Thanks for that Bigmac. The matter may now be resolved as they are going to refund as a"gesture of goodwill" after I had threatened to sue the company. I've now composed a letter to the MD for my daughter to send accusing the company of operating illegally, so we'll wait and see how he replies.

Hi I was wondering if anyone could give some advice about an issue my daughter is dealing with. She and her boyfriend needed to hire a car and they telephoned Hertz who were happy to book one for them to be picked up from the local dealership. My daughter who is 20 had to be the main hirer of the car because they would not accept her boyfriend's debit card as it was a Solo card. They immediately took the charge of £55. When they went to collect the car they were informed that neither of them was old enough to hire a vehicle, needing to be over 25, and that they should contact the customer services to arrange a refund. When they did that they were told that a refund would be made within 10 working days. However this was not made and my daughter contacted Hertz again. She was told that the matter had been looked into and that no refund was due because the operator at the time claimed to have informed them that they had to be over 25. Firstly, my daughter's boyfriend made the original call and they did the booking without once asking to speak to her. They took her card details without asking to speak to her for permission. He denies that the question of age was ever mentioned. When customer services were later challenged about the question of taking her card details, they replied that this would have been verified when the car was collected. Surely then the payment should not have been taken until this verification was made? Am I right in thinking that if someone is not eligible to enter into a contract in the first place, which my daughter clearly was not if she was under the required age, then the contract would be null and void anyway and Hertz are acting illegally in withholding her money. Any help please!!

Thanks Pete Just clutching at straws really. I guess will just have to sit it out and wait like everybody else. Just when I could almost taste the dosh!!

Can anyone help with post No 39 please. Have now had letter from DG saying that they will be requesting a stay and I want to get a letter to the court requesting its refusal on the grounds that UTCCRs is not my only argument, and also because some of the charges relate to refused direct debits and not overdraft fees?

Can anyone please help regarding previous post. Have now had standard letter from DG saying that they will be requesting a stay and I want to get a letter to the court requesting its refusal on grounds that UTCC is not my only argument, and also because some of the charges relate to returned direct debits not overdraft fees.?

Hi Have been keeping an eye on threads to see how other people are getting on since 27/7. DG have still got until next Friday to submit their directions to the court and I'm going to assume at the moment that they will ask for a stay. As my particulars of claim was not only quoting UTCCRs, but also the Unfair Contract Terms Act, can anybody please tell me exactly how I could argue for that - in other words how are the banks contravening that Act?

I seriously wonder if this test case will ever actually get to the high court. If the OFT is due to make an announcement later this year on the amount they consider to be 'fair' for bank charges, then surely the banks just want to stall things until then. Once they have that figure to work with they will start making counter claims on the cases already waiting in the courts and make offers to all the other people at the prelim stages. Either way a case won't stand a chance in court and everyone will have very little choice but to accept what they offer.

I don't think this test case will ever actually get to court. In view of the fact that the OFT are going to announce later this year what they think a 'fair' charge is, I think the banks just want to wait for that. Once they have that figure to work with they will either counter claim against all cases already waiting at the courts, or make offers to everyone who hasn't gone that far yet. Either way they won't have nearly as much to pay out and court fees won't have to be repaid either.

I've now phoned the court and DG did not send back the AQ. Can I write straight away to request the defence to be struck out, and when I write to DG should I send them a copy of the letter?

Can anyone help me with the timing of this letter to request strike out. I don't know for sure whether DG have returned the AQ and I'm going to phone the court today to find out. If they haven't then presumably I could send the letter straight away. If they have returned it, then should I wait for the 14 day deadline before the allocation hearing and if they don't serve their draft directions, then request for strike out. Also I haven't sent any nudge letters yet, but am going to start sending them now that there is a definite date to aim for. Should I send standard nudge letter or is there a specific one mentioning that we now have a date for a hearing?

Hi everyone Just to clarify - when I returned my AQ I did not send draft directions, I asked the judge to order standard disclosure. As I've now had the General Form of Judgement I am assuming that DG returned their AQ fairly promptly, and as you've all said I think the judge is putting pressure on them now to prove their case. I'm inclining towards writing and requesting for strike out.

Hi Pete Thanks for that - can you give me the thread for each of those two choices please - sorry if I'm being thick but I get lost on the site very quickly!

Hi After completing allocation questionnaire and sending it back to court by 9th July, I have today had a General Form of Judgement Order. It is ordered that there will be an allocation hearing on 7th September to consider either staying the claim pending the decision in a test case involving the Defendant or giving directions for this claim to be heard as a test case and if necessary allocating the claim to the multi track for that purpose (I had asked for the small claims track). Also, not less than 14 days before the hearing the Defendant shall file with the Court and serve upon me details of any cases proceeding as a test case, the decision in which will determine the issues in this claim. Alternatively the Defendant shall file with the Court and serve upon me draft directions for this case to proceed as a test case. I may make any representations to the Court in writing provided these are received by the Court and served on the Defendant not less than 5 days before the allocation hearing. What exactly does all this mean? Is it going to help me or just delay this whole thing even longer? As far as I know HSBC haven't got any test cases in the pipe line - or am I wrong? Any help very gratefully received!

Hi Why don't you contact the Trading Standards Office and ask their advice - I've always found them very helpful. I've also found that when you write to a company and quote the rules of Trading Standards they know you mean business and usually do something to rectify the matter. Good luck.

OK. But from what I can make out this order for strike out is on the basis that they are playing games with claimants, i.e. wasting court time by submitting defence and then paying out at the last minute. Draft order requests them to list successfully fought cases against cases where they have paid out. This argument seems pretty reasonable to me.