Thread: If you are Planning to go to County Court read this urgently

Originally Posted by bridle

Hi All,

If you are planning to go to the county court with a PPI claim think very carefully.

Yesterday I took a claim to the Southampton County Court and the judge dismissed my claim, My claim was that i was told i had to have the insurance and that i should never have been sold the insurance due to a pre existing medical condition.

The judge said that if i was unhappy about taking out ppi i should have not signed for the loan and furthur more just because i have a knee injury that would not stop me from claiming if i had a head injury or a coronary etc.. and thrfore the insurance was a product that they could sell to me and my pre existing injury does not stop PPI being appropriate.

He the proceeded to write down the order saying claim dismissed.

Please think very carefully as I was lucky the other side did not want there expenses back even though the judge offered to award them there expenses.

This judge was joke but be careful as if other judges use the same view as mine did you will loose as he made it clear several times that i did not have to sign the agreement as i could have not had the money when i pointed out i was very desperate which is the only reason why i would go with a company that charges such high interest. again he said that was your choice.

Good luck everyone

Wayne

Hello Wayne,

I am so to hear of your disappointing news, do you have leave for appeal perhaps you can discuss your case a bit more, examples may be learned for arguements etc.

What did you put on your POC and what evidence and arguements did you forward:grin:

Hello BC,

After reading this it's put me off reclaiming PPI which Ive just started looking into - as I was self employed I was told that ppi would be needed in order to be approved for the loans.

BC

On no account give up on reclaiming your right to the return of PPI premiums they have been massively mis-sold and the mis-sellers know this

Please keep with your claim and make them prove they are correct and you are not. (If they deny mis-selling then the ball is in their court to prove this fact. If they do not deny mis-selling then the ball is in the county court and the District Judge will make the decision) IMO they will never be able to prove the product was suitable for you as a customer. They can fob off, cover up, mis lead but IMO the sellers will never 100% of the time, be able to say the product was suitable to all customers. Therefore if it was not suitable to all customers it has surely been mis-sold to a lot of customers. YOU could be one of them.

Rant over keep fighting BC

aa

Originally Posted by pt2537

you shouldn't let this put you off, i would say, make sure you prepare fully, get all your skeleton arguments and witness statements correct and make sure your arguments measure up to the bar.

I think it is more important to focus on the effects of misselling on the contract more than the effect it has on you.

Hello Pt,

Thank you for coming over to the PPI forum, god knows we really need a legal perspective on these matters:grin:

Can you please fill us in a little more about the effects of mis-selling the contract. This may help other who are about to issue at court.

I am of the believe that anybody issueing at court, must be able to provide water-tight arguements and relevant case precedents to ensure that they will have a good chance of success.

Can you help us with this in anyway

Could it be that the term "mis-selling" is a bit of a wooly and ambiguous phrase to be used in court?

Perhaps judges need to be convinced using language they can professionally relate to in precise unambiguous legal terms.

Ive come to the conclusion that we need to state the precise contractual reason *why* we believe we should get redress for premiums paid due to the PPI being mis-sold, and interest levied thereon ie: failure of consideration.

(Thanks to pt for pointing me in this direction, BTW!)

Originally Posted by alanalana

Hello BC,



On no account give up on reclaiming your right to the return of PPI premiums they have been massively mis-sold and the mis-sellers know this

Please keep with your claim and make them prove they are correct and you are not. (If they deny mis-selling then the ball is in their court to prove this fact. If they do not deny mis-selling then the ball is in the county court and the District Judge will make the decision) IMO they will never be able to prove the product was suitable for you as a customer. They can fob off, cover up, mis lead but IMO the sellers will never 100% of the time, be able to say the product was suitable to all customers. Therefore if it was not suitable to all customers it has surely been mis-sold to a lot of customers. YOU could be one of them.

Rant over keep fighting BC

aa

Hello AA,

I do hope you have managed to get your blood pressure down

I absolutely support your rant 100%, as I know how hard you have worked on this forum to help, support and guide others who are going through the process of reclaiming back their money taken by deceit. And many cases of this deceit were by companies they trusted

You also know how passionate I feel about helping others, empowering them to reclaim what should never have been taken in the first place. Just look at the successes there have been:grin: Some even via the court.

What we need is a whole re-vamp of the ppi forum, guidence for water-tight pocs for issueing legal proceedings, legal arguements that will stand up in court, guidence regarding witness statements and court bundles. We really need some help over here from a legally minded expert who can advise, guide and support us.

You, me and Painty do our best to keep the forum going and stay positive, and as you know, its hard, to keep ones spirit up, let alone everyone elses, as it can be draining at times. But what do you do, we can't let them away with this.

This post will probably be cabbotted because I am prepared to say, that these financial institutes have conned and robbed their own lives blood, yes their customers for years and when you the average Joe Bloggs, tries to right the severe wrong doing, you get the denial, untruths and then you eventually you get the courage to issue proceeding, meet the judge and he wrongfully rules in their favour. This really wants to make me swear

At least now in the future these financial institutions will not be able to apply these up front single premiums to loans, so that is a positive move for consumers applying for loans in the future:grin:

Therefore, what do we do, we must soldier on regardless

Originally Posted by pt2537

I think that you need to set out your complaint clearly and the authority that supports this view, that way the DJ is not left to use his discretion and come to some half baked conclusion

The problem with "misselling" is that its not a term which judges will be au fait with, now talk about a total failure of consideration and the judge will know what that is and will understand it and its consequences upon the contract

Thanks pt.

You must have posted this up, whilst I was on my rant.

Thank you.

Can you discuss and educate us on the aspect of the failure of consideration please:grin:

Could it be that the term "mis-selling" is a bit of a wooly and ambiguous phrase to be used in court? (In Court possibly yes). My approach as can be seen from my own thread is to go via the fos route who are upholding 80% of claims submitted to them, I have no actual figures on the percentage of Court case successes. I would suggest it may be lower than the FOS results depending on the county court Judges opinions. Please see this......


If you are Planning to go to County Court read this urgently

For a DJ to comment that people claiming PPI refunds are jumping on the PPI bandwagon is truly abhorrent and deserves any derision pointed to him/her for such an off hand remark. The DJ in question is surely not aware of the massive scale of PPI mis-selling as pointed out by the FSA and ICO which has been backed by the resultsy of the findings by the FOS. I believe his ruling should be contested or appealed.

Perhaps judges need to be convinced using language they can professionally relate to in precise unambiguous legal terms. (How does a Litigant in Person do this with very little or no understanding of the County Court procedures and especially in the face of trained legal defence?) Court action as can be seen does not always succeed and incurs addition costs to someone who may be unable to afford the costs of Court action.

Ive come to the conclusion that we need to state the precise contractual reason *why* we believe we should get redress for premiums paid due to the PPI being mis-sold, and interest levied thereon ie: failure of consideration I believe it is failure of the bank staff to be fully trained in establishing the customers requirements. plus the greed to obtain large bonuses by selling products unsuitable for the customer. Yes you can consider their greed and lack of customer concern as a failure of consideration the only consideration where PPI was concerned were the bank staff bonuses attached when they managed to add it on to a loan or credit card or mortgage without disclosing the full costs to the customer. Remember whatever you call it the FSA ( have made large fines ), FOS have upheld 80% of claims on PPI complaints, ICO have been involved where financial institutions have failed to proved the information required of the banks etc under the requests submitted within the Data Protection Act 1998.
Whichever way you look at PPI the product was Mis-sold to the consumer under a number of guises and yes that would inlude a failure of consideration of the appropriate terms of the contracts to the customer big time.

aa

People have won and lost in Court and also won and lost via the FOS. I believe it all depends on the soundness of you complaint and how it is presented. If you have a solid case then fine.