I have just realised I could have sent the letters to a wrong address and that y they r not replying. This is address I have been communicating with them(to request for CCA) in the past and they always reply. I sent the two letters to the below address and they shows delivered and signed for by someone.

BARCLAYCARD HOUSE

P O BOX 5592

NORTHAMPTON

NN4 1ZY

I have just found another address for them which is ......should i resend the letter before action again or carry on with the court claim ?

1234 Pavillion drive

nn4 7sg

Hi Tessy,

You sent your letters to BC and they have signed for them. If they've failed to get them to the right dep't and answer within the deadline you gave, that is their problem.

Do your research, get your POC sorted so it reflects YOUR claim (re chgs older than 6 years, restitutionary int't, Default Notice) and make sure you have it all prepared properly.

Remember, you will sue Barclays Bank PLC t/a Barclaycard.

Ok will get that prepared and get back to you if I need help. Thanks a lot

New POC Barclaycard (N1)

Claim No [ ]

IN THE [xxxxx] county court

BETWEEN

[Mr xxxx xxxx]

Claimant

and

-Barclays Bank PLC t/a Barclaycard

Defendant

PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

1. The Claimant entered into an agreement (“The Agreement”) with the Defendant on or around xx/xx/xxxx, whereby the Defendant was to advance credit facilities to the Claimant under a running credit account, Account no xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx ("The Account").

2. The Agreement essentially consisted of the Defendant providing the Claimant with a credit card (“The Card”) which would allow the Claimant to make purchases and receive cash advances on credit. In return the Defendant was entitled to charge interest at the published rate.

3. The Agreement was a Regulated Agreement for the purposes of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

4. At all material times the contract was subject to the Defendant’s standard terms and conditions which could be varied from time to time.

Summary

5. Throughout the course of the Agreement, the Defendant has added numerous default charges to the Account for the Claimant’s failure to make the minimum payment on the due date and or for exceeding the credit limit and or if a payment is returned. (Full particulars are set out in schedule 2).

6. The default charges were applied in accordance with the standard terms of The Agreement which were:

a) A penalty payable on breach of contract and thus unenforceable: and

b) An unfair term under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (“The Regulations”) and therefore not binding on the Claimant.

7. The Claimant is accordingly entitled to repayment of the sums wrongly added to the Account.

The Charges

8. The standard Terms of the Agreement in substance provided as follows:

(a) The Defendant would provide the Claimant with the Card. The Claimant was entitled to use the Card to make purchases and receive cash advances up to a credit limit (“the Limit”) set by the Defendant. The Defendant could unilaterally change the Limit by giving the Claimant notice in writing.

(b) The Defendant was entitled to charge interest on the purchases and cash advances at the published rate.

© The Claimant was to pay the minimum payment of 3% of the amount owed or £5 (whichever was the greatest) by the due date as notified in the monthly statements.

(d) The default charges Apr xxxx – Jun xxxx were £xx.xx, Aug xxxx – Nov xxxx was £xx.xx & Jun xxxx was £xx.xx.

Penalty

9.The amount of the Charges exceeded any genuine pre-estimate of the damage which would have been suffered by the Bank in relation to the Claimant’s transgressions.

10. In the premises the Charges were punitive and a penalty and thus unenforceable at common law.

The Regulations

11.At all material times the Claimant was a consumer within the Regulations.

13. At all material times the terms of the Agreement providing for the Charges were unfair within regulation 5 of the Regulations in that contrary to the requirement of good faith they caused a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations to the detriment of the Claimant.

14. without prejudice to the burden of proof, the Claimant will refer to the following matters in support of the contention that the terms are to be assessed as unfair as at the time of the conclusion of the Agreement, and of each revision to the Standard Terms.

(1)The terms relating to Charges were standard terms; they would not be individually negotiated.

(2)The Charges were a penalty for breach of contract.

(3)The Charges exceeded the costs which the Bank could have expected to incur in dealing with the exceeding of the credit limit, late payment or returned payment.

(4) Accordingly the Charges were a disproportionate charge incurred by the Claimant for their failure to meet their contractual obligation and thus within the ambit of Schedule 2 (1) (e) of the Regulations and indicative of an unfair term.

(5) As the Bank knew, the Charges were of subsidiary importance to the customer in the context of the Agreement as a whole and would not influence the making of the Agreement.

(6) As the Defendant knew, the Claimant had no means of assessing the fairness of the Charges.

(7) In the premises, the effect of the Charges would be prejudicial to the customer who incurred them, and cause an imbalance in the relations of the parties to the Agreement by subordinating the customer’s interests to those of the Defendant in a way which was inequitable.

15. without prejudice to the burden of proof, the Claimant will contend that the terms’ imposing the Charges are not core terms under regulation 6 of the Regulations and relies on the following matters.

(1) The assessment of fairness does not relate to terms which define the main or core subject matter of the Agreement.

(2) The assessment of fairness does not relate to the adequacy of the price or remuneration as against the goods or services supplied in exchange (in other words, whether or not the relevant services were value for money).

(3) The Charges are correctly described as default charges by the Defendant in the key information provided to new customers.

16. By reason of the said matters the terms were not binding under regulation 8 of the Regulations.

17. The Defendant wrongly applied Charges to the Account totalling some £xxx.xx between xx/xx/xxxx and xx/xx/xxxx. Particulars appear from Schedule 2.

18. On xx/xx/xxxx the Claimant demanded repayment of the sums wrongly applied.

19. The Defendant has not repaid them or any of them.

And the Claimant claims;

(1) A declaration that the sums totalling £xxx.xx have wrongly been applied to the Account. These charges are older than the normal 6 years but are claimed by virtue of s32 (1) c Limitations Act 1980 as per Kleinwort Benson v Lincoln City Council.

(2) Payment of the said sum of £xxx.xx and interest in restitution of £xxxx.xx as per Sempra Metals v Inland Revenue Commissioners.

(3) Interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 24.9% per annum on the amount claimed (daily rate of £x.xx) until judgment or sooner payment.

(4) Court costs of [ xxxx].

I believe that the facts stated in these particulars, comprising of x pages, are true.

Dated

Signed

Do i have to check my terms and conditions for the 8c marked in red. Also, my charges were not up to 6 years ,do i have to inlcude this part at the near bottom in red.

I would appreciate you check if am on the right track. Much Appreciated

Hi Tessy,

Re 8©, your old statements should tell you what you had to pay as a minimum payment.

If, for any reason, you can't find out for sure, I'd put £5 or 5% on the POC.

Re 19(1), if all the charges you are claiming are less than 6 years old, then omit any reference to the Limitation Act and the Kleinwort Benson case.

Thx for that. so where can i get the N1 FORM? should i visit my local small claim court or submit online ?

You should be able to download the N1 from the HMCTS site.

Complete the N1 and make 3 copies of it. Keep a copy and send the original and 2 copies to CCMCC Salford. They'll process the claim and send you back a stamped copy.

We advise doing this as the MCOL process has limited space for your POC's.

Hi, Sorry have been extremely busy over past weeks.

What am i going to tick (Yes or No) to the

Q. Does, or Will your claim include any issues under the Human Right Act 1998 ?

and how will i get a claim NO to put on the form ?

No to Human Rights and the court will fill in the Claim No. as part of the process.

Thank you. How about the Brief details of claim , can i put CHARGES RECLAIM FOR PENALTY CHARGES ?

Hi Tessy,

See here - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?368541-trancyb-vs-Barclaycard&p=4140925&viewfull=1#post4140925

I suggest you go through that thread, and other "BC WON" threads, to see how they went. You'll find pretty much all you need but we're here if you get stuck.

Sorry i have been out of the country for a long period and just submitted my bundle to the court last month. I have received acknowledgement and Barclaycard has agreed to defend their claim and they were given up till the 1st of April to submit their defence.

Below is the letter I received from Barclay today regargarding my Barclaycard and was dated 26/03/2014. What am i suppose to do or should i ignore ?

Barclays Wrote :

I have conduct of your matter and have been investigating your claim.

It has come to my attention that BC account which incurred the charges against which you claimed was sold to third party debt collection agency IDR Finance in May 2012. You receive a Notice of Assignment notifying you of this sale. Barclays therefore do not currently own your account. Consequently Barclays do not have any access to any information regarding your account post May 2012.

In order for us to deal with your claim Barclays will therefore need to purchase your account back from IDR. This will benefit you as you will not owe a debt to IDR finance.

Once we own your account, Barclays can thouroughly investigate your claim and we will need time to purchase your account back to do this.

As you will be aware, Barclays defence will be due on 1st of April 2014. We therefore request you agree an extention of 28 days to file and serve our defence.

I would be grateful if you would respond by close of business day 27 march 2014.

Absolute rubbish - they almost certainly WILL have information post 2012.

I would suggest that you do agree to the extension - if you dont, then they can apply to the court and you could be liable for their costs in the application.

I would be grateful if you would respond by close of business day 27 march 2014.

They want you to respond to a letter the day before you received it ?

If this were me, I would send them email/letter confirming that you have received their request for an extension of time for 28 days (work out the date and enter that).

Point out that you only received the letter/request on the 28th March, so you have been unable to confirm as requested, by the 27th !

Did you keep the envelope this came in ? If you are in a position to retrieve it, I would. It would be interesting to see what type of posting method they used.

So it was dated 26th March, then posted and they wanted you to respond by the 27th.

Thx, sorry i have chucked away the envelope. I have just read their email with respect to the above which was sent also on the 26th. Think i might just reply to that.

Hi Tessy,

To save trawling back through this thread, did you clear whatever debt was assigned to IDR Finance.

As CitB says, agree to the extension as it's not worth contesting. If no debt remains owing to IDR, it will not affect your claim but if any amount is still owed, BC will clear this by Set Off from what they agree to pay you.

The real reason they want to buy back the a/c is NOT to get more recent data - it's to make sure they own the debt again so they CAN Set Off if necessary.

Yes i owe around £540 to IDR and I am claiming £620 + int from BC.

Hi Tessy,

I wonder why BC said you owed nothing to IDR, if you think you owe them £540.

Update the spreadsheet (just open it and the interest should show to the present date) and let us know the current figure shown for compound interest.

I received a letter from Barclays today offerring a full and final settlement of the total amount I claimed £690.

They have requested I sign their letter and complete the Court Notice of discontinuance form.

They did not say anything about removing the default

I asked them to remove on my credit files.

Should I write to them again and not complete the notice of discontinuance form

as I guess if I should complete this and send to court,

they would not remove the default again.

Also, should I accept their offer or wait till everything is concluded befor I sign their own letter ?

Reply to Barclays Litigation saying :-

I refer to your settlement offer of xxdate.

The default marker regarding this account was made up wholly or partly of unlawful penalties charges, Accordingly, all adverse credit markers and default markers need to be removed from the CRA records.

Until this is done, my court action will continue and I will ask the court to resolve such outstanding matters.

If you agree to have the adverse data removed in full, and agree to pay the settlement amount, I will then agree to Discontinuance.

Reply to Barclays Litigation saying :-

 

I refer to your settlement offer of xxdate.

 

The default marker regarding this account was made up wholly or partly of unlawful penalties charges, Accordingly, all adverse credit markers and default markers need to be removed from the CRA records.

 

Until this is done, my court action will continue and I will ask the court to resolve such outstanding matters.

 

If you agree to have the adverse data removed in full, and agree to pay the settlement amount, I will then agree to Discontinuance.

 

Thank you,

I emailed the litigation officer today requesting the above and

I also requested they instruct LInk Financial ltd to remove every data entered by them unto my credit files.

Barclays has got until 28 April to file their defence and they wanted me to discontinue the case tomorrow 25th and post it to the court tomorrow.

Secondly, the litigation officer replied my email saying Yes they will remove any adverse marker placed on my credit file

and that I will receive letter stating this by tomorrow.

Can I write to them again and mention that they will have to remove every data entered by LINK FINANCIAL ?

or will they remove it since they have agreed to remove any adverse marker entry. J

ust want to he sure before I discontinue the case

Hi Tessy,

I would want B's Litigation to agree to "ensure that all credit data regarding this account is removed from CRA's, including those markers placed by Link."

Also, get B's Lit'n to confirm how quickly the refund to you will be made, so you have this in writing.

Barc litigation staff is not in thr office today.

She will be back on monday 28th and their deadline is 28th as well and

they wanted me to post the disc form to court today.

Yes I have a written letter I rec thru post that say they will make the payment within 28 days and

I have an email and an attachment thst say they will remove any adverse data.

She said I will receive a copy letter in post today which I did not receive as I receive my letters for today.

What should I do?

Firstly, will the attachment be enough to back myself up.

Secondly, can I assume they will remove every data entered by LINK

(as i specifically ask for this in the email but was ignored in their reply) as well as the default.

Thirdly, Will I mess up things if I do not send the discontinuance form to court today to meet their deadline

even though it was their fault getting back to me late upon the fact that they had extended for 28 days.

Hi Tessy and please STAY CALM !!

The Barclays Lit'n person is off today and you can bet that she's not running about panicking. She'll be enjoying her day off.

You already have her email agreement to have the adverse data removed but you have every right to wait for the written letter.

You do NOT have to worry about this and Barclays will sort matters as they see fit on Monday. They can either decide to enter a Defence so as not to prejudice their case, or they can ask you to sign a Discontinuance letter once you are happy to sign it.

Don't let this worry you any more - you've done nothing wrong and it'll be sorted in good time.