Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder

Leaderboard

  1. Michael Browne

    Michael Browne

    Registered Users

    Change your profile picture


    • Points

      3

    • Content Count

      15,019


  2. Cornucopia

    Cornucopia

    Registered Users

    Change your profile picture


    • Points

      3

    • Content Count

      1,608


  3. Caz1974

    Caz1974

    Registered Users

    Change your profile picture


    • Points

      3

    • Content Count

      662


  4. Parkvale

    Parkvale

    Registered Users

    Change your profile picture


    • Points

      2

    • Content Count

      3,723



Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 04/04/07 in all areas

  1. A few weeks ago I received, out of the blue, a letter from a company called ECI, pursuing an alleged debt on behalf of Cabot (I will not say which bit of the hydra yet). I ignored it, as I did the next couple. Ultimately, however, curiosity got the better of me and I had an entertaining conversation with ECI. It transpired that they were trying to collect a debt apparently incurred in 1984! - is this a record? I told them that so far as I could remember I have never had an account with the bank they named, but in any case it would be statute barred. It seems that ECI, like so many DCAs, think that the OFT guidelines and DPA don't apply to them. "You must owe the money, because Cabot say so, and statute barred doesn't mean we won't continue to enforce it", they said. "Actually, it means precisely that you won't, because you can't", I said. "Well, maybe not in court, but we can still try to collect", they replied. They then went on to tell me some porkies about registering defaults with CRAs, cancelling my birthday and making the sky fall in. I went on to ask if they could produce evidence of my consent for them (or their client, Cabot), to process my data, to which they replied that they must have it, because Cabot wouldn't have handed the case to them otherwise. A touching faith in Cabot, no? The creature at ECI said he was so confident that they could still collect, that he'd be writing a final letter before taking me to court (he'd obviously forgotten that that isn't going to happen). Maybe he wrote it, but he certainly didn't send it to me. On the other hand, I have written to them. I am rather busy, so my letter won't get posted until the 6 April. In my letter I have told them that I perceived the phone monkey's talk of continuing to collect as a threat to harass; asked them to confirm that they will now comply with the OFT guidelines; demanded a copy of my signed consent for them and Cabot to process my data; and demanded full details of their client. I have a feeling that they will not want to play. The next stage will be to complain to the FOS and IC about ECI, and then begin a complaint against Cabot under the DPA. Sink me, I'm quite looking forward to doing battle with Citizen Maynard.
  2. Pandora_nini

    MBNA/Link

    Hello, this is my first post here.... have spent ages reading through, and noticed that others have had issues with MBNA and Link. I have struggled with MBNA for the last two years, trying to reach some kind of agreement with them, and not really getting anywhere. Finally agreed (ie I agreed to a repayment plan that I could afford), and then they promptly sold the debt to Link without any notice to me. More than half of my debt arises from unfair penalty charges and interest on those charges, and I want to challenge MBNA and claim these back. Link, however are calling me wanting me to pay the whole debt off, and are being quite nasty with it. Can anyone give me any advice on this: - should I agree a monthly repayment plan with Link whilst I tackle MBNA - are there any rules or regulations that Link need to stick to that I can quote back at them - can I insist that I only deal with them in writing - I don't want to be pushed into a situation with Link that is unfair or prejudices my claim with MBNA - feeling very stressed about the whole situation, and am being bullied by them, so if anyone can give me any advice/support on how to handle this situation? I'd be very grateful. Sorry it's so long for my first post. So glad to have found somewhere to find real and useful information. Thanks
  3. Hi Pam, Paul etc... Section 85 Comprise has a number of meanings. Ultimately it is for the Judge to decide what was intended by the Act. MIB's legal team can only offer opinions, as we do, on the subject. BA's experience is telling. I would argue that the purpose of the act as a whole is consumer protection and we (the consumer) are therefore entitled to the benevolent interpretation of 'comprise'. Regarding the purpose of s85 in particular I'd say... 1) It is necessary to include a copy of the original agreement with each renewed card so the consumer can see what they originally signed up for. 2) It helps prevent MIB's altering agreements 'by stealth' by serving as a reminder. 3) It aids recognition of unsolicited credit-tokens. 4) Any other reason you can think of. Now, all of that said, my personal approach to s85 is to keep it ready for my defence in the event of an ivitation to court from the MIB. My first line of attack is the agreement itself, then T&C's / s85 etc. If I were MIB and I saw s85 defence being batted back at me I'd worry. They're no wiser on this point than we are and it hinges on 'comprise'. They have chosen to interpret comprise as 'consist of' without thinking through the alternatives and the implications. If it turns out they're wrong they'll be fairly upset. I respect those initiating s85 claims against CCP's, I'm not currently in a position nto do that myself (yet). Regards Lantana
  4. Hi Sassca I just did a search of the words 'Abbey & Mortgage' and found this thread http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/abbey-bank/72132-sho-abbey.html?highlight=Abbey+Mortgage where a similar question is asked and answered. Have a read of this then if you want more info you could read the threads started by the people that have posted the replies, you can either just search for them by looking through the threads or you can click on their name in the box on the left of the reply, then you'll be on another page where it gives you the option to find threads started by xxx! Just click and search for the relevant one. Hope this helps! Also, don't be ashamed - we're all in the same boat, it must have started as a tug boat but now it's a whopping great big cruiser (or even something bigger!) Keep reading and you'll get information, keep posting and you'll get help, advice and moral support. Good Luck! Knellyk
  5. Trading without a credit licence is breaching the terms of the CCA Sorry for the late reply, incidentally I am not a casual observer with no valid opinion. I have read all of this thread, and follow it very closely. I would thank you not to be condescending to my posts.
  6. You could also ring Gordon Watt - Data Protection Advisor: 0141 223 1013 He works for Yorkshire Bank and ask him to help you He's a very nice person to deal with. goodluck
  7. if you are going to do the o/d interest - try looking at this thread - post 26 - i wrote this for someone and she and many others have conquered overdraft interest using it. :honeygie v HSBC *****WON***** (1 2 post 26. as an example - my son's charges were 1500, o/d interest added 300 and the 8% interest which everyone can add at the claim stage added another 300 - so in his case it was certainly worth the hour it took us to sort it. my advice - try the thread - do the advanced and see if it is worth it.
  8. Hello and Welcome, Caroline. If you take your time and read up as much as possible before starting your claim I'm sure you will put the smile back on your mums face. Read all the F.A.Q.s and step-by-step instructions, have a look in your Banks Forum, read a few threads then start one yourself. There is always someone willing to help you out. Reading up as much as you can will help you through the process without making to many mistakes. Best wishes with your claim. Regards. Scott.
  9. As you suggested 14 days then send lba, you set the timescales and stick to them, keep the thread updated and good luck.
  10. .. oh so modest ! Just to clarify what photman has said. The OFT did suggest that anything above £12 would be deemed excessive if the Credit card companies charged more. But the OFT do not make the law of the land, this was only a recommendation, not the law, and Photoman is completely right they can only recover their actual costs or liquidated loss as they call it, anything above that is a penalty and we all know how penalties are treated. Me? I'm not a mod either but someone gave me a few green pips, which Photoman will accumilate at a grand rate of knots I am sure.
  11. Hi Dont know if this helps but i used to work for Dlc, most employees recive one weeks training on how to use telephone system and very little legal training at all,, average employees are either teenagers doing their first jobs or part time working mums if you dont pay they chuck you back into computer system and put you on the dialer to be called back by someone else, all of their telephone calls are recorded and if you are harrassed call back and complain, the call will be listened to! Definatly ask for a cca as their filing system in rubbish and in the six unfortunate months i worked their i never once was shown how to use it, use cca request to intimidate staff as most would not have a clue. This company has had huge problems with dpa breaches in the past and when they are trained are regulary warned not to breach the dpa, good to know as you can use this to intimidate them, they cant apply futher charges and would have great difficulty in getting charging orders etc as they buy in debts and normally have very little paperwork to back them up Yes i am embarrased that i did this job but i was desperate for work and promise you all that i did some serious good deeds during my last week with them
  12. Please pardon my intrusion here, Red. Just a short, but simple comment. Most of this stuff here is way above me, but I can see you are able to understand it pretty well. I can also see (by the edits !! ) that you are feeling emotive about this, too. I can only ask you to let your head guide you on this, and keep your heart out of the process. The courts deal with the head stuff, but unfortunately, it is the hospitals that may end up dealing with the heart stuff. Please don't let that happen, matey. FWIW, I have had cause to look into the possibility of claiming damages for ill-health caused consequentially. Nerves, depression, booze & pills, blah blah. It's down on record, yeah, but proving the direct cause of it is IMVHO where the fun and games will start. The opposition will employ professionals who I am sure will try and dig up every other thing that may have caused your ill-health. And I mean dig - it's their job, and they will do it well, I'm sure. You may think your cupboard's tidy, and that you have nothing to hide, but I have heard that said here so many times. They will find all sorts of things you never realised were in there, of that I'm sure, and they could literally push you over the edge in doing so IMVHO. I eventually decided on two things: 1. I will keep my cards very close to my chest, and 2. I will go for every other penny that I think I do have a chance of getting back without having to worry about P.I.'s going through my rubbish, and my personal records. I will consider that as my payment in lieu of compensation. Please let your head run the show, not your heart. Bill. PS - there are some Google spreadsheets for consolidation loans here if you're interested.
  13. hi just checked my account and i have been refunded everything short of £20 but who's complaining, that god thats all over, couldnt have done it without the constant knowledge and background of CAG, so a donation is winging its way over, it took longer than my first claim, but not as long as other banks, Happy Easter:D
  14. on ur list of charges did they abrvieate what the charges were such as RC, OD, etc, because if so then the daily overdraft is OD, i phoned and they confirmed this is ontop of the charges ie, £3 a day amandax
  15. Hi, nondeeploom Initially you do not claim for interest,this comes at the stage of submitting your case before the court. Welcome to the forum. Please take time to read the faq's use the template letters. LINKS.... FAQs.... Templates Library.... There is also live chat, visit if you need any quick advice. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/chat/flashchat.php Finally good Luck. Happyolddog. If my advice helps please tip the scales, left.
  16. No not really. Over £5k and you are in fast track. their are possible cost implecations, but tinthis track the bank must disclose their true costs of their charges. Which we know they have not done nor will do. Ask away their are lots of help available here. Your confidence will soar as you progress.
  17. Poor Flump nearly off the bottom of page 1. BUMP.
  18. I'd also check that the new lock they have fitted confirms to any relevant safety standards for the use it has been put to - namely the sole means of exit in a high rise flat. If it does, you probably don't have any legal recourse on this one - but if they've fitted something which is inappropriate, it will serve to back-up the rest of your claim and force them to compensate. Whilst they acted in "good faith", they obviously didn't check the matter thoroughly before acting.
  19. Make sure you keep on their case and get their offer secured in writing, and details of when payment will be recieved. Best regards
  20. AngelaT I think the best thing to do would be to follow the step by step instructions and faqs first for the charges. I think you can get the CCJ removed but takes a lot of doing, it would take possibly getting the court to make a judgement that the charges were unlawful, after which you could possibly appeal against the CCJ, or you might be able to put it's removal into your claim as the only reason it was served on you was because of the unlawful charges, Probably someone else on this site might be able to help more with the CCJ. Also with Monument do exactly the same claim back the charges, the oft statement mentioning the £12.00p is only the limit above which the oft would take action, Monument would still have to prove the charges like the banks have to. regards pmahonc
  21. Hi You do not have to submit your evidence (copy statements etc) until such time as you are preparing your bundle in advance of a hearing. At this stage you need only provide the schedule of charges. John
  22. Hi Dave Thanks for the support The issue as far as I have been addressing is the effect on the poor in the community. But there is a much bigger issue here and one that can't be addressed by saying that the legislation will only be used in the last resort or with an additional warrant, even though i would argue with the efficacy of either of those points. This bill if it becomes law will be the first time in 800 years that a representative of the government will be able to use force on a member of the public over a matter of finance. We all accept the regrettable but sometimes necessary use of force in criminal cases; this has always been deemed acceptable because it protects the safety and well being of the public. Debt however has never been a criminal offence but now we find the same enforcement methods being used on both. Now we find that violence cannot only be sanctioned in cases where the, "Crown versus the accused” via a criminal court, but in cases where in essence it is one member of the public against another member of the public via a warrant from the civil court. This represents an unacceptable bridge between the two arms of our legal system (Civil and Criminal) and one that contradicts the very essence of British Justice. As I said before we are on a slippery slope here and people need to be made aware of it. Best Regards
  23. mistie

    Mistie V Tsb

    ok, got my statments with a lovely letter from lloyds. pre-lim letter off tomorrow claiming £1995.
  24. oh that's not fair - if you're getting reps for being a wino, Corn & I should be moderators by now
  25. helen can i suggest you ring the court to find out if they have actually submitted a defence? The hearing on the 13th is it the actual hearing or a case management/allocation hearing? Glenn
  26. Red though i agree with your sentiments exactly in making the banks pay for what they have done i am so default ridden now i cant even get a debit card on a bank account I DO FEEL THAT I HAVE TO REITERATE SOME OF WHAT HAS BEEN SAID ABOVE THAT WHAT YOU ARE PROPOSING TO CLAIM FOR IS HIGHLY RISKY AND FROM WHAT I HAVE READ ON THIS THREAD I DONT THINK STANDS A CHANCE IN HELL OF SUCCEEDING . In your claim from what i can see you have alot of unproven area to cover Contractural Interest Charges (why you are entitled to the higher rate of interest over the courts Sec 69 8%) Charges predating 5 years (time span for scotland i believe) so statute of limitations I believe from reading what you have put the main part i have trouble trying to justify in your cliam is the award of Damages agreed that due to defaults you had to borrow from Sub Prime lenders to make ends and this was bought by concequence of the charges resulting in the defaults. I would personally use these fact to back up the reason for why you are entitled to the higher interest rate back from the banks instead of the standard stat 8% Ie Due to the banks action in taking the charges it resulted in my having to use Sub Prime lenders which resulted in my having to pay alot higher interest rates in regards the purchase of a car which i require to work had it not been for the defaults lodged against me then i may have been able to borrow at a more favourable rate Ie 8% compared to 29% Thus as the banks have acted unlawfully in the removal of more money than what they were entitled to in regards their liquidated Damages I would not have had these defaults lodged and would have had access rate to a more competitive interest rate so i would ask the court to look at this in regards the reason why compund interest should be awarded instead of stat 8% Sorry to be a doubting thomas but i wouldnt be able to rest easy within myself without a word of caution. At the end of the day it is your claim and your decision to make as to your best way forward and you have to live with the consequences of your actions yes the figures make it nice and say go for it but can your claim be substantiated in Law is a different matter . My personal thoughts on what i have read on here is Go for the Charges not an issue Claim for compounded interest at the Unauthorised rate (not proven and still needs proving why we are entitled to this rate instead of the 8% sec 69) The Damages aspect i would drop as i cant see how you can prove these are due to the bank charges other than having to use sub prime lenders which the reverse argument ould be well you could have bought a cheaper car etc By no means not saying dont have ago if you want but If it were me i wouldn't
  27. My eldest lad worked for the Abbey for a while, then left for the RBS (which he has also kicked into touch since.) He reckoned there was more pressure to meet targets in the Abbey than there was in the RBS. And staff turnover was VERY high.
  28. If you need any more help feel free to PM me and I'll reply as soon as I can:D
  29. OFT is a central government body - Trading Standards is local government. They are quite separate. OFT does issue guidelines and collates information on a national basis. The decision to prosecute is down to firstly the investigating officer's recommendation; then their bosses recommendation and usually a committee of the Local Authority (often guided by their Legal Department) as well. Generally, TS see their job as ensuring compliance with the many laws which they enforce. Often the stages involve advice followed by warning and prosecution is seen as a last resort. They have very limited resources and tend to prioritise things such as safety; public health; major criminal rip-offs e.g. car clocking or counterfeiting over more 'technical' offences. They would fight shy of prosecuting a S78 offence on several grounds (in no particular order). 1. Cost v. Benefit (does the prosecution show a real benefit for the local Council Tax payers?) 2. Likelyhood of success. Is it provable 'beyond reasonable doubt'? They will be up against a multi-national with their large legal departments. You can bet that the MIB would make a major fight out of this. 3. Have they exhausted the other enforcement avenues? A more effective use of their scarce resources might be to attack the 'problem' from the licencing angle. If OFT get notified of thousands of complaints of non-compliance with S78-79 and problems under the Agreement Regs. then OFT would have to consider Fitness to Hold Consumer Credit Licences. I have seen the effect on a company when they are issued a 'Minded to Revoke' notice. They don't half get their sh*t together quickly! Loss of CC Licence = End of Business.
  30. Ok, well here it is my first draft to claim charges back. Now without going into the risks of having to pay their legal costs which I am fully aware, what would the possibilities of getting this through. Any comments, or ammendments to the figures, or any area that could be expanded/deleted/modified would be greatly appreciated.
  31. my motto in life is: "if in doubt dont." you are clearly doubting embarking on a career as a cashier
  32. Hi, Nattie, I quite agree with you that it's a matter of interpretation. I work for a 'Media Company', in the sales department, so the customers who come through to us EXPECT to be sold to. (That's mainly why they are calling.) Our training is such that we let the customers know which services are available to them, find out which ones they want, and then question them about their needs. ie, which programs they want to have on the TV, to what useage the internet will be put, (downloading, games playing, simple browsing etc), and how much and when the telephone is used and the types of call. We then RECOMMEND which services would be best for them and the reasons why. (This is the theory, at least, and one which is generally adhered to.) Funnily enough, when this process is NOT followed, there tends to be UNDERselling, as the customer may not have the information about the differing services we offer, and may take the cheapest, but not necessarily the most cost-effective, option(s). If the same sort of criteria were applied to banking/financial customers, then there would be far less accusations of staff being pressurised into selling as the process lends itself to guiding the customer to the products which are right for them. The customers would have an understanding of what they were purchasing, and more importantly, why. As you rightly imply, matching products/benefits to needs is ethical selling, and there the banks seem to fall down, (not only banks of course, overselling is prevelant in many industries), but, it doesn't necessarily have to be that way. PeteCC And as a BTW, I recently went overdrawn bya few pounds, was willing to reluctantly accept the 'penalty', then had charge upon charge applied to the tune of £190.00. All successfully waived.
  33. About the OFT (not so) impending report - PLEASE READ THIS IF YOU'RE WORRIED In the "Tonight" programme a few days ago, Martin Lewis announced his belief that the OFT "cap" would be set at £12-£15 and that the banks would then only refund the difference between that amount and the amount people were charged. This opinion created a panic amongst reclaimers, thinking that they were about to lose a large chunk of their money if they didn't rush to claim now. This needs a few clarifications: First, this is Martin's opinion. It is not based in law, or insider knowledge. He may be a well known journalist, but it is still only his personal opinion, speculation if you will. The facts are these: a) The OFT is a regulatory body, they do not make law. The only way the law can be changed is through an Act of Parliament. b) The OFT, when they announce the results of their enquiry on bank charges, will only be announcing a level at which they themselves will take legal action against the banks. It is not a cap!!! In their credit cards report of April 5th, 2006, they clearly stated that they could not declare what was a fair or lawful charge, only the courts could decide on this. Furthermore, the OFT also declared at the time that consumers who felt that they had been charged unfairly should go through the legal system to reclaim their charges. There is no reason to suspect that their stance will not be identical this time. c) The law on penalties is well entrenched in contract law. Even if a bank tries to tell you after the OFT announcement that they will only refund the difference between the "cap" (It's NOT a cap!) and what you were charged originally, (leaving aside the fact that such a decision couldn't apply retrospectively anyway ), well, they also told you their charges were lawful, fair and transparent, and did you believe them? Why should you believe them now? d) Bottom line is this: If the bank try to say that they'll only refund you the difference, carry on with your claim. They will still have to convince a judge that what they are charging is lawful, which means they would still have to disclose how those costs are calculated, and they still won't want/be able to do that. Conclusion: Ignore the sensationalism, stick to the facts, and you can't go very wrong. In other words, business as usual, OFT or no OFT report. I hope this helps setting a few minds at rest. __________________
  34. Please Please stick to your time schedule, they will try to delay things at every stage, just stick to your deadline and you will be fine. On day 14 send your next letter.
  35. Use the Simple S/S here: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/182-interest-calculation-spreadsheets.html See here for a visual guide: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/barclays-bcard-woolwich-successes/7226-maisielou-barclays.html#post50088 Overwrite the existing examples type of charge, amount and date. The days since and 8% will be calculated automatically See here foe MCOL: Money Claim - Getting it right Getting MCOL Right
  36. hi caryn, Welcome to the forum. Please start a thread in this link; http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=11 Title it as above. By the wording of the letter you recieved the judge has probabally had enough claims in his court and will without going through due process, find in your favour and tell the bank to pay your money back. Please take time to read the faq's use the template letters. LINKS.... FAQs.... Templates Library.... There is also live chat, visit if you need any quick advice. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/chat/flashchat.php Finally good Luck. Happyolddog. If my advice helps please tip the scales, left.
  37. nanaman

    Fourteen Days

    14 calender days from the time the letter was posted.
  38. You'll be absolutely fine! Why should your claim be any different from the countless other successes? Now that Whistleblower has exposed the true costs there is even less to worry about. I foresee YB getting very meek and humble over the next few weeks! I'd wish you luck but you won't need it:D
  39. Now theres a thought, getting everyone to make their donation after their celebratory drink. pmsl
  40. kcom, Have a read of my thread: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/halifax-bank-bank-scotland/56689-survivor-halifax-new-claim.html I started in Jauary with a phone call to request statements, and got the money in my account 1st March. I followed the advice from this site, and used the Template Library for all the letters that I sent. I filed N1 at my local court in Hull, as I wanted someone to check that I'd completed it correctly. Just remember - you're only claiming back your own money that has been taken from you unlawfully - if you ever have any problems, just shout up and there will be someone to answer/help. I'm now claiming back charges applied to the wife's account Check these links fo help/advice/guidance FAQ's - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/faqs-please-read-these/ Step-by-step instuctions -http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/faqs-please-read-these/31460-example-step-step-instructions.html Template Library - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/ N1 Form (.pdf) - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/844-n1-claims-form-pdf.html That should give you enough to be going at - if you need anymore, then just shout up. Survivor --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If you found my advice usful, please click the scales to the left - Thank you.
  41. Hildragon, I dont normally jump on people, I do sincerely apologise:!: it is too easy to become defensive but that is no excuse.... navigation IS clunky but the content IS fabulous, which is why you will find me and others putting links in posts to go read some piece of advice. The constructed index posted previously is a godsend, as also the search within a thread... but if you do not easily find what you want (it may not even exist) please do ask questions... someone will point you in the right direction.
  42. With regards to your evidence, you need everything from the Basic Court Bundle from the templates library, all correspondence between you and Lloyds, your statements or account information provided under your S.A.R - (Subject Access Request), a schedule, a transcript of the interview with Peter McNamara BBC radio -Sept 2004- sound file & transc, and edit this ‘statement of evidence’ to suit your claim and add it to your bundle too - New strategy for Allocation Questionaires It is a lot of paper, but you do need 3 copies of everything. File one at the court, serve one to Lloyds sols and keep one for yourself (this should include the originals). Upon the deadline for document exchange, if they haven't either settled (fairly likely) or submitted documents (very unlikely), then see this thread - SC&M court bundle non-compliance
  43. If your creditors are hassling you, they may be breaching OFT debt collection guidelines. Are they bullying you into making payments you can't afford? Advising you to borrow, from other institutions or even from your own family, to pay off the debt? Demanding payment in full? Implying that they can send you to prison for non-payment? The document laying out these guidelines are in the post above, in .pdf format. There is also a ready-made complaints form on the Office of Fair Trading's website, in a .doc format. Every complaint is another step towards getting dodgy DCAs' licenses revoked. Don't hesitate! http://www.oft.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/B3999175-A9BC-469D-AD5B-BA284DE36E01/0/complaint.DOC
  44. Armsoft

    Abbey - what next?

    Gem, Firstly, Welcome to the site:) Your next stage needs to be filing in court, and there is a template N1 Form completion which you can use in the Library. There would not be a problem with you filing on MCOL, you just put your Sons details in, and at the end use your card to Pay (I`ve done the same for my son against Halifax). You`ll get the court costs back from the Abbey as part of your settlement (all explained on the N1 template), but be prepared for a long wait as Abbey like to take it to the wire before settleing (sometimes on the steps of the court!). You don`t need to let Abbey know you filed, the court will do that for you:-D Hope this is of help. . .
×
×
  • Create New...