Jump to content

moneyproblem

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    235
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

51 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. update. here is the reply i rec'd from orange I want to send a reply back, but i don't want to give away too much of my case... is that a legit concern? can someone look at my reply and advise? thanks in advance
  2. excellent. thank you very much for the info. i'll keep this thread updated when I get a response. cheers
  3. Hi Rebel, We've sent a formal letter (email) of complaint. we sent it to Mr Swantee who is the chief exec of EE, and we rec'd a reply from his assistant. At first they weren't willing to do anything except offer a payment plan which would extend our contract by at least a year. We pushed harder and they offered to reduce the charges by half, which we didn't agree to as we should've been contacted and the rate for the charges are no where to be found in the t&c. We offered to pay the monthly price plan amount, as that is the only rate/figure found on the agreement and they can't charge at an arbitrary rate as the contract doesn't say they can do that. They refused that offer and will only go so low as half the charges (plus tax of course). Our discussion has pretty much come to an end, we asked for the deadlock letter. They promised to send it, and have not (that was weeks/a months ago). This is where we're at currently... Should I send a LBA? Incidentally, just received our recent bill, which has a refund of £12.43 on it. We have no idea what its for. Gonna call them and find out. I'm hoping they have done it in regards to us not having any services despite the fact that we've paid. Then they would have officially shown that they agree that we should receive a refund for not having access to the service.
  4. Hi fellow CAGers, its been a long time. I've gotten all my finances in order and thought I would be free until I ran into a problem with Orange. I've had a mobile phone contract for about 3-4 years. I've always paid by direct debit, and my bill has never reached even £60. At the end of June this year, I received a bill for over £300 Orange allowed me to go over my plan by 700 minutes plus. I contacted them on the same day I rec'd my bill, and asked them why they didn't they inform me that I had gone over my plan. They said that they don't do that and that its my responsibility to keep track of my calls. I told them that I've never even had bill for £60 moreover £300. I told them that I have also previously rec'd texts from orange stating that they do periodically look at how much I'm paying. I asked them that it would not be feasible for me to pay it. And I was told that they can't provide any help until the debt goes to the collection teams. I asked if I could upgrade my plan to have unlimited calls and text messages. They said yes, and told me that the upgrade would start at the end of July. I paid the portion of the bill that I didn't dispute. Within two weeks I was partially barred. My account was unbarred at the end of July, as per the start of the new plan. I paid the new plan on time, and within 2 weeks, my line was partially barred again. Paid September's bill on time, paid October's bill on time On October 1st, the account with fully barred. Throughout this time, I've been having phone (I've recorded all of these) and email conversation stating that both T-Mobile and EE contact their customers when they are close to their limit (via a text) and I've found news quotes from Orange representatives stating that they do contact their customers. I was going to take them to the Ombudsman, but even though I requested the deadlock letter multiple times, and have been promised it, it was never sent. I'm considering taking them to court for the 2.5-3 months of charges for no service, even though I was paying. And for charging an arbitrary rate that is no where to be found in my contract. I agree that they are owed money for the extra minutes, even though I don't like the fact that I wasn't notified at all given the bill has skyrocketed more than 4 times my plan. The money I believe they are owed is what is stated in the price plan, another month payment which covers the 700 plus minutes. There is no "extra minute" charge found anywhere in the contract. Not only that, during this entire time, I've rec'd two calls from orange sales people offering another line, and one orange sales person actually offering to update my account again, for cheaper than the price plan offered in June. I read that the CCA doesn't govern them, but saw someone post link a to WHICH regarding mis-selling and Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, can I also use the UTCCR? My goal is to pay what is contractual and get my phone number back, which they are currently holding ransom. Can anybody offer any help/guidance?
  5. Updated...So, finally got around to filling the form out to set aside judgement & i decided to withdraw my claim - sent this to the court in jan 30 rec'd form back from court the next week in feb saying they needed more information, which i sent back on the same day. So the court has had the application since the third week in february the latest. received another letter from the solicitors in april - saying that they are filling to have the judgement set aside and are seeking costs (over £1k + application fee). I emailed them back stating that I had already applied for the judgement to be set aside and for the claim to withdrawn some time ago. They pretty much blew me off - now addressing me as a debtor I already know that only a court can award costs, so i'm not really bothered by that. A hearing date has been set to decided whether or not to have the judgement set aside and the claim withdrawn - 25 October - shocked. I don't know why the hearing is so far away. In the mean time I would like to ask for recommendations as to what to do next? I don't see why i should pay costs for the following reasons: 1. CC took it upon themselves to hire solicitors. They could've wrote to me themselves highlighting my error and requesting me to withdraw my claim and set aside the judgement. 2. Since I didn't actually take them to court, there is nothing for them to defend a) I have noticed that they have changed to case name from Moneyproblem v Citi Group Centre to Moneyproblem vs Citi Financial - i didn't change the claim at all, so i'm sure they're not allowed to do this. Is it possible to have their application struck out because they've addressed the wrong defendant in the claim? Shouldn't my application for set aside and withdrawal take priority over theirs seeing as how mine was with the court from february? (i called the court and found out that they didn't actually enter my application into the system until around the 3 week of march, and they did the solicitors the very next day - which doesn't seem right). What are my options? Any help would be appreciated - thanks in advance
  6. It depends actually. It depends on the judge's view, your arguments against c1's arguments, how well you can convnce the judge, and your evidence (case law, etc.). Some judges might even bypass the limitaton act as a matter of principle if you can convnce them on everything else (like my judge was considering doing). t would get struck out. The reason being is that the litigation clauses that state that if the defense has not answer a point asserted by the plaintiff, that they have then, by omission, have agreed that its true. So, if we make a claim against c1 and say reason 1, 2 & 3 - and c1's defense is against 1, and says nothing about 2 & 3 - then c1 have actually conceeded those points as being true as they've said nothing against it. I'n my claim against c1, their defense all the way up until 2 days before the court date, had absolutely nothing to do with my claim. C1 were given ample time to see and understand the claim I was making against them, and chose not to defend against it at all. If I knew about striking out defenses I could've easily gottn it strike out as it didn't pertain to my claim and pretty much was a waste of the court's time.
  7. just a quick note, when you make the court claim, and c1 puts in their defense - if their defense doesn't pertain to your claim or doesn't answer every point of your claim - file for the court to throwout their defense and make a judgement against them a defendant must answer every part of the claim intheir defense i didnt know this until a week or so before my court date - had i'd known - i would have filed and had a pre-hearing which would've gone in my favour.
  8. i'm glad costs weren't awarded as well a lot of people have been saying that I should appeal, but since no money was lost, i'm not gonna make a big issue out of it. i'm taking it as a learning experience for any future litigation. the barrister wasn't from Henderson Chambers - although, i don't know where she was from
  9. Hi Everyone, sorry for the delay in getting back. After the case I just needed a break from it all. Well, we lost. However, c1 lost as well. My charges were £180 (most of which were statute barred). I was asking for over £2k in restitution. C1 made a counter claim for their costs, which was also over £2k I could not convince the judge on any points at all. I couldn't convince him on concealment, mistake, or even that the c1 couldn't hide behind s.6.2. The court case was scheduled for 2 hours, and last for abour 2 1/2 - 3 hours. With all of that, the judge didn't allow c1 counter claim. The barrister was trying to say that the case was frivilous, the judge said he didn't think it was. The judge also complimented us on our court bundle (which was over 300 pages). He also complimented us on the sheer amount of research we did in regards to the claim. He also complimented us on, what he saw, as having a very firm grasp of the all the laws and issues involved, and he said that we were one of the very few lips that he'd seen provide such high detailed evidence and arguments, etc, etc. (too bad that didn't make us win) So, even though we lost, at least we are not worse off than when we started, which i'm happy about. The barrister didn't look happy that she didn't get awarded costs, but who cares Where It Went Wrong 1. I think the main place it went wrong was that the judge didn't read anything. So all the legal arguments presented in our court bundles, the witness statement, judgements in other cases, etc. He didn't familiarise himself with any of it. I do think that if he did, that we would have had a better chance. 2. The judge fully admitted that this claim is one that, he felt, would take days if he were to look carefully and scrutinize all the arguments and evidence, and that there is a lot of information to take in. But again, he didn't read anything at all until the case was underway and he had to. 3. As it was my first time in court, I don't think i did a good job presenting and proving my case. There were a lot of things that i wanted/needed to say, and i didn't get/take the chance to say them. In regards to my legal arguments, a lot of them were actually lengthy quotes that proved/showed my point. Although he did read some of the paragraphs, he didn' read the majority of them, and it was necessary to do so 4. The judge did not agree with the UTCCR. As far as he was concerned, its not "law" as such. He saw it as european consumer "law" versus english contract law, and he upheld the english contract law. Again, i believed I had proof from previous judgements that upheld both laws and specified what was what, but he didn't read it, and I didn't present it correctly. Limitation Act The barrister was trying to get the case over ad done with quickly by asking that the judge deal first and foremost with the limitation issue. If I can't postpone the limitation than my claim should be dismissed. The judge took a different view and wanted to hear the entire case. So it looked like if I could prove that the charges were unjstly penal, and unenforceable, and that they are not protected by s6.2, that he would postpone the limitation even if I couldn't give a valid reason (at least that's what it looked like). Concealment I could not prove a fact of concealment. The judge said that c1 are under no obligation to tell me about the utccr, and its the same thing with the oft 2006 report, and any reason as to why they reduced their fees. Even though I did have in my notes to say that c1 actually conceald the nature of the charges in their letters to me, i didn't get/take the chance to say it. Mistake When I received the barrister's skeletal arguments on saturday, I noticed that they did go after the kleinwort benson case law, but saying that it specifically pertains to mistake in law, and my case is not about a mistake in law. I showed the judge that although kleinwort benson is mainly about a mistake in law, that there is a lengthy (very lengthy) discussion about what is a mistake, and the bearing this has on unjust enrichment and restitution. The judge agreed with my stance in regards to kleinwort benson and that it showed that there is no distinction between mistake in fact or law, when dealing with unjust enrichment and restitution. The problem was, however, that it was lengthy. A lot of information that supported/proved my claim was found in the entire length, that was not read by the judge. And even though I continuously tried to bring him back to it for him to read, I wasn't successful in getting him to do so. So, let's say that there was about 20 - 30 paragraphs i felt necessary for the judge to read in order for him to see why i'm able to claim payment in mistake (its in Lord Hope's judgement btw, if you want to read it). The judge only read 3-7 paragraphs. I do believe that if he read all the paragraphs i pointed to, that he would have agreed to the postponing the limitation. But he didn't So, because of those reasons, the charges remained statute barred. But again, he wanted to hear the entire case regardless if the charges were statute barred, to the annoyance of the barrister. Penalties??? I did convince the judge that the charges were penal, but i couldn't prove that it was unjustly so, as per the utccr. The reason I couldn't prove they were unjustly penal (i.e. disproportionate), is because c1 hid behind s6.2., and they pointed to oft v abbey to prove it. I knew they would do this and I too pointed to oft v abbey to disprove their claim, because in the supreme judgement ruling they discussed another previous supreme court case (oft v first national bank), that showed that not everyhing was protected by s6.2. They went into detail as to what was and what wasn't. What wasn't protected are charges for the breach itself. What was protected were services. s6.2. (in a nutshell) is that you can't complain about the cost of goods or service (i.e. you can't complain about the remuneration of those things). I said to the judge that in the oft v abbey case, they specifically talked about what the issue was. They weren't discussing any charges for the overdraft itself, but charges for the services provided for when the person was in overdraft. For example, when i'm in credit, if i write a cheque, the bank doesn't charge me for it. If i'm in unauthorised overdraft, the bank will charge me for the cheque. The service that they were requesting remuneration for is the cheque, not the overdraft facility. In my case, its specifically about the breach of contract. No service is being provided by c1 at all to incur these charges. I stated that the service being provided by c1 is the use of £200 (or whatever the credit limit is). The remuneration for that service would be the monthly payments I make to pay that borrowing of the £200 back. The default charges are not part of that £200 at all. I have not borrowed/used any default charge money in anyway to actually incur those charges. The charges are specifically for not remunerating c1, or doing so at a later date than agreed The judge agreed with me on that. He then asked the barrister to prove me wrong. And she couldn't. Problem was, however, is that the judge then started to reason what the service being provided was. He stated that the service being provided was not just the borrowing of £200, but the borrowing of the £200 and not having to pay it back over a certain period of time. He says that then, the default charges become part of service being provided because i'm stil borrowing the money over a period of time, including the default charges - so that's the service. Although, I don't agree with him, i see his point, and the logic makes sense to me. Remember though, this is the judge saying this, the barrister didn't produce any valid argument against what I stated in regards to services. I pointed out to the judge, even though that may be the case, that is not what the contract states. The contract states that the charges are for breach of contract. Therefore they are not part of the services as per their own contract. What is the contract, to pay at least the minimum payment by the due date and to not go overdrawn. So the default charges are not part of the paying back, but they are outside of it, according to their contract. He pretty much disregarded that argument by saying that it was part of the contract that I agreed to and english law is that contracts are binding. I pointed him to the kleinwort ruling though, hoping that he would read some more but that was pretty much futile Closing In the closing the judge stated that the oft v abbey has nothing to do with credit cards, and (as i pointed out to him), most, if not all the banks involved in that court case has credit card facilities themselves - and therefore, for them not to be mentioned at all, would mean that the ruling had no bearing on credit cards. But, as there were no previous high court or surpreme court rulings involving credit cards, then we would have to look to similar rulings regarding lending to get info from. He drew a parallel between the oft v abbey and our case. He repeatedly stated that he had to remind himself of english contract law, and he again admitted that the case was incredibly intricate, detailed, and can get confusing (at point he was saying he was getting a head ache), and that he did't read anything prior to the court date, but felt he knew enough to come to a fair decision. Conclusion Once he came to the conclusion on the s62 and service and remuneration, I knew that was it. The judgement was definitely a blow, especially after all that preperation. I am happy that he didn't award costs to c1. If he did, I would have appealed (i would have been exempt from any fees). I decided not to appeal because his logic did make sense, even if i didn't agree with him, and since we didn't "win", but didn't "lose", i was alright with that. Before I started the claims I was already happy with not winning cases as long as I didn't have to pay anything, but I think after all the reading and preperations that my mindset changed to i have to win. even though i felt there was a 50/50 chance, when the case got underway it seemed like that was definitely and over statemet. That's about it. If anybody wants a copy of my arguments or anything like that, i'll be happy to send them. I do still believe that my arguments and case law were/are sufficient enough to prove a mistake was made (postponing the limitation), and that they are not akin to the bank charges spoken of within the oft vs abbey case. I will probably be going to court again for my two citi credit card charges as those are already in the midst of the legal process, so i'll see how that goes - but, i'm not going to go after any more charges past 6 years until i become more confident of my chances. i'll be focusing on my ppi claims instead.
  10. update... received a letter from some solicitors on behalf of cc. They are asking me to set aside the judgement. Here are their reasons They say they never received the Claim Form - I don't believe that as the claim form was sent to the address that all my letters were sent to, and all their responses were sent from. (This is the important bit) The say that because the claim was against Citi Group Centre and there is no legal entity called that. The correct name should be Citi Financial Europe Plc - When I looked, I stupidly put the building name as the defendant I already know that their 1st point is irrelevant, but i'm not sure about the 2nd one. Please tell me that it doesn't matter as they are the only ones who occupy that address and they were happy to respond to the letters I sent address to that address (without Citi Financial Europe Plc). Please tell me I can still enforce judgement... puhleeeeese P.S. - They've sent me a letter to sign telling the court to set aside the claim and that no costs be awarded. HELP!!!
  11. @Huggy, don't take it personal lol, there are members here that will help and has spread themselves all over the forum. I know of one kind person ' Slick', he tends to come on late though as he has his own live etc etc The best thing is read some more here. Your LB looks fine in regards to what you have said so far...... I will warn you though from my own experience Capital One is hard work I am at the court stage with them and if you are serious you need to get reading not only on here but on laws and case laws in order to try and get them to settle and as IMS says they will go ALLL the way before a Judge. Especially with charges beyond 6yrs. I am not trying to scare you, but it is what it is, the days of easy claiming, I believe is over, so you got be prepared to prove your case which can be done with understanding and be prepare for the fight. JMO
  12. I need some help to look over my WS and my bundle, I have a few things that I found that I want to include in the bundle. I will upload them in a few to be checked please.
  13. Hi Slick, thanks for getting back to me. I here what you're saying. The only reason i was looking into it was as a way to counter the argument cap1 used in regard to ss' case I can see why it was viewed as being a mistake in law (primarily) - but then again that's on my very limited understanding of all of this legal stuffs. I was looking for case law that was based on mistake in fact (so there couldn't be any misunderstanding/misinterpretation), and that's how i ended up looking in concealment. I didn't even know that concealment was discussed in any capacity in cag as all advice pointed specifically to mistake. I found cave vs. robinson on google, lol Just read through that link - it looks like progenic had the exact same mind frame about it that i do now. And nobody was able to provide a sufficient enough rebuttal to the concealment argument - even the fraudulent concealment (which i'm not gonna use) wasn't even given a sufficient rebuttal. Saying that though, progenic never said what happened to any of the cases - so we don't know if it was successfull or not. I do know of at least one other person using both 32b & c, and going to court and winning, but that was only 1. i may not use 32b in this claim as i'm already to far gone, and don't think i would be able to slip it in with a strong enough emphasis, but i'll probably use it for my other claims and see how it goes. what do you think, then, is the best way to argue against c1's attack on kleinwort in regards to making it primarily about a mistake in law, and therefore irrelevant to our claim as our claim is about mistake in fact, making our claim statute barred?
×
×
  • Create New...