Jump to content

Glenn UK

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Glenn UK last won the day on March 8 2007

Glenn UK had the most liked content!


1,336 Excellent
  1. ALl I did was write a nice letter to the court, seems the banks used this approach rahter than make a formal application. However, I will ring the coutrs and see what their take on those letters is. if they want me to send them £35.00 then i will along with an n244. Whether it upsets the court is of course of concern, however, the judge is a professional and hopefully he will understand the cklaimants concenrs about the test case. JMHO Glenn
  2. I have today made an application for the stay to be lifted in my claim, not sure how much impact it will have but it seems like a good thing to try. Glenn
  3. Julie People will do as they wish of course, I have a pretty strong feeling that most people take the letters, add their own details and sign it. I guess if my suspicion is right then its better than nowt, but it may have more impact of people can write their own. I do realise that many of us find it difficult and challenging to write these letters. For those that feel intimidated by writing such letters, a thought worth bearing in mind is that we are not solicitors and should not try to write like one (most of the letters i receive from solicitors re bank charge claims are poorly written and contain legal inaccuracies anyway so best not copy their style eh?). If you write any letters to the court in simple English setting out the facts as you see them as to why any stay should be lifted it will likely have more impact than anything else. Don't be frightened simple English is the easiest way to deliver any information or make requests that the court do something, they are not interested in legalese for the sake of it as far as i can tell. HTH Glenn
  4. Generally the when the court makes an order for something to be done, they issue it in writing confrimgn exaclty what is to be done. I expected somehting from the the courts setting this out and if others have not had it then they need to ring up and ask whats happening. Re can the court change its mind, in reality they can do what they like, the CPR rules governging court procedures and practices effectively gies them that power. Re banding together to send a standard letter, I am not certain thats the best approach. It would be better for everyone to send their own letter based on the facts imho. I know he wasnt particualry impressed with stuff he thought had effectively been plagiarised from this site and others re the UTCCR i trieed to present. Seems to me that one hudred letters written by claimants in their own words but pressing the salient facts would have more effect than 100 standard letters signed with little effort or thought on the part of the claimant. JMHO Glenn
  5. FWIW I have two claims against abbey and have never received an offer on either, the 1st was concluded after it was listed for trial, the second has just past allocation stage. The court will hold until somone convinces them otherwise. Dont stop trying send them a letter asking for the stay to be lifted and think of some good reasons why that should be so. JMHO Glenn
  6. You are welcome to do what you want. For your info though, i wrote inviting them to settle the second of my claims when the first one was. They wrote back said submit a second claim we wont negotiate until you are in litigation! Glenn
  7. Ginger Dont believe it until they actually turn up and defend on the day. The claims are listed for the fast track, which means standard disclosure, which means they have to reveal their costs. Interestingly even if they fudged the figures the argument should be what were the pre-estimates when they started imposing charges, so they would have to show estimates going back to the earliest claims. Without the estimatyes they are on dodgy ground and it throws doubt on their integrity. As if any mored oubt needs throwing in that direction. anyway they have everything to loose and little to gain unless they really do have evidence that it costs them 30 quid or whatever to bounce a dd. JMHO Glenn
  8. if you really want them to strike out the defence then the best bet is to make a formal application i understand. However, there are potential dangers, although i think they are small, that if you got a hearing to strike out their defence they could ask the court for costs should you lose the application. Generally as far as i can make out courts wont strike out unless they have extreme provocation. JMHO Glenn
  9. FWIW Dont get to excited about the paint and the corner. The court sonly interest is in seeing claim settled, either out of court or if it gets to court, with both parties taking part, unlikley i know. I suspect Abbey will take it to an allocation hearing and settle shortly thereafter if they stick true to their form. Re the strike out have you made a formal request using the n244 or just written in? At the AQ hearing sexpect to see either a barrister or a solicitro from abbey and if there are any contensious issue i.e. charges over 6 years old or CI, they will ask the court to strike them out effecitvely. For your part you need to go along and make your case for the claim going ahead in tact. HTH glenn
  10. By the time he looks at your application the 28 days will most likely be up. Secondly the order is saying they should settle or the claim will be listed for a hearing. Its not like he is saying that the claim is stayed pending some test case which will never happen. On balance id wait for the 28 days and save yourself the time and aggro. JMHO Glenn
  11. FWIW I dont think judge Dudley is on our side per se. I think he knows the banks are playing fast and loose and is pretty certain they accept they stand a good chance of losing should a reasonably well structured claim for unlawful charges come before him. In other words he is basically making them settle because its likely the law says they would loose if they went to court. If you upset him, even a little, then he can be quite intimidating. I wouldnt interpret this in any way shape or form as him being on my side. JMHO Glenn
  12. Newbody I agree with yuo its best to try and i am sure that we will find a route which stops the unjsut enrichement of the banks, the top 4 high street banks are estimated to have made 4.5Billion from unlawful charges last year. Seems really unjust that they get to keep it. JMHO Glenn
  13. Interesting Gary, i guess its aproblem where an account is still active, in my case my accounts are closed so its not so easy for the banks to do that. Of course not everyone is in the same position and of course there are ways or accepting whilse effectivley rejecting the payment. whether the court would be happy or not would of course be up to the judge bearing in mind the circumstances of the case. FWIW it is important that claimants dont lose site of the fact that the overall objective is to get a settlement they are happy with, to to get into court (unless their mad of course). The cl;aiming process is in part a kind of game and how youy play will affect your chances. If you play and end up in court imho your chances are much reduced of getting a good result simply because the opposition has the upper hand, they have been playing for longer and have better resources than us generally. glenn
  14. LOL @ Newbody i know lifes a bitch isnt it, its as well i had AoP in my claim because my claim for more than sec69 is ongoing. FWIW Abbey did the same to me last time, hence using a different approach this time. Not all banks do the hearing thing though, i guess primarily becuase they have to stump up for counsel or a solicitor for the day and the cost benifits are usually pretty small. abbey have taken a different view. Glenn
  15. Somehting that occurs to me, is that the claim for CI under M&R and more recently the revised F&B has always been of dubious legal status. The advice was always to maintain a claim in tact and not to accept any partial settlements. In this case the claimant had already recevied and settled the claim with the execption of CI. The message must be to those who have submitted claims and being told to bogg off is dont accept any partial settlements. If you can get the case listed for a hearing then the bank are morelikley to settle than not, even at the CI, the alternative is for them to risk arguing in court over the charges and not just the CI. This of course is not for the faint hearted and does of course carry a risk. If you are not up for it, accept the Sec 69 interest or dont claim CI in the first place.
  • Create New...