Baba02, thank you for the update. I am considering a small claims approach: no costs can be awarded or claimed against me. I'll keep everyone abreast of things.

Hi Baba02: I'm in a similar situation with KMC; please let us ll know how this works out.

An update: after filing my claim on moneyclaimonline Orange / EE wrote to me denying it had done anything but offering to pay both the claimed amount and the costs of the claim. Impossible not to settle so I took the money and dismissed my claim. For me the moral of the story is: use MCO and Orange / EE will settle.

OK, thank you. My immediate concern is if by requesting a judgement from the court on the basis that no payment has been received although Orange has "promised" to pay I would be acting contrary to the CPR system, you know: I should "give them a chance" or something.

Thank you. No, no explanation has been given for the charges nor has Orange repaid the money. My inclination is to pursue a Jufgement at the earliest opportunity if this is lawful. I have made a claim. Orange has not defended or paid me the money. Some vague proposal from Orange does not constitute Orange's legal obligations. Therefore I am inclined to seek a judgement. Your thoughts please!

Thank you; that said my existing POC's accurately set out my claim. The issue for me is am I obliged under law to wait while Orange takes its own good time or am I free to press for a Judgement on the basis that they have not paid?

I've been an Orange / EE PAYG customer for many years, mainly because their service is really the only option where I live. In any case, I travel to Asia for work, typically 3 to 4 weeks at a go. During this time my UK phone is with me and off becaue it has no service where I work (and I mean no service, nothing). So, imagine my surprise to learn that on one trip while the phone was switched off it had used circa £70 in internet useage (and I have free internet as part of my PAYG). Endless calls to Orange and they acknowledge an error, my account will be refunded. No refund so another round of calls to Orange in India. The manager in India tells me "I'll make certain you never receive your refund". So, off to MCOL. Now, Orange has written to me: no acknowledgement of error just a "goodwill" gesture of my total claim amount. However, the letter states that I must alow Orange 30+ days to send the cheque. My question: - Orange has repeatedly not lived up to its comittments to refund, therefore I don't trust it; - A promise to pay is not payment, therefore I am not inclined to discontinue my claim. Therefore, my view is ask for a judgement if I do not receive payment with the 28 days from deemed service. I would be most grateful for CAG's thoughts on this. (Note: the service address of Orange is: Everything Everywhere Limited Hatfield Business Park Hatfield Hertfordshire AL10 9BW tel: 01707 317000)

OK, frustrating news on this case: after a number of hearing judgement was made in favor of HSBC. the judge ignored my request for HSBC compliance under 31.14 as he (the judge) had not ordered it. I had evidenced to the Court that HSBC admits that it does not possess the documentation on which its case relies (such as account opening and O/D or loan paperwork). I would like to appeal because HSBC have lied and lied again to me and the Court. Any suggestions (PLEASE)?

I couldn't agree with A1 more! Thank you both Ben & Apple!

I'm glad. A word of caution: I've had a large number of battles with Kensington: make sure you get it in writing!

Hello. A couple of suggestions: Make sure thatyou put everything in writing to Kensington and that you send it via registered mail. Do not rely on anything over the telephone. Are you the only person at the house? I ask because should Kensington attempt possession you need to be sure you receive the correspondence. I have asked Ell-enn of this site to respond to your post!

@bhall: al of these are interesting. Thank you for posting the links!

@ bhall: Thank you. I take your point entirely. I remain highly suspicious of my lender though less sceptical of its legal position. I have the impression that my lender is somewhat concerned about its own legal position (i do not think I am wishing this, my lender has repeatedly backed down when faced with court {granted it may be nervous of having a wild card judgement against it}). So, my final question: do you think is it possible that lenders consider that the Pender case is not just as solid as we may consider it to be? Many thanks!

@searching70: My question exactly!

@bhall: I too have a mortgage with Kensington ("KMC"); I have read most, if not all, of the discussions between yourself and applecart. I am inclined to agree with your argument that the deen need NOT be signed by the lender. I have a letter from KMC which states: KMC “has passed the beneficial title to a third party“ and that KMC "retains legal title". My question to you: does the fact that KMC states it has no beneficial (is this the same as equitable?) interest affect the position of the lender?