There are no stings attached to these goodwill offers from Abbey. If the OFT were to actually lose the test case then there would be nothing to repay to Abbey. Rgds Budgie

Hi Belville, Just tying up the loop. Have a great break Budgie

Hi Belville, How are things going on this? Are you considering making an attempt to get your claim sorted under the latest financial hardship definitions produced by the FSA and the newly issued Waiver extension ? Rgds Budgie

Hi Brownie All you need to do is follow the advice given by MkAndy in Icy's Capital One thread when preparing your N1 POC. "Underneath the section that contains 'what the claimaints requires' - just put 'removal of the Incorrectly recorded Default Notice from the claimant's credit file' include the date it was added and the amount. If it gets to court, which it wont, you could argue that if the charges are indeed unlawful, the Default is therefore incorrect and in turn a clear breach of the data protection act." Nothing more need be said at this stage. Regards Budgie

Hi Browni, Have a read of "Court fees do I have to pay them" on the HMCS website. Court Fees I suspect that by simply filling in the form and providing the relevant information you could avoid having to pay a fee. Your boyfriend will probably be able to do the same with his own claim. There is nothing to be scared of or worried about in filing a court claim and nothing can be said against you for the delay between you sending letters and filing a claim. Capital One will fold at the stage when they have to file their defence and will refund all of your charges, plus all the purchase interest you ever paid on the account, plus statutory court interest. This will be about 1 month from now IF you file your court claim this week. I therefore strongly recommend that you get your court claim, for the refund of your charges started ASAP. You can tackle the default situation as part of your claim. The account should not have been placed in default because the account was in dispute etc etc. They currently owe you more back in charges than you owe them on the balance of the account and by the time you add the court interest onto your claim they will owe you even more. If you need any help with filling out the court fee forms or your N1 for your court claim just ask away. Budgie

Hi Brownie, Have just read your thread. Sorry to be blunt but there is only one thing you can and should do to sort out this situation. File your N1 at Court. You can send whatever letters you like they do not care You could /should have filed your N1 a year ago! Is there a reason why you haven't done so. Rgds Budgie

Steven4064, please clear some space in your PM inbox, am getting bounce backs LOL Rgds Budgie PS : You should now be able to view my thread on the other site, in VIP area

With all due respect YB. RUC is not the place for it. It wouldnt be too much trouble to set up an new independant site, jointly administered by a team of say one or at most two Admin Members from each member site. There would be a secure area that could be used by the full Admin Teams and nominated persons of all member sites for the purpose of getting together, thrashing out ideas and assisting each other. Access to that area could be limited to those people whom the Admin each site decide could be useful members of the "think tank". The site could also be used as a central repository/library that could be accessed by any member of any site and where the Admin of each site could deposit material. Test Case reports and news ( live reporting feeds for example ) could be posted up on the site. Each site would provide links to the various facilities for it's own members. Crikey there are countless uses to which such a site could be put. But I will leave it to others to maybe suggest things as well. The actual format of RUC is very simple and easy to use and would probably make an ideal format for a site such as I have suggested. Smasher would be the ideal guy to develop such a site, with his experience from developiong RUC and his new site British Consumer. I wonder if he would be interested in getting involved!

I would even be prepared to assist in organising it ! It would need a good Chairman,and if anyone suggests Angela Knight I will personally hang draw and quarter them.

Thanks Rooster, but IMO some of the smaller sites are actually leading the way in certain areas and are actually leaving the bigger sites behind. Biggest is not always best. There is so much expertise out there now that should really be made available somehow to every claimer using every site who needs that tyoe of expertise. I made a suggestion earlier about arranging a meeting between all the sites owners and nominated representatives. This could initially be an online meeting using some form of online conferencing system. There would be no need initially to all meet up physically. Surely it has got to be worth trying to do something along these lines, at least to determine if there is any possibility of some form of Consumer Co-Op. Budgie

I totally agree YB. What is needed is a totally unified approach, maybe a combined "think tank" website ( as I suggested in an earlier post ), with each site still retaining their own individual identity and members, but using a common approach to reclaiming, developed by the thinktank boffins. There would be nothing to be gained by individual alliances between various pairs or smaller groups of websites. We basically have that already anyway.

Does anyone think this might be a possibility. RUC peeps could, of course be included in this as well. It would be a shame to lose the expertise that existed on that site. I have some ideas if anyone would like to seriously discuss the matter. Maybe we could start a new thread. What do you think MTM ??

I am listening and have commented as have others

I said my piece and won't go into any more details. I actually thoroughly enjoyed my time on RUC and it was once a very good site.

No need for any changes to template letters at the moment. Basically nothing has changed since the test case was first announced. Most people's claims are for repayment of charges based upon historic terms. No judgement has yet been handed down wrt historic terms and probably won't be for another three months. Even the Nationwide penalty aspect scenario is still open as this was raised once again by the OFT at the 7th, 8th, 9th July hearing. Obviously, template letters will need to be updated once the full judgements have been handed down and the various appeals dealt with but at the moment there is no real need to change or amend any letters currently listed on the RUC site.