Jump to content

Harry Turnbull

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    24
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About Harry Turnbull

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. Hi Tinga If this is your first time in court, it will just be to set a date for a Diet of Proof, which is the final stage when evidence has to be presented and cases argued. However, as far as I know, CB has never gone as far as Proof. They always settle before. There probably won't even be anyone from CB in court. They usually just instruct a local solicitor to appear on their behalf and to agree a date.
  2. Just got back from holiday to find a letter from CB enclosing a cheque for the full amount claimed "in full and final settlement" (Almost £1900 including interest and costs, pursued under Summary Cause, which has a maximum of £1500, not including interest etc.). The Diet of Proof had been set for 5th September, although the writer of the letter, 'solicitor - dispute resolution', seemed to think that proof had been assigned for 22nd August. It has taken one year and three weeks, but finally we got there.
  3. Caro Next court date is June 20th, so, yes, anniversary and one day!
  4. Back to court yesterday, and agreed to go forward to Diet of Debate, but I wanted to know the terms of the debate (so did the Sheriff). Lawyer for CB said it was to be about the Limitation Act, restricting claims to five years instead of six. I said I wanted to talk about other things as well, such as the actual charges, because I now had evidence (the Whistleblower stuff) which would show the bank has been deceiving me, and others, about the charges, and would mean the bank would lose the protection of the Limitation Act. The Sheriff, who appeared to be not particularly sympatheti
  5. I returned a cheque from CB (for less than the claim amount) on 22nd February and it is now 10.30am on Tuesday 6th March. The proof is set for 9.45am tomorrow 7th March. The post has just been delivered with nothing more from CB, so it looks like I will be in court tomorrow for the first ever proof hearing to be contested by the bank. Re my post of 30th January, this will be the one where the Sheriff wondered if the court would be big enough to accommodate all the people who would want to hear the bank's evidence.
  6. I returned the cheque from CB and it is now 10.30am on Tuesday 6th March. The post has just been delivered with nothing more from CB, so it looks like I will be in court tomorrow (9.45am) for the first ever proof hearing to be contested by the bank. Re my post of 30th January, this will be the one where the Sheriff wondered if the court would be big enough to accommodate all the people who would want to hear the bank's evidence.
  7. I returned the cheque from CB and it is now 10.30am on Tuesday 6th March. The post has just been delivered with nothing more from CB, so it looks like I will be in court tomorrow (9.45am) for the first ever proof hearing to be contested by the bank. Re my post of 30th January, this will be the one where the Sheriff wondered if the court would be big enough to accommodate all the people who would want to hear the bank's evidence.
  8. Robert I've read the debate in your link. So I take it you are still of the opinion that they will eventually pay the full amount if I reject this latest offer?
  9. I have today received a cheque from Clydesdale "in full and final settlement of your claim", because, they say, "it is simply uneconomical for the bank to proceed to a hearing". They are not asking me to sign anything. However, they say that the sum is made up of the charges "that are not time barred". My claim was from 04/02/2001 till 05/12/2002 and the cheque covers everything claimed, including expenses, but only from 04/02/2002. This is about the five year limit in Scotland, as opposed to six in England. Are they right about this? Has anyone else had this from CB?
  10. I have today received a cheque from Clydesdale "in full and final settlement of your claim", because, they say, "it is simply uneconomical for the bank to proceed to a hearing", but they are not asking me to sign anything. They say that the sum is made up of the charges "that are not time barred". My claim was from 04/02/2001 till 05/12/2002 and the cheque covers everything claimed, including expenses, but only from 04/02/2002. This is about the five year limit in Scotland, as opposed to six in England. Are they right about this? The proof is set for 7th March.
  11. Back in court this morning. Told the Sheriff CB had made an offer and I had declined it. Solicitor had been instructed to ask that proof should not be assigned for February or March, but didn't know why. I said March would suit me better, so Sheriff said, since no reason was given by CB, it would be set for 7th March. Sheriff asked solicitor if evidence would be put forward by CB and she said she thought they would probably try to prove that the charges are liquidated damages and not penalties. The Sheriff then wondered if the court would be big enough to accommodate all the p
  12. I was back in court on Tuesday for my second preliminary hearing. The Sheriff could not relate the items in their defence to the paragraphs of my claim and gave them a week to number the paragraphs in the claim to accord with the paragraphs in the defence. A third hearing was set for 30th January. Yesterday, I received a letter from Clydesdale saying "Prescription in Scotland is five years, and you are therefore only entitled to raise an action seeking 5 years bank charges". I am seeking 6 years charges, which I still believe is correct. The letter then went on to offer "in an attempt to resol
  13. I was back in court on Tuesday for my second preliminary hearing. The Sheriff could not relate the items in their defence to the paragraphs of my claim and gave them a week to number the paragraphs in the claim to accord with the paragraphs in the defence. A third hearing was set for 30th January. Yesterday, I received a letter from Clydesdale saying "Prescription in Scotland is five years, and you are therefore only entitled to raise an action seeking 5 years bank charges". I am seeking 6 years charges, which I still believe is correct. The letter then went on to offer "in an attempt to reso
×
×
  • Create New...