Here is an interesting snippet. A member of our pipe band works for a bank - I just thought it was of those commercial London banks. Last night we were out on a job and I was talking about the CAG spreadsheet to someone then my banking friend said "The banks are absolutely certain they will win". Started to find out why and how HE knows; argued about Common Law as per the business claims, and how on earth van they win - what are they going to rely on to fight common law stated cases on penalties and 'cloaked charges' then this guy goes all nasty, talking about US stealing their money and so on - I was not getting anywhere then to my shock he tells me he works the a foreign national bank that owns two UK banks and he heads-up both their PENALTY CHARGE centres, and although not a legal bod liaises with their legal department set-up for the OFT case providing them with various bits of information they need. One of the banks 'slip-ups' falls into the CAG basic court bundle; asked about this he saids "That was just a disgruntled employee and I do not think you can rely on this". Mmm I wonder if I can get more info out of him as he talks TOO much when I made him cross

All standard stuff - remember they DID NOT ask you to sign for 'full and final' settlement, they just told you is was; just take the money and carry on with your claim Best of luck with it BTW

Over on one of the business thread we are drawing-up a revised POC (especially photoman) because in the light of the OFT case we need to a be absolutely certain that we have explored every avenue to got only get our cases heard but won. We cannot use the the UTCCR's or reference to any consumer law so we have to rely on Common Law and stated cases. So what we would like to see is the bank's defence to Common Law Many thanks Our forum is here:- http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/68191-claiming-business-account-lets-34.html

Have a look at your bank T&C's and see if there is anything in there about this.

bump

bump

Was this from the template on CAG I do not know the the answer so this will Bump if for you

Pen - Hi, I am not sure re the cost I think it is the £35 I have read about - in any case this will Bump your question

Oscar - Hi, All you can do now is wait to see what the court does; which all probability is to order a Stay. You can ask for that to be put aside, but if it were me I would not be holding my breath with that request. Go back and have a look at the Step-by-Step guide here as there is stuff there and more importantly the sticky here: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/lloyds-bank/78216-aqs-stays-strike-out.html The other thing to do is visit Wiki as it much easier to find things there Best of luck with your claim

nicky -hi, You have posted this on the LTSB forum, perhaps a site helper could move it across to A&L. But in the meanwhile you do not need your N1 as that got the court date in the first place. Go to Wiki - cos it's easier to find things on there. Print out the Step-by-Step and follow through that; as re the court bundle this is something the court may/will ask for. Ah ah just spotted an offer letter from solicitors - was that for the full amount ?? Otherwise you will find a complete Basic Court Bundle on Wiki Best of luck with your claim

sarah - Hi, Please don't panic, this totally forbidden here as you will get all the help you need. Also please do not feel confused this is also not allowed here You might find it easier to find things on CAG Wiki - there is a great Step-by-Step guide there - easy to print off and just tick off the things you have done as time goes by. Then if you need help just SHOUT !!!

Please let us know what the costs refer to

Ah Ha, I got a letter from LTSB for the £750 thing and they just TOLD me this was there final word on the matter and there was nothing in the letter inviting me to sign "full & final blah blah". So I would accept the 750, write and tell them that this will be deducted from your claim, carry on with your claim to court as per normal. When the OFT thing is over you will be near the top of the queue. Personally I cannot see how on earth the bank's can win. They already backed off with the credit card charges as per the OFT statement AND over on the business threads we cannot use consumer legislation such as the UTCCR's - the core of the OFT case. We have to common law regarding penalty charges and with stated cases we use the law is already pretty concrete on this. You may find our thread of interest - go to page 1, then the last page and look back my open your eyes http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/68191-claiming-business-account-lets-34.html

Hi - If it were me I would actually go down to the court in person with whatever bits of court paperwork sent to you. I have been to my Guildford CC a few times and I have the court staff really friendly & helpful

I could be wrong; but I thought (may have read it on CAG and not needed to use my brain) that courts were still proceeding with claims already firmly down the processing procedure i.e. court dates been given etc

zomerzet I think I would write or get an appointment - you may just be lucky as you say you have not been using it

Hi - It's holiday time so not many people around to answer you. If it were me I wait a bit and get all your statements together and make one claim, as things are going at the moment the cases are being Stay'ed. You will save yourself some time and money by only putting one claim in. At least you will be near the top of the pile when the OFT case is sorted out Best of luck with your claim

bump

Penman - I need your advice on the POC please This is the extract from your POC Was this from the OFT Statement ? Or through your extensive research did you find bits & bobs elsewhere. The reason I ask is that this extract was posted by elsinore:- And I am just wondering if it is worth including the whole wording of the above and then altering your wording slightly to remove any duplicated bits Just a thought

Here yer go This is photmans letter I forgot the post No but somewhere around page 27 Dear Sir/Madam You -v- XXXXX Bank Plc Claim Number: ******* I write in relation to the matters as detailed above, and specifically the order of a stay in proceedings made by district judge XXXXX on **/**/**. The basis upon which a stay has been granted is with regards to awaiting the outcome of the ongoing "test case" currently being taken by the OFT against several banks. I respectfully request that this stay be lifted. This is upon the contention, that as the central focus and grounds for the OFT’s case is to determine whether or not the charges are subject to the test of reasonableness, as required under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations (UTCCR 99), then it is not of any consequence to the basis of my claim in this case. As a Business account claimant my claim did not include any reference to nor make any reliance upon the UTCCR. As such, it would serve no purpose to delay proceedings in order to await the outcome of a case that would have no bearing or relevance upon this case. As such I respectfully request that the current stay be lifted so that this case may proceed without further delay. Yours faithfully

gaz for the busines accounts you may be pleased to see a new poc on there - start at the back of the thread and work forward It's here http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/68191-claiming-business-account-lets-34.html

lancasterchealse - have a look on this forum (not too many pages from the end) and you will see a really good layout from photoman on removal of a stay for business accounts

elsinore + lancasterchelsea elsinore - Many many thanks for your post. I think as per l/c post what we have to do is to get the message across loud and clear to the DJ right at the very start to make it very clear that that our claims do not rely on UTCCR's (which is the main point behind the OFT case); so I will definitely add your post to my POC in the hope that the DJ sees this (rather than hide it away in my witness statement, which is only of any use once the DJ has decided to hear the case in the first place). I would also add this covering letter (posted on here already) to reinforce the point at the very start rather than fight to have the Stay put aside, if that were so ordered in the first place. So I think when submitting my N1 I would add this letter and the modified POC to your local court I will also pass this by my lawyer friend and put her back into the DJ's chair and see weather or not she would either hear the case or agree to a 'Stay' BUT her comments to me was that in the light of the "Public Policy Element" she may actually grant a Stay - her reason were as follows: "I might - just - allow the Stay on the grounds that up until now all courts have been inundated with bank claims and now with the OFT case under way; I suspect that if I set the Stay aside then everyone else would be ignoring the OFT 'test' case & and adopt 'our' approach and that this may not be in the best interest of the courts - not withstanding the different reliance on legislation" Remember that no actual case has been 'won' at court, OK we use the words won cos peeps have had their money refunded mainly due to the fact that up until now the banks lawyers have not actually defended the case but have settled beforehand; and in the cases lost, this has been either badly prepared cases, or in two cases the claimants have said they - were not in breach of the contract - which fortunately PM's POC now clearly states we WERE in breach of contract. :)

Just another c'aviate to this. As my lawyer friend teaches commercial law and what we are dealing with here is her special field I thought her comments were obviously a very wise thing to seek; in fact I spent about an hour on the phone with her re this POC. She is very interested in what the CAG are doing and is VERY sympathetic to our individual claims, and knows the misery this is causing us all. [i have been with her in court on one occasion - ABSOLUTELY RUTHLESS - a bulldog in fact; shot the other side (and the judge) to pieces they must have thought they were facing a cannon loaded with grapeshot What PM has said about the OFT para is absolutely correct of course And she commented that in reality this was no 'big deal' I will expand on her comment when she read the OFT paragraph (I put her in the judges chair for the question). She said that as she read the POC everything was looking fine with well put forward points. Then when she got to the OFT bit she thought "Yes, we all know about the OFT original directive (both the court & banks) so why did the claimant not list the relevant page of the directive as he has done elsewhere in the POC" - it might just look more professional to show that the claimant clearly knows where they are coming from (her words PM [NOT mine] & certainly NO slight on you very good self). She also wondered that within the OFT directive on credit cards is there any mention regarding "bank accounts" rather than just credit card accounts; because if it did this would give slightly more weight to the argument. Nevertheless we on CAG do have access to a very clever lawyer - although I will not 'tap on her shoulder' for little Q's Just a thought PS In the light of the change to just one small paragraph i.e Para 5C Why not combine the Limited Company claims and this thread into one - more knowledge leads to better results ?? Maybe

PM Only a tiny post here (easily missed) but I did answer this question after seeking her advice; which is that for limited companies this POC is fine if you just remove Para 5 c