Please post here if your case has been transferred to London Mercantile Court and you wish to attend the first Case Management Conference on the 18th of October at 10:00 a.m

Hi Sara, We shall see!!!......have P.M'ed bankfodder, and also had further discussions on how to force the issue of how these charges are calculated. let the games begin !

UPDATE; I have been informed that Judge Mackie has now reviewed the cases place before him and he has directed that a formal case management conference shall take place on the 18th of October at 10:00 am. Would any parties who’s case have been referred to mercantile, and who wish to take part in this CMC please contact me as a matter of urgency

Judge Mackie was due to review the files today, and will pass a direction from there, I am expecting some feedback either late this afternoon, or early tomorrow morning. Will let you all know from there, also FYI in the end there were about 10 cases with various defendants that went before His Honour Judge Mackie QC for consideration.

may be of interest to some; Judge Mackie QC https://secure.thelawyer.com/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=110537&d=pndpr&h=pnhpr&f=pnfpr

Technically yes, although if you are acting as a litigant in person this is unlikely as the court would see that it is unrealistic and disproportionate to your means.

A number of cases involving various defendants have been passed to Judge Mackie for consideration, at the last count there we 10-15 in the pile, I think some were settled yesterday so the number on his desk is reducing, however it is the principal that is being tested, not a specific Bank / defendant

The rules for a bailiff executing a magistrates order are slightly different from civil cases, and they can use "reasonable force" to obtain entry. as you have been down the appeal route there is not a lot else that can be done at this stage, you cant pay what you haven’t got, and if the bailiff has little or nothing to levy on in the home then they are wasting their time. if you own a car you may wish to move it...

http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/HMCSCourtFinder/Search.do?court_id=145 Is where all of our cases have been intialy transfered to, however I am not sure this is where the conference will be held as a lot of their work is being transferred at present apparently EDIT: see above !

If you have done the Bookworm Bundle then this will suffice, i am sure BF will confirm, but if monday go's ahead then it will be the very first steps, but none the less very important ones.

When I spoke to Dan Pope on Tuesday he requested that all relevant correspondence and plea's should be made available for Monday.

All cases in the planned conference relate to Barclays

Have also spoke to Dan Pope, and e-mailed Angela Hodgson at listings, and have requested that my case be included. I wonder if Mr Jeremiah / Barclays are reading this!

File_Wizzard v Barclays (Woolwich) also transferred to Mercantile from Bow county court on the 20-09-06

In short you have already given them the right to do this within your original T&C's and it is quite a common practice for most banks, and is not directly unlawful ( although it may breach banking code if it places you under undue duress or financial hardship) Best advice is to follow what has been suggested previously and open an unrelated account, and pay back any outstanding sums as is financially viable.

I would file you calim BEFORE you go away, barclays WILL wait untill day 28 to file a defence claim anyway.

You will generally find that Mobile phone contracts are NOT governed by the CCA, just standard contract law. If you read the T&C's of an average Mobile Phone contract it will merely state "Your Contract is to be interpreted in accordance with the Laws of England and Wales" .........It will therefore not be specificly regulated under the CCA. This does not apply to all cases, but the 4 major networks all operated under this type of contract. However your contract with the actual retailer / air time suppler may differ, best to check on an individual basis.

The N149 is more to do with the logistics of the claim rather than any specific details related to the claim its self. The items you have referred to can be submitted at a later date to both the court and the other party once a hearing date is set. If you read the guidnace notes on the back all should be clear ( ish!)

The contact details for the person “dealing” with the claim will be included on the defense form, although in reality the name given may not be the person actually dealing with the claim as I believe he is rather busy at present! Although as Don Quioxte has stated, this is not always the best way to resolve your claim, and you should only do this if you are confident in your approach as you could theoretically jeopardize your claim if this is undertaken in the wrong context or manner.

Slightly off track from the original post now, all I was saying was that in my own experience I found the now infamous Mr Jeremiah to be a help rather than a hindrance, and that once a defence has been filed, that it may be more expediant to contact him directly rather than waiting for court dates Ect.

Fair point!

Hi Rebel Just that they seem to be the only two people in the whole organisation who have actually took a positive stance and are dealing with (in my experience) the whole issue in both a professional and amenable manner. It is very easy to focus personal feelings about a company on an individual you come across as part of the process, but these two (amongst others) seem to be doing the best they can against a tidal wave of claims! P.s I don’t work for Barclays!, just telling it how I find !

Add me to the list of "also spoke to Keith Jeremiah today" In all fairness, and contrary to some of the previous posts seems like a very reasonable chap and is obviously very busy at present. I think Mr Jeremiah and his colleague Mr Peter Townsend at Barclays DPA are probably both going to more than earn their Xmas bonuses this year!

All charges that do not accurately reflect the actually loss to the bank are unlawful, the £12 is merely a suggested "fair sum" recently proposed by the OFT, this in no way means that £12 pounds is a lawful charge, or that it is the minimum or maximum that should be charged. Once a final ruling by the OFT is made the banks may partially adopt the £12 sum, but even after this the law still stands that all charges must reflect true loss

Yes you will need to wait the full 40 Days if you are going to write to the ICO and claim that the data controller has failed in his duties to supply the information in compliance with S.7 of the DPA. unfortunately the ICO are very overworked and under funded, so you are liable to wait at least 2 - 3 months for a response and / or resolution