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.
I have now taken them on, having been a cahoot customer since they commenced business. Charges over 6 years with both current account and credit card account amounting to £2033. I recieved the standard fob-off letter, started legal action and they have filed an acknowledgement of service, which gives them until the 21st May to enter a defence. I am determined and will see it through. What can I expect to happen next?
In my case (hanson v cahoot), they sent in a defence, which wasn't really too scary. They then offered me half the claim in the hope that I would settle, which I rejected, saying that I would be preapred to go to court. They then capitulated, saying that the claim amount (£833 in my case) was not enough to warrant them going to court.
I am not sure if they will deem your higher claim justification to turn up to court, though, from what I have read on these pages, it seems doubtful. Hang in there and see what happens.
They sent a lame defence, and offered me 50% to settle.
I have just emailed them a reply
--------------------
Thank you for your letter dated 17th May
I have carefully considered the contents of your letter on behalf of Abbey National plc. and have come to the conclusion that I must reject your offer of £1285.00 in Full and final settlement. For your client to wish to retain 50% of a sum of money taken from my account, in effect 'my money' is wholly unacceptable. However, in light of the exceptional customer service that cahoot have offered me in the past, I would like to make an offer, without prejudice, for settlement of the case. I will accept the sum of £2330, as calculated by your client, plus £120 court fees. I am willing as a gesture of goodwill to waive the interest, which as you well know I am and will be fully entiled to should the case go before a judge. In addition I require an assurance that my acounts with Abbey National plc, trading as cahoot will not be closed.
Should your client decline this very reasonable offer, I will be filling in and returning the allocation questionnaire as soon as I receive it and have absolutely no qualms about taking the matter to Court for a judge to decide the outcome. For your information, I will not be seeking a 1 month postponement of further action so we may have more time to reach settlement.
You ask that I 'consider that it cannot be correct that our client cannot charge anything at all'. My case is based on the fact under law that the charges are a disproportionate penalty and therefore unenforceable as they are contrary to common law. Further, as a disproportionate penalty they are invalid under the Unfair (Contracts) Terms Act 1977 s.4 and under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. Para.8 and sch.2(1)(e). In the event that the charges are not a penalty then they are unreasonable within the meaning of the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 s.15.
Should cahoot decide to bring their charges into line with OFT recommendations it would be welcomed. However I am not aware that cahoot have in fact published an amended menu of charges to reflect your view that they should at least charge something?
It would be interesting, for my information, if you could provide a true indication of Abbey's administrative expenses incurred as a result of me going over my overdraft limit. I realise an organisation of Abbey's standing would have analysed such costs and would appreciate it if you could furnish me with the details. As it stands this morning they still enforce penalties of up to £35 from their customers for the slightest 'transgression'. Given the automated nature of modern banking I'm sure you agree with the OFT that such sums are wholly unacceptable? Forgive me, I am sure that you are fully versed in this matter and you must understand the reluctance of banks to make a defence in court.
Given that this case does not set a legal precedent, the fact that I have offered your client a swift and painless means of avoiding the expense and embarassment of a court case, and the fact that I am waiving my claim to interest, I expect an answer by the close of business on Friday 19th May 2006.
If you have found this post (or any other post) useful ensure you click on the scales in the top right of that post to give credit where credit is due.
As ever, with (I believe most if not) all advice given on this website, I am not qualified to give any advice and you are duly warned that any decisions are your own decisions made on your own account and no liability will be accepted for any advice followed ! Use your own judgment. Seek advice of a qualified, insured, professional if you have any doubts.
Congratulations!!
It may seem then, that if you are prepared to waiver the interest on court claims they might, just might consider paying up. Is this another feather in CAG's cap if this is this case? It is at least an option to consider, if you are willing to forfeit the interest.
Abbey - Prelim sent 17th May £2560.00 + £191.44
LBA sent 1st June
Claim Filed 27th June 3349.90 Inc Interest + Costs
Court Papers Served 3rd July
Claim Acknowledged 10th July
50% Offered 27th July
Settled Out Of Court 1st August £3080.45
Capital One - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) request 31st July
Congratulations!!
It may seem then, that if you are prepared to waiver the interest on court claims they might, just might consider paying up. Is this another feather in CAG's cap if this is this case? It is at least an option to consider, if you are willing to forfeit the interest.
I don't know what would have happened if I'd kept pursuing it but £2330 that I didn't have yesterday was good enough for me. Good luck.
Congratulations!!
It may seem then, that if you are prepared to waiver the interest on court claims they might, just might consider paying up. Is this another feather in CAG's cap if this is this case? It is at least an option to consider, if you are willing to forfeit the interest.
However if you hold out for the interest due they will (IMO) pay that out too... If they didn't want to have to pay the interest they should have settled before you were forced into taking them to court to make them listen to you...
Obviously this does come with a slight risk that they will take it all the way to court, but I can't imagine that once they have made an offer of the full amount that they won't finally cave on the interest too...
If you have found this post (or any other post) useful ensure you click on the scales in the top right of that post to give credit where credit is due.
As ever, with (I believe most if not) all advice given on this website, I am not qualified to give any advice and you are duly warned that any decisions are your own decisions made on your own account and no liability will be accepted for any advice followed ! Use your own judgment. Seek advice of a qualified, insured, professional if you have any doubts.
Apologies dsfit if I've cast any shadows on your success...
If you have found this post (or any other post) useful ensure you click on the scales in the top right of that post to give credit where credit is due.
As ever, with (I believe most if not) all advice given on this website, I am not qualified to give any advice and you are duly warned that any decisions are your own decisions made on your own account and no liability will be accepted for any advice followed ! Use your own judgment. Seek advice of a qualified, insured, professional if you have any doubts.
smith v's Cahoot
with both current account and credit card account amounting to £2033. I recieved the standard fob-off letter, started legal action and they have filed an acknowledgement of service, which gives them until the 21st May to enter a defence
Reply With Quote
Re: smith v's Cahoot
Originally Posted by dsfit
