Marc Gander - The Consumer Survival Handbook


A 220 page introduction to all things consumer related by our own BankFodder.

Includes energy companies, mobile phone providers, retailers, banks, insurance companies,debt collection agencies, reclaim companies, secondhand car sellers, cowboy garages, cowboy builders and all the rest who put their own profits before you.

£6.99



Patricia Pearl - Small Claims Procedure - A Practical Guide


An excellent guide for the layperson in how to use the County Court - a must if you are intending to start a claim.

£19.99 + £1.50 (P&P)


Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 28
  1. #1

    Thumbs down RBS defended in court (17/11/06)

    Hello,

    I have never posted before now. I am owed aprox. 2100 from the Royal bank of Scotland in unfair charges. As I live in Scotland I decided to split this into 3 small claimsicon.
    My first small claimsicon went to court this morning (17/11/06). I must admit i wasnt as prepared as i should have been. I had heard of the banks not turning up or settling at court so I was not too worried.
    Prior to the court date I did recieve an offer over the phone from Jonny Nisbet (jonny.nisbet@rbs.co.uk) who i believe is a trainee solicitor for RBS offering me 310 goodwill gestureicon to drop the case (the full amount i was claiming for in this case came to over 1000 with interest and court fee).
    I rejected this offer.

    In Court this morning RBS solicitors?? said to the judge the offer still stood and that if it was not accepted they would give their defence. Again I turned down the offer.

    They then entered this defence taken word for word:

    'The charges have been applied in accordance with the terms and conditions of the banking contract between the Bank and Mr XXXXX. The charges are both transparent and fair and reasonable and represent a genuine estimate of the cost to the Bank in administering the said defaults. In addition, Mr XXXXX's claim for charges in the period 7/7/2000 - 15/8/2001, being charges levied more than 5 years prior to the date of service of the summons on the bank, has prescribed. Being more than 5 years these are now time-barred'

    I was then asked by the judge if I wanted to go to a date for proof. I said yes and was asked to supply documents for this. I am unsure what they mean by this. The date has been set for 19/01/07. It seems a long time away. The first date i was given took only 3-4 weeks.

    Has anyone been this far with the RBS? What do I need to do now?

    Similar Threads:
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0

  2. #2

    Default Re: RBS defence in court (17/10/06)

    Can anyone please help. Has anyone else had to go to court with RBSicon or recieve a date for a second hearing?


  3. #3

    Default Re: RBS defence in court (17/10/06)

    hi eubo,
    im confussed by this in scotland we are limited to being able to go back five years on claims six years is for england. i realise this can be challenged and perhaps this is what you will have to do? could you explain further why you are claiming these dates and your reasoning?

    bos~ Data Protection Act sent
    ~ statements received
    ~ owed 1766.82
    ~ prelim letter sent 30/08/2006
    ~lba handed in 14/09/2006
    bos Data Protection Act sent
    ~ statements received
    ~ owed 1217.86
    ~ prelim letter sent 30/08/2006
    ~lba handed in 14/09/2006
    court date issued of the 17th november
    27th oct full offer totalling everything including 8% interest court costs and 10 dpa sar..... one down next to go.

    rbs~ Data Protection Act sent off 21/09/2006
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0

  4. #4

    Default Re: RBS defence in court (17/10/06)

    At first it was me being naive about the Prescription and limitation acticon (Scotland) 1973. I did not realise there was a 5-year limit.

    However, after further research I have found that if the pursuer was unaware a breach took place that the 5-year limit would start from when I discovered the breach had taken place. This can be up to 20 years after the breach.

    In hind site I would have only claimed for 5 years but I still think I have a good argument and will give it a go.

    My only worry is giving the Bank too much ammo and having the case thrown out.
    I was very surprised that the bank turned up to the first hearing and a bit unprepared but want to make sure im ready for the next hearing in Jan if they dont settle before then.


  5. #5

    Default Re: RBS defence in court (17/10/06)

    i am surprised as well ill do my best to get a mod or sh to look at this for you later.

    bos~ Data Protection Act sent
    ~ statements received
    ~ owed 1766.82
    ~ prelim letter sent 30/08/2006
    ~lba handed in 14/09/2006
    bos Data Protection Act sent
    ~ statements received
    ~ owed 1217.86
    ~ prelim letter sent 30/08/2006
    ~lba handed in 14/09/2006
    court date issued of the 17th november
    27th oct full offer totalling everything including 8% interest court costs and 10 dpa sar..... one down next to go.

    rbs~ Data Protection Act sent off 21/09/2006
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0

  6. #6

    Default Re: RBS defence in court (17/10/06)

    Eubo,

    There are two limits, 5 years and 20. The starting date for the five year limit can be postponed in certain circumstances such as where the claimant was not aware and could not with reasonable diligence have become aware of their right to enforce an obligation on another. The twenty year limit applies irrespective of knowledge, i.e. it cannot be postponed. In most cases the five year limit will apply, and in those cases where the puruser could have pled the postponement of the five year period, their claim will prescribe in twenty years regardless of whether they knew or could have known etc.

    It is confusing, I know, but five years does apply in these cases.


  7. #7

    Default Re: RBS defence in court (17/10/06)

    Quote Originally Posted by Advocate View Post
    It is confusing, I know, but five years does apply in these cases.
    Not "does", "might".

    Eubo, have a read of this:

    http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...st-332152.html

    Then decide for yourself how you want to proceed.

    Robertxc is our Scottish moderator and very knowledgeable. I'l ask him to have a look at your thread, see if he has any advice.


  8. #8

    Default Re: RBS defence in court (17/10/06)

    Advocate believes that you cannot go beyond five years because a 'reasonably' diligent person could have known that penalty charges were unlawfull all along, so you cannot say that you just found out about it. I would beg to differ.

    While it is true that (however unlikeyl) you could have known that penaly charges are unlawful, you could not possibly have known that the banks charges were penalties. his is because:

    A. The banks, to this day, keep the breakdown of thier costs strictly confidentialicon.

    B. If you were to ask them for a breakdown, they would tell you to get lost.

    ...and C. They swear blind that their charges are not penalties.

    For me, they key event was the OFT's statement earlier this year to the effect that they consider the banks charges to be excessive.

    I suggest you read the thread mentioned above, and make up your own mind. For your information, I've claimed beyond five years and still had settlement from the bank.

    Robertxc v. Abbey - 3300 Settled in full
    Robertxc v. Clydesdale - 750 Settled in full
    Nationwide v. Robertxc - 2000 overdraft wiped out, Default removed by order of the sheriff
    Robertxc v. Style Card - Default removed by order of the sheriff
    Robertxc v. Abbey (1) - Data Protection Act action. 750 compensation
    Robertxc v. Abbey (2) - Data Protection Act action. 2000 compensation, default removed

    [B] The opinions on this post are those of Robertxc and not necessarily the opinions of the group and do not constitute sound legal advice. You are advised to seek professional legal advice.
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0

  9. #9

    Default Re: RBS defence in court (17/10/06)

    thanks for the replies. My other worry is that they stated in court:

    'The charges are both transparent and fair and reasonable and represent a genuine estimate of the cost to the Bank in administering the said defaults'

    But how can they say this without giving a breakdown. Should i be requesting the judge ask for this because my attempts to get it directly from the RBSicon has failed.


  10. #10

    Default Re: RBS defence in court (17/10/06)

    the simple answer to this is they can say whatever they like however you should ask them to prove this in court. the judge can order them to disclose their costs and this is imo what you would be looking for.

    bos~ Data Protection Act sent
    ~ statements received
    ~ owed 1766.82
    ~ prelim letter sent 30/08/2006
    ~lba handed in 14/09/2006
    bos Data Protection Act sent
    ~ statements received
    ~ owed 1217.86
    ~ prelim letter sent 30/08/2006
    ~lba handed in 14/09/2006
    court date issued of the 17th november
    27th oct full offer totalling everything including 8% interest court costs and 10 dpa sar..... one down next to go.

    rbs~ Data Protection Act sent off 21/09/2006
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0

  11. #11

    Default Re: RBS defence in court (17/10/06)

    Quote Originally Posted by smoorach View Post
    the simple answer to this is they can say whatever they like however you should ask them to prove this in court. the judge can order them to disclose their costs and this is imo what you would be looking for.
    Actually, they don't need to prove anything. You're the one bringing the action, so it's up to you to prove your case.

    Robertxc v. Abbey - 3300 Settled in full
    Robertxc v. Clydesdale - 750 Settled in full
    Nationwide v. Robertxc - 2000 overdraft wiped out, Default removed by order of the sheriff
    Robertxc v. Style Card - Default removed by order of the sheriff
    Robertxc v. Abbey (1) - Data Protection Act action. 750 compensation
    Robertxc v. Abbey (2) - Data Protection Act action. 2000 compensation, default removed

    [B] The opinions on this post are those of Robertxc and not necessarily the opinions of the group and do not constitute sound legal advice. You are advised to seek professional legal advice.
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0

  12. #12

    Default Re: RBS defence in court (17/10/06)

    my appologies robert and eubo i stand corrected. many thanks. is it not the case though that we are looking for the banks to disclose cost? please dont think im being cheeky i just have picked something up wrong and would like to get it shraight in my own head

    bos~ Data Protection Act sent
    ~ statements received
    ~ owed 1766.82
    ~ prelim letter sent 30/08/2006
    ~lba handed in 14/09/2006
    bos Data Protection Act sent
    ~ statements received
    ~ owed 1217.86
    ~ prelim letter sent 30/08/2006
    ~lba handed in 14/09/2006
    court date issued of the 17th november
    27th oct full offer totalling everything including 8% interest court costs and 10 dpa sar..... one down next to go.

    rbs~ Data Protection Act sent off 21/09/2006
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0

  13. #13

    Default Re: RBS defence in court (17/10/06)

    Eubo, you have my every sympathy, facing them in the Court is I am sure everyone's worst nightmare, but there's enough support on here for everyone to be properly prepared, so no excuses there then!

    BTW, is anyone else here concerned that RBSicon might be trying to make a test case out of this one???? :o And should we all panic, sorry, monitor very carefully and offer Eubo all the support possible??

    Sweetrevenge
    Don't get mad - get even!
    If I've helped you please hit my scales 'n' bump my rep!

    RBS (My A/c) S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent /10/06, statements rec'd 20/10; Prelim sent 3/11/06, s*d off letter rec'd 20/11; LBA sent 28/11, Settlement offer rec'd 18/12
    WON at LBA with compound contractual interest 607

    RBS BF Account S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 4/11, part response rec'd 28/11, further info sent 3/12 awaiting statements at 20/12, Sent LBA 19/01/07. Received all statements resulting in 3 claims, 1,278, 4,279 and 7,250(!) all with contractual interest.


    This is now very out of date!!!!
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0

  14. #14

    Default Re: RBS defence in court (17/10/06)

    Quote Originally Posted by SweetRevenge View Post
    BTW, is anyone else here concerned that RBSicon might be trying to make a test case out of this one???? :o And should we all panic, sorry, monitor very carefully and offer Eubo all the support possible??
    No. The 'defence' they've stated is nothing new, and is going nowhere. This is just a scare tactic to make you think they're going to go all the way. Obviously, it's always possible that they may come up with a good defence, but this isn't it.

    Robertxc v. Abbey - 3300 Settled in full
    Robertxc v. Clydesdale - 750 Settled in full
    Nationwide v. Robertxc - 2000 overdraft wiped out, Default removed by order of the sheriff
    Robertxc v. Style Card - Default removed by order of the sheriff
    Robertxc v. Abbey (1) - Data Protection Act action. 750 compensation
    Robertxc v. Abbey (2) - Data Protection Act action. 2000 compensation, default removed

    [B] The opinions on this post are those of Robertxc and not necessarily the opinions of the group and do not constitute sound legal advice. You are advised to seek professional legal advice.
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0

  15. #15

    Default Re: RBS defence in court (17/10/06)

    Hold on.

    DId they put the Defence in writing? If they did then I think has to be lodged with the Sheriff Clerk some period PRIOR to the preliminary hearing (7 or 14 days). I am pretty sure they just can't turn up and hand in their written Defence.


  16. #16

    Default Re: RBS defence in court (17/10/06)

    In any event keep on going - your doing good.

    BTW you might want to put in an Incidental Application for details of their ACTUAL costs. Robert will probably be the best person to help you. They will probably settle before the Incidental Application calls in court, but at least you get paid sooner. Which is good as long as your not worried about interest.




  17. #17

    Default Re: RBS defence in court (17/10/06)

    they have to submit their defence of 14 days before the proof hearing. It always takes longer for the proof hearing than it does for the preliminary hearing.

    Robertxc v. Abbey - 3300 Settled in full
    Robertxc v. Clydesdale - 750 Settled in full
    Nationwide v. Robertxc - 2000 overdraft wiped out, Default removed by order of the sheriff
    Robertxc v. Style Card - Default removed by order of the sheriff
    Robertxc v. Abbey (1) - Data Protection Act action. 750 compensation
    Robertxc v. Abbey (2) - Data Protection Act action. 2000 compensation, default removed

    [B] The opinions on this post are those of Robertxc and not necessarily the opinions of the group and do not constitute sound legal advice. You are advised to seek professional legal advice.
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0

  18. #18

    Question Re: RBS defence in court (17/10/06)

    Thanks everyone for the feedback. I know they have to submit their defence 14 days before the Proof hearing but do I not have to submit my case by then as well. How should I prepare this and what should I be submitting?


  19. #19

    Default Re: RBS defence in court (17/10/06)

    Bump


  20. #20

    Default Re: RBS defence in court (17/10/06)

    Quote Originally Posted by eubo View Post
    Thanks everyone for the feedback. I know they have to submit their defence 14 days before the Proof hearing but do I not have to submit my case by then as well. How should I prepare this and what should I be submitting?
    You will have submitted your case in your statement of claim. They now have to submit a defence. If they don't, there's not much you can do until the next hearing.

    Robertxc v. Abbey - 3300 Settled in full
    Robertxc v. Clydesdale - 750 Settled in full
    Nationwide v. Robertxc - 2000 overdraft wiped out, Default removed by order of the sheriff
    Robertxc v. Style Card - Default removed by order of the sheriff
    Robertxc v. Abbey (1) - Data Protection Act action. 750 compensation
    Robertxc v. Abbey (2) - Data Protection Act action. 2000 compensation, default removed

    [B] The opinions on this post are those of Robertxc and not necessarily the opinions of the group and do not constitute sound legal advice. You are advised to seek professional legal advice.
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Reclaim the Right Ltd. - reg.05783665 in the UK reg. office:- 923 Finchley Road London NW11 7PE
We use cookies to personalise content and ads and to provide social media features. We also share information about your use of our site with our advertising and analytics partners. See details