all this.

Ho hum...

car2403 · 20th July 2008, 14:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by car2403

I think there'll be a nice little email going of to Salans today, with a scanned copy of all Court Orders they have failed to comply with, seeking an explanation and asking them to comply within 7 days.

The hearing is next Friday - 25 July.

Still nothing from GE yet, so they haven't posted what they should have to me - I'm not surprised.

I don't intend to let up on them this week, so there's now a statement of my costs incurred in bringing/litigating this claim against them going off Special Delivery. Costs total £275, which is a modest amount, IMHO, to claim as a LIP. Add that amount to the £1k damages, (relying on the Kpohraror case) plus Court costs of £150, and the claim now stands at £1,425. All this because GE won't negotiate on the Default removal issues.

Remember that they refunded the charges applied to the account, in response to me bringing this claim against them, then tried to Default me again, without the charges being included in the Default balance. Very sneaky! It shows what lengths they will go to, doesn't it? Good thing I was on to them and paid the balance off within the timeframe allowed by the Default Notice! I can't wait to see how they rely on their amended defence, (which they will have to, as they haven't submitted any documents under the Courts Directions, should they even turn up on Friday!) on the basis that the original Default was accurate since they've virtually agreed that it wasn't by their actions - but still haven't removed the Default!

In fact, while I was working my schedule of costs out, I've sent them 5 offers of settlement since the claim was started. All of which have more beneficial terms for them than I'm claiming. I'm sure the Judge will have to agree that I've been more than lenient on this one!

Roll on Friday, then...

car2403 · 25th July 2008, 07:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by car2403

Roll on Friday, then...

Well, Friday is here, so I'm off to Court in a tick! :o

I can't wait really - excited to see what happens now they seem to have blown their own case apart!

mcuth · 25th July 2008, 08:17

Good luck matey - hope all goes well - can't wait to see your update later

Cheers
Michael

car2403 · 25th July 2008, 12:30

Okey dokey, I'm back. Took 2 hours, but here's the outcome;

The Judge summed it up like this;

The agreement provided by GE Money was just the first page which he hauled them over the coals about - "don't you know CPR requires original documentation to be produced at Court?" - the solicitor rumbled on about how GE can't store originals and this is a certified copy, which has the signatures on. The Judge asked where the rest of it was - the reply was that this was page 1 of 4 and that the original wasn't "reproduceable for Court", (which means they don't have it) so they produced a newer one, that was a completely different layout to mine and tried to pass it off as being "similar". I asked the question and they couldn't ask - the Judge just raised an eyebrow when they admitted they can't provide the other 3 pages.

Looks promising at this stage?

The Judge then said, "putting all this to one side", (you what?) that the agreement was improperly executed because it wasn't dated, so it was unenforceable under the CCA. He added that a Court Order would be needed to enforce the agreement, even though GE hadn't applied for one as the weren't seeking to enforce it, in Court. In his opinion, as I had made payments under the agreeement that met with it's terms, despite my argument that I was prejudiced by enforcement, (unlawful Default - see more later - and charges applied, etc) the Court would have Ordered the agreement be enforced if they were asked to do so.

Not so promising now?

Looking at the Default Notice, he decided a Default Notice is not a form of enforcement under the CCA - it's a precursor to seeking enforcement, but doesn't amount to an enforcement action, despite my argument. In any case, the default exists under the agreement, despite it being unenforceable without a Court Order, as the contract still exists, so GE was right to issue the Default Notice.

On a slippery slope now, right?

Looking at the charges applied, the question of whether they are penalties was dismissed because of the OFT Test Case on Bank Charges. The Court wasn't prepared to question the fairness of the charges, as that was part of the "price" for applying them, which was agreed in the original agreement. This despite the terms relating to charges being on one of the "missing" pages - "GE wouldn't have made such a mistake in constructing their agreements", the Judge mentioned. When I mentioned that the charges were unfair because I wasn't aware of them, that was dismissed as well. He did admit that the fairness of the amount of the charge could be questioned, but that would still have to be decided - he mentioned that the OFT uses £12 as a reasonable fee, so £15 probably would also be reasonable. Despite all this, though, he did decide that there was a possibility that the charges were unfair, so the Judgment takes that in to account.

Light at the end of the tunnel?

Back to the Default Notice and he agreed that Woodchester -v- Swaine applied and that the balance outstanding was

CAG Products - We think that these will help you to make your claim or Reclaim your Right These sales also help us to keep helping YOU and keeps this site free of third party adverts!

Small Claims Kit	Small Claims Court Guide	CallBurner - Skype CallRecorder Review	Last Will & Testament Kit	Fight a Motoring Ticket

Alternatively you could purchase a CAG email address here, or maybe you'd prefer our address labels here
UPDATE: Consumer Forums ConsumerWiki is now LIVE - click here: ConsumerWiki N.B. Please note - due to postage costs these products are only available in the U.K.