Written by John Kruse, one of the leading experts on Bailiff Law, this consumer friendly guide is essential reading for anyone who comes into contact with a bailiff.
The book is easy to understand and clearly explains the rights
a bailiff has, and also what they cannot do when collecting debts and repossessing goods etc.
Another new member for the 'Brian Smith Fan Club' ! He's certainly got the right initials for it hasn't he
Anyway, I've just received what seems to be the now standard reply from
Mr BS, offering the difference between £12 and the various fees charged on my account. Obviously, this is not acceptable so I'm about to file my court claim - but wondered if I need to amend anything on the templates in view of recent events with Lickthewallfatboy ?
The letter also states:
'In a recent court case involving my client, Joeblow v Citi, the fairness of the above policy and the fairness of the £12 charges was raised. The case was dismissed and the court implicitly held that the policy was fair and the charges reasonable, being in line with both the OFT guidance and common law principles of damage for breach of contract. Citi does not wish to enter litigation with it's customers but will do so if necessary to discourage speculative and ill conceived cases founded on a misunderstanding of the OFT report. with the benefit of this judgement behind it, Citi will continue to deal with claims in the manner outlined above'
From reading through the threads I know a few people are getting replies along these lines (Bookwork - I'm also going to write to the various bodies about it !!), and I'm wondering if I should stick anything in my claim about it?
Anyone with any advice or suggestions, please chip in. And if there is anything that can't be posted feel free to PM me.
Citicards have over 50 claims now they are dealing with apparently. It came up at my hearing on Monday.
Abbey - Claim 1 full hearing 22 Feb 07 - Settled in full £710
Abbey (Claim 2) full hearing 22 Feb 07- Settled in full £4000
Abbey (Claim 3) Court date 27 June -
Capital One (claim 1) £467 Settled in full 20 Sep
Capital One (claim 2) £72refunded 19 Aug
Associates (Citicards)
claim 8 Aug/judgment by default 30 Aug/set aside hearing 9 Oct/Stay denied, ordered by Judge to reveal breakdown of charges andfull hearing 24 May/FULL DISCLOSURE ORDERED BY 8 MARCH/JUDGE TO STRIKE OUT DEFENCE AS NON-COMPLIANCE/DEFENCE STRUCK OUT PAYMENT IN FULL REQUIRED IN 14 DAYS
They are going to busy boys and girls then running up and down the country to all these local courts, all those travel costs, legal costs, etc, looks like Mr Smiths letters have put off no one.
And all that 8% interst of those claims must be a fair whack, why dont they just pay they will in the end.
regards
adamski
Lloyds TSB (SARS) request sent 9th June 2006
£2191 Moneyclaim Issued 11/08/2006, Acknowleded 17th August Defence 14 Sep, AQ returned 5/10/2006.SETTLED IN FULL £2,670 26/11/2006/ Lloyds Credit Card SETTLED IN FULL £267 MBNA SETTLED IN FULL 15/09/2006 £829 Citicard (SARS) request sent 22nd June 2006 Moneyclaim issued 19th Sep, Defence and AQ received 5/10/2006, AQ returned 5/10/2006, part refund received 10/10/2006
GE MONEY SETTLLED IN FULL £400
Barclaycard Me and Mrs SARS sent 19/10/2006 settled £350
Welcome Finance PPI 2 accounts one settled £1018 waiting on other
GE Money PPI 1 account settled 8/5/2008 £560 2nd account SETTLED IN FULL £3,599.78p 15thAugust 2008
Lloyds TSB PPI CC complaint sent 10/04/2008
Black Horse PPI with FOS 20/05/2008
HFC PPI complaint sent 22/05/2008
Abbey - Claim 1 full hearing 22 Feb 07 - Settled in full £710
Abbey (Claim 2) full hearing 22 Feb 07- Settled in full £4000
Abbey (Claim 3) Court date 27 June -
Capital One (claim 1) £467 Settled in full 20 Sep
Capital One (claim 2) £72refunded 19 Aug
Associates (Citicards)
claim 8 Aug/judgment by default 30 Aug/set aside hearing 9 Oct/Stay denied, ordered by Judge to reveal breakdown of charges andfull hearing 24 May/FULL DISCLOSURE ORDERED BY 8 MARCH/JUDGE TO STRIKE OUT DEFENCE AS NON-COMPLIANCE/DEFENCE STRUCK OUT PAYMENT IN FULL REQUIRED IN 14 DAYS
Sorry for the delayed reply - main fuse blew and it's taken me a couple of days to figure out how to repair it . DOH !!
In reply to your question, the account is still open sort of - I haven't got a card and I haven't used the account since 2001 , but as I had a balance of about £3,000 I still owe them £2,230 even though I've paid them £75 a month or more religiously since then (including several one off payments of a few hundred quid !). Until I joined this site I had no real comprehension of interest rates etc, and I can't believe how much I've actually paid these people due to their exorbitant rates (27.9% on my card !!)
Fortunately, a few months on this site has made me realise that I need to understand a lot more about the way I, (and other people !!), handle what little money I've got. So hopefully I'll come out of this a lot wiser as well as a bit better off...
Give this letter a shot and issue your claim. The template is fine no need to alter it.
Dear xxxx
Account no xxxxx
Thank you for your letter dated xxx along with your offer of XXX. I accept this offer in accordance to with my duty to mitigate my loss as partial satisfaction of my claim. However, I must inform you that I fully intend to continue my claim for the full amount.
In accepting this part payment, I am in no way consenting to any variation in terms of the contract. I note that no variation of the terms in the contract can be conducted by yourselves unless 30 days notice in writing is granted as per clause 30.1 of the terms and conditions of the contract.
I am aware of the case of joe bloggs v. Citi, but understand that as a small claims case in Northern Ireland it will have no authority in any proceedings issued by myself. I am also aware that a district judge has also advised yourselves that it can not be relied on in any proceedings. I also understand that the case is subject to appeal.
I would also like to point out that whilst the OFT report was instrumental in alerting me to the fact that I can claim the return of unlawful penalty charges, it in no way forms the basis of my claim nor indeed could it as it has no legal force. To remind you, my claim is based entirely on statute and common law in that the regime of charges you have applied to my account represent unlawful penalties for breach of contract following the principles set out in Dunlop v New Garage. They also represent an unfair term under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 Paragraph 1(e) of Schedule 2 provides that a term “requiring any consumer who fails to fulfil his/her obligation to pay a disproportionately high sum by way of compensation” may be unfair. Furthermore any term requiring a consumer to indemnify your loss may also be regarded as unfair under s.4 of the Unfair Contracts Terms Act 1977 where the court considers it to be unreasonable.
As you have clearly failed to respond to my intial request in either providing a breakdown of the costs to which you have been put to as a result of my breaches in contract, nor repaid the sum in full I shall be issuing a claim forthwith.