Jump to content

PeterT1953

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    22
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About PeterT1953

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. That is a fair point, of course. I was simply making the point that the OP had indicated that she did have the money to pay the fare, and that maybe proceeding to prosecution may be a trifle harsh under the circumstances. I do travel regularly by FCC, and i have noticed this year a marked increase in the number of ticket inspectors - my impression is that more that 50% of journeys do seem to have them. Which is of course right and proper.
  2. I think lg086 was saying in her original post that she did have the money for the fare on her (£6.50) but not the amount needed for the penalty fare (£20)
  3. Thank you again Lea. The same thought had crossed my mind, that they try the same strategy again, and try to bring the case back to court before the 31st March. It is strange, but reviewing the correspondence and phone logs, it does give the strong impression that it is quite "personal", and that they are rather miffed that they did not get possession of her property, or a suspended order first time round. One of their representatives even suggested that debtors need to be punished. If so, it is extremely odd that an international banking group could be conducting a personal batt
  4. She has received a copy of the court order, which says "adjourned generally with liberty to restore before 31st March 2012, when claim will be struck out". So not a disaster (I hope) but not quite what she asked for. I would like to say a huge thank you to Lea and Ell-enn for your help and support in this.
  5. Not sure if this is of any help but the FSA have just fined Swift 1st Limited £630,000 for treating customers unfairly. They have also agreed to pay redress to customers that they have overcharged, an amount estimated to be £2.35m.
  6. Thank you very much Lea. That does help to clarify things quite a lot. So the devil will be in the detail! This whole experience has been quite an eye opener for me! I had not realised quite how mendacious some of the bank litigation deaptments could be.
  7. Lea, many thanks again for your help. She went to the court this afternoon, and I went with her as moral support. With a statement for the court, which she handed to the Usher. She was not called and did not see the judge at all. He simply sent a message saying that he was "adjourning the case indefinitely" and that in due course she would receive the papers from the court confirming the decision. So not sure where she stands right now, to be honest? It looks as though the Woolwich may have got an adjournemnt with liberty to restore? No doubt time will tell. Is there anythi
  8. Thank you Lea - you raise some very good questions. It had been in my mind to attend anyway, in case they decide to ask the Judge for something other than an adjournment! How should she go about it? Perhaps a statement for the court? Thanks for your help so far - I cannot tell you how valuable it has been in enabling me to offer some reassurance.
  9. Lea - thank you once again. Your help in this has been amazing! Yes, a hearing has been listed for 2pm on the 1st September. And confirmation has been received from the court. She wrote to both Barclays and the solicitors on the 5th, repeating her offer of current monthly instalment plus £120, outlining the arrears figures and showing how they had reduced over time etc. Last night she had a letter from the solicitors saying that they would like to adjourn the case on the basis that she maintains payments as agreed. Huge relief that she will not have to appear in court again! Bu
  10. Thank you Lea. I cannot say how much I appreciate your care and attention on this. The spreadsheet shows a pretty convincing picture - perfect apart from a blip in June when by mistake she paid the normal payment by the end of June but the extra £100 a few days into July. However according to their own statements for the quarter April 2011 to June 2011, she was already ahead in payments by more than £100 at the time. (mind you I think their accounting system is up the creek, but at least it is there in black and white on their statement produced at the beginning of July). By the
  11. The only recent development has been that late on Friday she picked up a message from Barclays on her home answering machine saying that they want to discuss her letter. And asking her phone an 0870 number. In her letter she had asked that they write rather than phone so that there is a written record of any communications. Lea - thanks for your help so far - the spreadsheet showing the payments made etc will be done this week. Would you like me to pm it to you?
  12. Lea - many thanks once again. That is very reassuring. I have to say that I am exhausted and I am not the one in the firing line! So god knows how she is feeling. Will finish the spreadsheet analysis next week and start to gather the statements and documents confirming the arrears position. Then I suppose it is a case of waiting for details of their claim - I would be surprised, in the circumstances, if they base their claim on the basis that "further arrears have accrued" because they clearly have not and it is simple to prove. And she has stuck like glue to the agreement.
  13. Thanks Lea. The first payment following the judgement was in September 2010, so at the end of August this will be £1200 on the basis of the wording of the judgement. - ie 7055 - 1200 = £5855. So if her arrears at the end of August are £5770.47 she will be some £84.53 ahead of the game. I have been going through the paperwork in detail, and it is a very interesting exercise. I have to say I am quite astounded! In May 2010, Barclays and TLT told her that her agremeent was only for 6 months from August 2010, and that it had run out in February 2011 and as no new agreement had been p
  14. Again - many thanks Lea - incredibly helpful. At the end of August the arrears will be some £5770.47 (they were £7055 at the date of the judgement in September 2010). On the basis of a £100 per month reduction from September 2010, one would expect the arrears to be £6855. She may be able to make a further £90 payment towards the arrears this month - should she do so or would that look a bit calculating? The Mortgage runs out in 2023 (I think - it could be 2028) Apart from three incidents - one on her part and two on Barclays - and supported by paperwork - all payments ha
  15. Thank you Lea. Have not had any response yet to the two letters, but as they were only received by Barclays and TLT on Monday this is not surprising. And than you for the information about costs and the circumstances in which they can be charged. A question, if you don't mind - trying to tap into your experience on this. (I know it is not possible to be definitive but a steer on this would be useful). She has made an offer - ie CMI plus £120 per month, which was refused by Barclays, but they would not give any reason. She has repeated the offer in writing. Do they have
×
×
  • Create New...