Hi, I was not getting much help or info from the Woolwich board so I am posting here as this will have interest to a few others I imagine. Many many years ago (Like 9-10years!) I had a Woolwich Account with an ex wife. We split and that account became a debt. I have no idea how I imagine her spending etc. I do not remember getting a default notice nor how it ended up at Equidebt Limited, but it did. I agreed payments and have been paying religiously until now. I decided it was time to find out what I was paying, why etc. I asked for the CCA agreement or what info they had on this. Surprise surprise Equidebt said they sent everything back to Woolwich (so debt was NOT sold on) and Woolwich said "too old no info!". I truly cannot believe the arrogance of the banks! So I proceeded to issue an N1 form at my local court with the following POC: 1. The Claimant had an account (“the Account”) with the Defendant which was joint with his ex-wife. This was opened on or around 1997 and subsequently sent to a debt recovery firm (“Equidebt Limited”) in 1998 2. A schedule of payments made to Equidebt Limited is attached to these particulars of claim 3. The Claimant made a formal request for a copy of the signed, executed credit agreement for the above account under Section 77(1) and Section 78(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 to the debt recovery company and the Defendant 4. The Claimant contends that the debt amount was inaccurate and would therefore like proof of how the debt was originally came about as the Claimant was not the main account holder. 5. The Defendants obligation to supply these documents has been breached under Section 189 of the CCA 1974 and therefore the debt is unenforceable and cannot now be proved or enforced in a court of Law 6. The Defendant contends that the data was destroyed under the Data Protection Act, however, the Information Commissioners Office only issues Data Protection guidelines and as any learned person would know “standard industry practice” does not correlate with “legal right or responsibility”. The Claimant therefore requests a full refund of payments made under this non enforceable debt, interest and court fees going back to its inception. 7. The Claimant argues that this account was active by virtue of regular payments being made into it on a monthly basis. 8. In accordance with the Act section 142(1)(b) the Claimant requests that the court declares the credit agreement unenforceable under section 65(1) by virtue of section 127(3). 9. By virtue of the unenforceability of the credit agreement as item 10 above, the Defendant has no rights, as precedent set in Wilson and others v Secretary of State for Trade and industry (Appellant) [2003] UKHL 40. 10. Therefore the Claimant claims all monies received by the Defendant or Equidebt Limited to the Account. 11. Save payments into and/or determined by the Court, any sums paid in settlement of this claim are required to be made by cheque, which should be made payable to the Claimant. 12. Accordingly the Claimant Claims: a) the return of the amounts paid to Equifax Limited in the sum of £1038; b) Court Costs; c) The claimant claims interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year, from 28/05/1998 to 06/07/2007 of £478.37 and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of £0.23 I believe that the contents of these particulars of claim are true. Now I got in contact with Barclays litigation to speed things up (I thought) and now I hear they will defend. They have until 4pm Monday so no doubt something will turn up on Monday morning. In the meantime I would love to have people’s views on this matter over the weekend, whilst I am waiting to find out what they are going to say. I mean are they really going to tell a Judge "we don't know much about this except he did owe us the money and so please don't judge against us!" Has anyone else been in a similar position or done the same sort of thing? Penfold

Just to let you guys know, I dropped the letter and draft Directions in to be told by the lady at the counter that all bank charge cases are being automatically stayed in Luton now. I did ask if the judge would see the letter and she said yes, but she gave me the impression that it would be stayed anyway... Oh well, Penfold

Thanks so much Age, I have worked those little things in. Let's we what happens... Penfold

This is what I am handing into the Court on Monday morning: The Court Manager RE: Claim number XXXXXXX Issue Date: XX July 2007 Dear Sir/Madam, We received our copy of the defence yesterday. We would like to request that the District Judge not allow the Defendant to continue to abuse the legal system by time wasting. We are also aware that there are a large volume of claims that consumers are bringing against the high street banks. We are also aware that to date that HSBC have failed to defend any case in the courts and that they often use the court process to extend and delay the period of time within which they deal with these matters satisfactorily. Personally, we believe that HSBC is merely abusing the legal system, like so many other banks, and we ask you to ask the Judge to throw out the case as an abuse of the legal process like many other Judges are now doing. Failing that then we, the Claimants, respectfully suggest that special directions may be made as per the enclosed draft order. We think that this would expedite the matter, which will hopefully lead to an early resolution and therefore making a court date unnecessary altogether. We are also aware that many Banks are now using the Office of Fair Trading Test Case as another excuse to issue a stay against cases. This again is merely their attempt to stall the legal system. We are aware that many District Judges are not agreeing to these as per the letter written by the Deputy Head of Civil Justice who wrote to all Designated Civil Judges, inviting them to consider staying outstanding claims on a case by case basis as appropriate. The Claimants believe the proposed directions will further the Overriding Objectives in that they identify the most fundamental issues in dispute (as detailed below), and allow them to be assessed in advance of any hearing so that this claim may proceed justly and expeditiously. The crux upon which this claim rests is the true loss suffered by the Defendant as a result of the contractual breach from which its charges arise. If the Defendant cannot substantiate the cost of each charge as proportionate to its loss incurred, it has charged contractual penalties contrary to the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 and common law principles established since the early 1900's. In the event that the Defendant's charges were accepted as being a fee for a service (which is refuted), examination of its true costs is required to determine whether the price is reasonable as required by the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982. The Claimant believes that if the Defendant has the serious intention of defending this claim at trial as is indicated by its defence, that it is incumbent on it to disclose such information. Further, the proposed directions are already routinely ordered in claims of this nature in the Mercantile Court in London, as well as in small claims track cases in Leicester, Derby, Chesterfield, Northampton and Mansfield County Courts. As the law relating to contractual penalties is long established, the Claimant believes the outstanding issues to be of fact. Accordingly, the Claimant respectfully requests that this claim be allocated to the small claims track, and estimates that the hearing of the claim should last no longer than one hour. Yours faithfully, enc: Draft Order Draft Order for Directions 1. The Claimant shall within 7 days of service of this order send to the Defendant and to the Court: a) A schedule setting out each charge repayment of which is sought, showing the date, amount, and reason given (if any) for that charge being made; b) Copies of any statement or other document relied upon as showing that each and every charge has been made; c) A statement of evidence of all matters relied upon as tending to show that the charges are irrecoverable as penalties or otherwise; d) Copies of decided cases and other legal materials to be relied upon. If the Claimant fails to comply with this order, the claim will be struck out without further order. 2. The Defendant shall within 7 days thereafter file and serve a response to the Claimant's schedule, stating in respect of each item claimed; a) Pursuant to what contractual provision such charge was made, producing a copy of the contractual document relied upon; b) Whether such charge is accepted to be a penalty, and if not why not; c) If such charge is alleged to be a pre-estimate of the Defendant's loss incurred by the Claimant's actions (whether or not such action is treated as a breach of contract between the parties), all facts and matters intended to be relied upon as showing that such was a proper estimate of such loss, and all evidence to be adduced at trial as to what the true cost of dealing with the matter was; d) If such charge is not alleged to be a pre-estimate of the Defendant's loss incurred by the Claimant's actions then facts and matters intended to be relied upon showing the basis upon which the charge was calculated and all evidence to be adduced at trial as to show that the charge was fair and reasonable. e) Any witness statements. f) Copies of decided cases and other legal materials to be relied upon. If the Defendant fails to comply with this order, the Defense will be struck out without further order. I hope this will be agreed by the Judge and so we can keep the whole thing moving, Penfold

It appears to be a mess up by the Courts! Barclays Litigation filed an acknowledgement of service and intention to defend. So I should not have been allowed to try to get judgement. Does that go against me in the eyes of the Judge or merely an error that they will see? Also the court sent me the letter regarding the acknowledgement with no stamp so it took longer and I had to pay for it too!!! My conversations with Barclays Litigation were fruitful in a way because I now have the name and email of the guy who will be dealing with my case so perhalps not a bad thing in the end... Will keep all updated, Penfold

UPDATE: Got the Defence today from the Court: The Claimant’s account is governed by the Defendant’s personal and/or business banking terms and conditions Pursuant to the Defendant’s terms and conditions the Defendant is entitled to make a charge for its services as set out in the Defendant’s price list (are they a shop then?), including an overdraft review fee for considering whether to provide and providing and overdraft. (English is pretty bad isn’t it for a legal document?) The Defendant denies that the charges applied to the Claimant’s account amount to penalties at common law and/or unfair contract terms for the purposes of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (UTCCRs). The charges applied to the Claimant’s account are reasonable and are properly and fully disclosed in the Defendant’s terms and conditions and published price list. The charges represent the contractually agreed price for the services provided and the UTCCRs are not applicable to them; alternatively, they are not unfair contrary to the UTCCRs. Further, the charges are not default charges and, accordingly, cannot amount to a penalty. Save set out above, each and every allegation made by the Claimant is denied. For the reasons set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief. Should I wait for Directions or can I send the letter suggesting draft directions and include a paragraph about the stays being requested? Thanks Penfold

Ok now I am worried.... I decided that since Judgement was supposed to be due today by default (Woolwich not defending) I thought well I can speak to Barclays Litigation and get things moving. Problem is that now they are aware of the case and will be dealing with it. I do not know if it slipped under the door without them realising and I have now messed it up by informing them of my case! So silly I cannot believe I was trying to be clever and have probably stuffed myself...If they decided to defend late will the Judge take into account I informed them of the case etc? Any views appreciated guys, Penfold

Sorry I should point out I have asked for Judgement and that should be back from District Judge today or monday and I have told the litigation team this info...Told them to save me (and them) the extra cash for a bailif. Penfold

Defence was supposed to be in on 6th and I spoke to someone in their litigation team today who asked me to pass all info to her to organise. But I do not know what she is organising! I am worried they are putting a defense together, but if they were then why did they not submit it in time...So I do not know what to think. Penfold

Hi, Can I please get peoples opinions of a claim being acknowledged, but no defence put in. Would you look at it as positive for the Claimant? The Defendant waiting to see what judgement the judge makes? Neither positive nor negitive? Thanks, Penfold

Hi, I rang to speak to Barclays LItigation and it looks like they never got the claim from the court. Should I wait for judgement today or talk to them and assume judgement to try to get them to settle without instructing baliffs? I do not know what to do in case they fax/ write to the judge to claim they did not get the paperwork and want to put a defense in or set the judgement aside.. Help please... Penfold

Hi, So to update, I rang the court today to see if HSBC have put in defence (they have until tomorrow) and unfortuantely they did yesterday so what do I need to do now? Draft Directions? Object to any attempt to stay the case? I did ask about stays and the Civil Court lady said she did not think any had been granted and also that HSBA have not asked for this case to be stayed. I assume if they would they would do so at the last minute again? Thanks, Penfold

Thanks Welshcakes, That's pretty much what I thought too. Next defendant is NatWest so completely different. No agreement and bless them they sent me statements with my name completely wrong so not even me! But I have been paying! Oh they are in trouble... I wonder if they will defend? I still cannot believe Woolwich did not defend or try to at least... Penfold

Hi and thanks for the reply, but I filled this at my local court and they confirmed no defence filled. They also said put judgement in straight away. So I did that yesterday and await the outcome. If this result goes my way can I use it in my particulars of claim on another debt that has no agreement? Thanks, Penfold

Thanks, but does it matter that I put it down as Barclays Bank plc (Woolwich) and not Barclays Bank plc T/a Woolwich? Just trying to make sure I have not allowed them a loophole? Also can they still put a defence in or I will need to just go for a warrant once I get the judgement? I have had not contact what so ever from their litigation team. Thanks, Penfold

Hi, I have taken Barclays to court due to an old Woolwich account (see Woolwich thread), but my question is this: They have not entered a defence, can they argue for a stay because they are not the Woolwich? I put the defendant as Barclays Bank plc (Woolwich) Please advise as I have gone for a Judgement today and am now panicing... Thanks, Penfold

Hi, Further to several months of letters to and fro I decided to take Woolwich to court and issued on 20th July and they had till yesterday to defend. They did not send a defence in! What do I do now? This is not bank charges, but claiming monies back for an old debt they they cannot prove. See POC below: 1. The Claimant had an account (“the Account”) with the Defendant which was joint with his ex-wife. This was opened on or around 1997 and subsequently sent to a debt recovery firm (“Equidebt Limited”) in 1998 2. A schedule of payments made to Equidebt Limited is attached to these particulars of claim 3. The Claimant made a formal request for a copy of the signed, executed credit agreement for the above account under Section 77(1) and Section 78(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 to the debt recovery company and the Defendant 4. The Claimant contends that the debt amount was inaccurate and would therefore like proof of how the debt was originally came about as the Claimant was not the main account holder. 5. The Defendants obligation to supply these documents has been breached under Section 189 of the CCA 1974 and therefore the debt is unenforceable and cannot now be proved or enforced in a court of Law 6. The Defendant contends that the data was destroyed under the Data Protection Act, however, the Information Commissioners Office only issues Data Protection guidelines and as any learned person would know “standard industry practice” does not correlate with “legal right or responsibility”. The Claimant therefore requests a full refund of payments made under this non enforceable debt, interest and court fees going back to its inception. 7. The Claimant argues that this account was active by virtue of regular payments being made into it on a monthly basis. 8. In accordance with the Act section 142(1)(b) the Claimant requests that the court declares the credit agreement unenforceable under section 65(1) by virtue of section 127(3). 9. By virtue of the unenforceability of the credit agreement as item 10 above, the Defendant has no rights, as precedent set in Wilson and others v Secretary of State for Trade and industry (Appellant) [2003] UKHL 40. 10. Therefore the Claimant claims all monies received by the Defendant or Equidebt Limited to the Account. 11. Save payments into and/or determined by the Court, any sums paid in settlement of this claim are required to be made by cheque, which should be made payable to the Claimant. 12. Accordingly the Claimant Claims: a) the return of the amounts paid to Equifax Limited in the sum of £1038; b) Court Costs; c) The claimant claims interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year, from 28/05/1998 to 06/07/2007 of £478.37 and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of £0.23 I believe that the contents of these particulars of claim are true. Please help what do I do now and how??? Thanks, Penfold

Luton County Court

Hi, That's what I thought, but if they miss the deadline because of the strikes can they argue the point and get the defence in a few days later? Thanks, Penfold

Hi Guys, Just a quick question, HSBC have until the 10th to defend the case, but how is this effected by the postal strikes? Can they get extra days because of them or they still have to stick to the court deadlines? Thanks, Penfold

Hi guys, Update time, further to my correspondences with Sir Fred and co I fainally got a letter yesterday from Iain Clink Cheif Exec of natWest Cards to say they do not have a legal agreeement with me and so the debt is unenforceable, but because closed in 2004 and settled no refund! Funny he failed to mention the other debt I am quering still with a fair bit on it! I wonder why...Oops no agreement once more me thinks... LOL see you in court mate...I have issued him with a LBA to ask how he came to that conclusion given the Banks "Legal Charges" and the rest of the truth they tell! If no agreement exists then no debt exists and so I will fight for refund. Anyone think I can win the refund of payments made? Thanks, Penfold92

Hi, You have raised an interesting point, an overdraft (whether authorised or not) is a form of credit. So I too am curious to know if this falls under the CCA or not. If not it must surely be under some credit agreement or else how would the bank guarentee to get their money back? Looking forward to more insight on this one, Penfold

Ok, So when should you send them one after the case has been acknowledged or when they say they will defend? Thanks, Penfold

Hi, No I actually used a physical N1 form and went to my local court, was told that was better and more info included. Schedules already with the forms, Penfold

Hi Guys, Quick update on this: Home sold and IVA should be paid off in full and final settlement this week or so. In the meantime: 5/3/07 Sent initial letter re questioning debt and proof of CCA etc 40 days working days limit - around 18th April 18/04/07 Letter before action sent after the 40days has expired. Got the statements. Then wrote to HSBC regarding the default on the 23/04/07 11/06/07 Sent prelimary request for monies today 14 days 26/06/07 Letter before action sent another 14 days given 11/07/07 Submitted N1 form to the county court So what now guys? I understand HSBC have 14 days to file a defense and if they do they get extra 14 days. Is that right? Do I need to do anything in the meantime? Thanks, Penfold