Jump to content

adam1976brown

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    129
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by adam1976brown

  1. i had a missed call from a number today from Abbey..tried ringing it but it does not accept incoming calls... does anybody recognise it??? 01142704029
  2. i too have had the same email as from the original post on this thread but it has been expanded over the time... it does seem to be the standard one sent.... Ms Kirkman asked me to send my files by email to her so she can look at them and offer a settlement to me... she saw my figure ,now at £16049.80p and told me to poke it, " WITHOUT PREJIDUCE". so i will now send off that great email from this thread and wait for the court date.shall i also write "without prejiduce" at the top of my letter????
  3. well i waited for Inga Kirkman to get back to me about her emails...when she did get back to me and it took 3 weeks.this is what she put... "Without prejudice" Dear Sir, Thank you for your email. We note that you still insist on payment in full. To this end we are unable to assist. With respect, your insistence on payment in full does not represent a genuine intention by you to resolve this matter without recourse to a fully contested court hearing. There is no commercial incentive to our client to resolve your claim. Further, you have made no account for the transactions that have the in fact occurred on your account. There must be some charge for these transactions. Each case is determined on its individual merits. Any case involving any other Claimant or Bank is irrelevant to your individual claim. Should you wish to reconsider your position and put forward a more commercially palatable offer to our client, we are more than willing to take instructions in relation to the same. Kind regards, Inga Kirkman Senior Associate Solicitor, NSW Now i guess this is a standard email she is banging off to people... on one side she is saying stick it up ur backside we r not paying and then she says come back to us with a better offer and we will look in to it....more stalling tatics...and no only that the email has very bad grammer.....and i hate the "without prejudice" bit... now when and how can they choose to put that??? a letter like that could be useful in my court bundle. it shows contradicting offers from them.. like good cop bad cop!!! also i have just been sorting out my court bundle and i was just wondering what the banks have to do when it comes to the "order of directions". do they have the same as me or does the judge do a seperate one for them... if not if i send of the first part of the order and the court bundle what do i get back in return from Abbey??? knowing the bank its nothing.... well i guess thats the end off my contact with Ms Kirkman... or shall i return the email??? if so what shall i reply with??? otherwise i shall just let it run its course and wait till the 4th september for the court hearing....
  4. once again i have had an email from Inga kirkman asking for my claim so she can settle it. not only do they have all the previous correspondances and the first part of the court order i had sent her via email my claim. usual excuse that she cannot open the files and can she have the sprdsheets in word form???? guess Abbey are still running on WIN 95.....sent her the files again and got a thank you today... now going to send her this... let us know if it is ok or needs some working... Dear Ms Kirkman Thank you for your swift response to my email. Now you are in possession of these files I now hope this matter can be dealt swiftly and not left until the last minute to be settled. As we are both aware your company has not gone to court to contest any of the claims brought against Abbey. The few cases you have stepped into to court for are infact not for the claim for charges, but infact are for the claim of the interest charged. Abbey had settled these claims for the charges out of court and the claimant then proceeded to fight the claim on the interest alone. Also the couple of cases that Lloyds TSB have won were in fact lost by the claimants on the basis of their preparation for the claims and not Lloyds defence of the charges as you are aware that they did not infact turn up in court. To that matter these cases hold no precedence and as highlighted in the media have been used to pressure claimants into dropping their claims. Hopefully you will respond to this email as quickly has you did to the last one and I hope to be able to put an end to this matter in the near future. yours faithfully she does not respond quickly to emails and it took me to write URGENT in the subject bar for her to look at them....
  5. ...just a a bit of a panic... sent of my folders to abbey and court with breakdown of charges, interset etc etc for the first part of the order i recieved before the court bundle is to be sent off but i dont know if this is of any importance but as my original claim is for £15449.80p i forgot to mention the court costs in the final total of £16049.80p. although this total was not mentioned in the folders it is mentioned in recent coresponance with abbey... is this a problem????all i shown is statements , charges and interest.. its all mentioned in my court bundle i am preparing for court case in september.
  6. see....fidiciary relationship .... when i thought i had it covered in most areas something else pops up...it is a hard thing to get ur head round.. its sounds basic.. contract workls both ways.. it does... but its not that simple... now thanks gary i now have something else to read... but this is what u need.. ideas passed round so u can get a wider view of th interest...
  7. sorry am i being stupid... what is SOL ??? also i have included this in my court bundle as part of my fight for CI.. As to Paragraph xx of the defence, the defendant asserts that there is no valid basis for the claimant to claim compound interest at xx.xx%. The claimant notes that Paragraph xx of the Defence, which purports to deal with this aspect of the claim, does not give a reason for the defendant’s denial of the claim. The claimant contends that this aspect of his claim should not be determined until there has been a judicial ruling on the lawfulness of the defendant’s charges. The claimant acknowledges that the terms of the contract only provide for the defendant to charge and receive compound interest on monies the claimant borrows from the defendant. The claimant’s case for claiming interest at the rate applied by the defendant to the claimant’s borrowing, is based in equity and a legal requirement for fairness and balance: When entering into the contract with the defendant, the claimant had no reason to anticipate that the defendant, having a long-established reputation in the banking industry, would make unlawful deductions from his account. Had this been a foreseeable event, the claimant might well have taken a different view about whether to agree to a contract which did not provide the claimant with a mutual right to charge the defendant interest in the event that monies were wrongly taken from his account, over a considerable number of years, thus producing a false picture of the claimant’s indebtedness to the defendant over the entire period covered by the claim, and unjustly enriching the defendant at the same time. The claimant’s case is not that the contract should provide for the claimant to be entitled to charge interest at the rate which the defendant reserves for itself in the ordinary everyday course of dealings. The claimant is inviting the court to award interest and therefore compensate the claimant at the same rate that the defendant deems fair compensation for allowing the claimant to use its money, given that the defendant’s withdrawals from the claimant’s account were unlawful, and given that unlawful withdrawals were unforeseeable at the time of the entering into the contract. If the defendant avers that its charges are fair, reasonable and therefore enforceable, its remedy will be to provide evidence of its actual losses or pre-estimate of costs in relation to the claimant’s account breaches. Since the defendant has been invited to do so prior to the issue of court proceedings, and has refused, and since the claimant is aware that the defendant has failed to defend any other similar claim at trial, the claimant deems the defendant’s charges to the account to be indefensible, and unenforceable at law. It was clearly not in the claimant’s contemplation when entering into the contract, that the claimant would authorise the defendant to apply penalty charges to the account, or to profit in an unlawful manner from the claimant’s account breaches. It should also be noted that the claimant had no bargaining power to determine the terms of the contract and as all banks trade in similar terms, the claimant had no effective choice in the matter. For the contract to confer advantageous terms (i.e. entitlement to compensation) on one party (the defendant) where there is no comparable term in favour of the other party (the claimant) is to create an imbalance in the parties’ rights and is contrary to the requirements of Regulation 5 (1) of the Unfair Terms In Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (“UTCCR”). Regulation 5 (1) of the UTCCR states as follows: “Unfair Terms 5. – (1) A contractual term which has not been individually negotiated shall be regarded as unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties’ rights and obligations arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer.” Therefore, to satisfy the requirement of fairness within the definition given by the UTCCR, the contract should provide a mutual or reciprocal term permitting the customer to apply the same rate of interest on any unauthorised withdrawals from the customer’s account by the bank. The interest claimed is therefore deemed to provide an equitable remedy in the context of the claim. The claimant’s claim for compound interest should be viewed in the in the context of the claim rather than in isolation, and with full regard for the seriousness of the defendant’s misdemeanours which have led to the defendant profiting unlawfully from the claimant’s account defaults. It is entirely inequitable that the defendant should have deprived the claimant of the use of his monies for this length of time without repaying it with interest at the rate which it charges the claimant in equivalent circumstances; monies which it is in the business of re-lending at the same commercial rate of interest and which will only restore the defendant to the position where it had not received any benefit from having had use of the claimant’s money. i have done quite a bit of reading.. when i started of i thought it was straight forward bout CI, but as i go on i find out its harder. which is why i have spent just as much time reading and writing bout CI as i have done on claiming the charges... i claim to be no expert but i am wiser now than i was in the begining...
  8. further to that gary is that why we are all taking banks to court.... to show there has been a breach in trust. and if there has not then should'nt the banks be there defending the claims. i do feel we r all taking chances in making claims on and that the reason they wont is not that they wont win but the wider implications of what they have to divulge to the courts on how these charges come about...
  9. i am trying to understand what context it is being used.. that sounded harsh Gary H should i be worried... if so in what way...any help would be great ..going to read again....
  10. just a quick message that if i am right might put a smile back on your face.... do u have any form of beifits or tax credits going into ur bank before you can clear that o/d... if so and i do believe i am right the benifits cannot be swollowed up by the charges... i do hope i am right.. if so go into the bank and get them to pay ur monies in cash when they r due... hope this helps....
  11. Had a look on google for " trite law". got some feedback but cannot see what she is quoting it for.. any ideas or am i looking at it and therefore blind as a bat....
  12. hi... had to send inga a load of details and charges spreadsheets so she can consider my claim.... did that over the w/e and got this back today... Without prejudice" Dear Sir, It is trite law that a claim for interest at 28.7% is bound to file. Abbey has successfully defended such claims before the Court. May I respectfully request that you recalculate your claim at the statutory interest rate of 8% in order that I can assess your claim. Many thanks, Inga Kirkman anyone seen this before??? also they have defended this rate of 28.7% in court... i hope i am not being silly but they have never defend anything in court.... any ideas on how i can reply to this.....
  13. no i have an unauth o/d chg.... could it be a change of name????? i usually add the description of the charge on a seprate sheet so incase the bank tries to bluff.... thanks once again... i think that is all....
  14. can i get a quick desciption of them if u know them.... thanks...
  15. sorry once again i have another... what is a paid referral at £20... have a few of these... r they charges....
  16. excellent... well not really.. means i cant claim..
  17. hi... just helping a friend with their charges.... not problems there, but i did come across a part on there statement like this.... details payment receipts date + place name REM 75.03U u/c days3 75.03 num items 1 kept out personal details but i need to know what the REM part is. cant work out from the balance if its a charge or credit.... any ideas if i can claim it or what the REM part is... its in the box for the abbriviation ie.. chg, atm,ddb etc.....
  18. thanks ICY... anybody any help?????
  19. quick update and i am in a right pickle, well in fact its a bloody shambles... had my directions from the judge to send of to courts and abbey a break down of charges, interest etc.... over the past 4 months the interest calculation seemed ok.. but i tried another spreadsheet and it seemed all wrong.. infact i tried loads. give or take a few quid here and there the new spreadsheets worked out ok, but my original did not.... now my backside is twitching and i have this bad feeling in my stomach it will all go pete tong.. and to make matters worse Inga Kirkman has contacted me to sort out the claim... she wants a list of all charges and interest so we can come to an agreement.. but i think my spreadsheet wont stand up... what shall i do... it seems my CI of 28.7% works out far more on the new sprdsheets then my original.. if she starts to ask me about it and says she has one and the figures r different what the hell shall i do... i need an expert or somebody with more brain cells then the single one bouncing around in my empty head to help me... i cant attach files to my thread so i can offer my email out so i can send them to somebody for help... i need to know what i need to say to her to clarify my figures... my charges r ok but the interest is bad..... i have my head around claiming CI and i am pretty confident i can holdmy ground on the argument but my figures i am sure will be my downful... PLEASE HELP ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  20. thks... well thats all done.. all in nice little folders in individual sleeves, all indexed etc etc... remember presentation is 100% effective.. if the courts see u made an effort they will treat it that way... if it looks like a right shag pile then it will be treated with the contempt it deserves... i guess!!!!
  21. just another quickie..( he he he)... just finished my first part of order that wants me to send to abbey and court my schedule of charges etc etc... now shall i also include the print out of interest spreadsheet???? i have sorted it out in my court bundle but dont want to add it to these files unless its needed... any help...
  22. i thought so... its just the way its put into a sentence confused me.. thanks....
  23. just finishing some aperwork to send of to abbey for the directions i got from the court and i came across this under the court bundle part on the order "Any witness statements must be included in the documents filed and served." now what does that mean filed and served????? thought after months and months of reading and doing the claim i was understanding but of course another spanner pops up in the works...
  24. thks gary... thats why i am spending more time on reading the contractual interest threads so i have an understanding if i need to fight it... but i am keeping abreast on the charges aswell so i am not just concentrating on one area... but i am hoping it wont get to court and they fight the interest part.. but am i right that they cant just defend one area, they have to defend both???? cause if they admitt ( well they dont admitt it) and pay up on the charges then all i have to do is stand my ground and get them to pay up for both????? i hope i got it right... as with the ordert i got sent and the 2 different dates, the chap at court apologised for the 3 week delay in getting it typed up and marked on the claim that there was a delay and the 28 days stated from 2 day and not the 8th may as stated... well more to read up and get my head round the leal side of the interest... cheers gary for help and i might if i have a brain fart in the future relie on ur knowledge ... tks again....
×
×
  • Create New...