Hi reclaimone, Just send the letter through stating when you are claiming from, ie from opening the account up to your last transaction (or close of the account if you have done this) and the rest is a waiting game before the court application. Good Luck. Stay Fresh Peeps regards Chris

Hi All, well after watching Martin Lewis on Fruday night (tonight with Trevor Macdonald) it spurred me on and I am again going for the PPI and charges I had put onto my account with them. Will keep you informed how I get on. Stay Fresh Peeps regards Chris.

Hi ABG, Hope everything is going OK. Sorry I havent been in touch, been a bit busy with inlaws start of claim against YB from 1980. Have you had any success at court yet? Oh Sorry I forget KKKKKKKKKKKERRRRRRRRRRRCCCCCCCHINNNNNNNNNNGGGGGGG £1.26 interest again. Cheers Mr Bank Manager. stay fresh peeps regards chris x

Hi Fred, I think it is 28 days from the date of the statement which is usually the 14th of each month. Now then, they date the statement on the 14th of each month,inform you they are going to take the charges from your account in 28 days time (usually the 11th or 12th day of the following month!) yet I don't know about you but I don't usually receive my statement until about the 25th of the month (11 days AFTER the statement date) therefore the so called 28 days notice is none existant!! could this be a breach of contract on the Nationwides side? Just a thought! Hope this has helped a bit. stay fresh peeps regards chris

Icy, just an update. Rang Skipton County Court tonight to see if they were still carrying on, and they informed me that ALL cases there are being stayed and they will take new cases but will more than likely stay them at point of application. will try and clarify what they mean. Oh Its been a while, but:- KKKKKERRRRCHING another £1.26 interest cheers nationwide. stay fresh peeps regards chris.

Hi Sofya, 'funow the problem is i really cannot remeber then forwarding any leaflets in terms of the policy, i do not even hold any policy documentsnny this bit: strange, that is, I had similar problems with Blemain finance, and I did'nt even know I had PPI until the loan was redeemed earlier this year. I'm still battling with them and I too am going for all their astronomical charges for a couple of late payments and telephone calls (which I know I never received at leats 1/2 of them. so this is how far i have cum 2 with WF they r waiting 4 me 2 respond & he even called me 2 confirm that i would be dropping the compalint, then on Friday i got a call asking me if i would like to re-finace this loan with another on WF loans but with a lowerint rate!!! culdnt beleive my ears. You should have gone for it but 1st you should say, I will go for it on the provisor you refund me totally all the PPI cost + interest and WF repay you all the charges (Sorry FEE'S;) ) they have taken/added to your loan and only when they have cleared your account will you reloan at a lower interest rate with them (under similar false pretences that they have with you regarding the PPI etc. then either reloan or say Nah thanks but thanks for the money!!! the choice is yours! good luck and keep us informed. reagrds chris

hi all, got the whole lot through from YB, took a while but now I can move forward. Like you GOGIVIT, I too had a shorter verion on the first couple of paper oddly cut out shaped extracts. But it ALL ADD's up in the end and I am almost to the penny on the guess. oh nearly forgot: KKKKKKKKERRRRCCHHHINNNG £1.26 + from now on. stay fresh peeps. regards chris

Hi ABG, any news? KKKKKKKKKKKKERRRRRRRRRRRRRRCHINNNNNGGG £1.26 interset again! stay fresh peeps regards chris xx

Hi ABG, thats a lot to take in and I'm way behind you as mine has'nt even got to court yet (ABBEY & Yorkshire only), lack of funds at moment, but I would guess this is a standard scare tactics defence in the hope you buckle under and stop the claim, you still have to remember they were advised by the court to come to an agreement regarding the settlement and although you have said you have lowered your initial claim to £6500 what did you lower it from? If it is a couple of grand less than your initial claim, remind ABBEY that your claim was for £xxxxx and to come to a swift end to the claim you have graciously reduced your claim after a lot of heartache to £6500 as it stands now and that you are still willing to accept this under the advice from the courts, otherwise you have every right to put in your full claim plus further interest you have since lost out!! since the ABBEY have deliberatley ignored the courts directions set out in July 2007. I really don't know what else you can do but go back to the courts and tell them of your despair at the answers ABBEY are not giving you! I am always here for you if you need me, and wish you every success as you deserve it all and more Best of luck and keep it going, just remember stay relaxed and it will all come to you, and remember SPEND IT WELL! Mr Bank Manager/Owner hmm guess what comes next, yep you guessed it KKKKKKKKKERRRRRRRRRRRCCCCHHHINNNNNNNNNNNNGGGGGGGGG £1.26 extra interest again cheers Stay fresh peeps regards chris xxxx

Hi all and everybody, Most of the posts are right in what they state, the only thing is, we would be better off writing to the OFT for clarification on mr Elithorn has stated, and maybe he is out to make a name for himself, but maybe with enough of us asking the question to the OFT then maybe WE can determine what type of neme he receives!! Remember it's still ongoing and if we push hard enough maybe the courts MAY turn their own decisions around and start recommencing our claims and I think this is a possitive move on our halves to keep persuing. The banks still have to comply with the relevant letters which were sent to them, the only differences is they don't have to make you an offer! Yet they still have to comply, and if they don't. then we still put the claim into the courts, (it's just a matter of finding a court that is continuing the claims which is the hardest part. I have had some positive support from my MEP saying that it is still in the minority with the courts as to who is staying cases and who is continuing!! I'll check my email from my MEP and confirm the website which tells you where to look for the best courts! oh Mr BM KKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKERRRRRRRRRRRRRCCCCCCCCHHHHHHHINNNNNNGGGGGG another £1.26 today in interest cheers!!!! stay fresh peeps regards chris

Hi ABG, thanks for ticking the scales, just wish I could help more. email to Inga whats her face looks good, but the reply sucks. I would now just go back to the courts and seek settlement through them and argue the case. Just remember to let the courts know that you have lowered your initial amount to try to resolve the matter in a speedy manner and Abbey have not even attempted to come to an agreement, but instead used the 'Ongoing?Test Case'. Let the court understand that the Abbey are stating 'Ongoing' when it has not officially started yet. Good Luck ABG and I'll be there with you (in mind) PS too much detail at the front of your email, keep it private if you can. Oh KKKKKKERRRRRRRCCCHHINNG £1.26 mr BM ta very much! stay fresh peeps. regards chris xx

Hi adam1976brown and clippy, I heard about the LTSB stint yesterday on my way into work last night, and it sounds as if the banks are trying to squirm their way out of the trial more than the OFT, I think the OFT are as always only compromising on the side of the Banks, and with the LTSB saying they have looked at the 'FEES' as being too high (which I would take as an admittance to the fact) that they are going to inform their customers of when they may be near the point of going over any agreement on the account and allowing them the possible time to 'Pay In' to their account to prevent the 'Fee' from being charged. How sly is that.!!!! What's betting the other Banks follow suit, but we have to remember the banks will not have discussed this between each other as that may be seen as colaboration!!!! watch this space thats what I say!! stay fresh peeps regards chris

Hi gogivit, Yeh i know, well I can wait as long as it takes. I did hear on the radio coming in to work last night that Lloyds TSB have backed off with their charges of £30 PER DAY for going over any overdrtaft agreement and will TEXT anyone getting close to their O/D limit so they can 'top up' before it gets that far! AND when the question was put to the person from LTSB that this was a climb down from the Court case and a sort of admittance of defeat before the case was finished the LTSB representative flatly denied it (naturaly) but it was good to hear it anyway. Got them running already!!!!!! Lets see what the other 6 banks and the Nationwide do to follow suit.!!! The Banks are crumbling!!!! KKKKKKKKKKERRRRRRRRRRRRRRCCCCCCCCHHHHHHHINNNNNNNNNNGGGGGGG £1.26 extra interest every day every little helps ta very much. stay fresh peeps regards chris

hi ABG, i will certainly try and help with the letter, I do think you have done most of it already with the email to Inga. I'll have a good read of the last few threads regarding the Courts directions and the dates etc that the courts gave both Abbey and yourself to come to a settlement. Speak to you soon, if you need me to PM you to keep it off the site then let me know, otherwise I don't mind sharing as others may want to use it as well. Every little helps. oooh oooh KKKERRRRRRRRRCCCCCCHINNNNNNNNNNNGGGGGGGGGG £1.26 interest again thankyou Mr Bankmanager chappy. stay fresh peeps regards chris

hi fresh peeps, well miracles never cease do they:eek: , I have finally got ALL my charges from YB going back to July 1994 and its a whopper. So now to find a court thats taking new claims, I think that might be Skipton!! KKKKKKKeRRRRRRRRRRCCCCCCCCHHHHHHHHHINNNNNNNNNGGGGGGGG on this one, but still £1.26 on the other ta very much!! stay fresh peeps regards chris

Garden! we used to dream of having a garden, and weeds? I thought that was something that was smoked back in the sixties!! far out man! peice man!!!

Hi ABG, well that sounds ok in your email to inga, I would have definatley kept on mentioning the courts directive regarding a settlement figure between you both and would stress this if you have to contact the court for further direction. Just remind the court manager/judge that you have abided by their ruling and advice but have had no joy and due to the DELIBERATE delay by Abbey in finalizing an amicable setllement figure on your claim this has now taken you into the pending test case scenario and you strongley feel that if this test case had not been brought in at this point you would have now settled the claim and would not now be feeling as if the ABBEY have taken full advantage of the testcase and it's ability to manipulate the system to their advantage leaving you with no option but to literally beg for the settlement.:o Do not let Abbey think they have won yet, tell the courts that you have tried in vain to settle this out of court and are still awaiting a positive response and reasonable settlement from Abbey under the courts advice back in whenever you were instructed by the courts. You have done really well up to this point, and I know you will succeed, it's just how quick the courts and how well you come accross with the judge regarding being messed around after the courts directions on coming to an agreement. If the judge doesnt rule in your favour for this alone, then there is something seriously wrong with the judicial system! I would probably contact inga again and remind her of the directions given by the court regarding coming to a settlement ON OR BEFORE the 17th August a settlement should have been made by now, and to add to the fact that the Abbey would now apply for a stay should not come into effect as the case had already gone to court for a hearing PRIOR to the 'Test Case' and instructions for a settlement had already been advised by the courts, and that if no amicable settlement figure is offered you will further persue the matter with the courts due to the facts you have stated earlier regarding trying to negotiate a figure through the courts advice. Let her know that you have taken all the neccassary steps as per the courts directions and that Abbey have not and it is on this evidence and all the previous correspondences between yourself and the Abbey (wether this be fax/email letters etc) that you intend to submit to the court for your request now for full payment of the whole amount plus any further interest you have incurred since the 17th August, UNLESS Abbey settleyour reduced claim to £6500 without further delay. let them know you mean business. And by the way, calm down and take it easy, don't let them wear you down your health is more important than the stress of it all. If you can stay calmer and relax more then just think about what you can do with the money when you get it. If your like me, the overdraft (if you have one) will be paid off, a donation to the cag, and the rest you can enjoy wether it be some 'ME' time or a bit of pampering or a holiday or a bungie jump, sky diving whatever you want to do with it. I might be cheeky and go to the Abbey and ask to open an account with them and at the last minute say 'Oh sorry this used to be in here but not now, tee hee hee!'. Remember ABG, some things are worth waiting for and I know we all want our money back right now, the banks did'nt wait a few months before they kindly releived our accounts of our money, but because we abide by the laws of the land we have to wait unfortunately. I think you have every chance of succeeding with the courts on this matter, as you have tried to settle in the allocated time and Abbey like all the banks now are just using the time to stall as long as they can. Go for it ABG and I'll be there with you all the way. sit back and take it easy, keep me informed. Oh mr BM KKKKKKKeRRRRRRCCCCCHINNNNNNNGGGGGG thats £1.26 interest ta very much!!!! stay fresh peeps regards chris xxxx

Hi ABG, sorry I havent posted for a while, I'm busy at work and when I'm at home I'm busy getting the house finished and the thought of possible immigration to a better country is forever looking more inviting. With time against me on that one it's a matter of prioritising what is best. I have however just recieved most of my statements from the yorkshire bank going back to 1995 (still got the first 12 missing though and its a lot more than I thought so I have some calculations to work out then I'll be back. Contact the court and ask them the state of play. Oh KKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKERRRRRRRRRRRRRCHINNNNNNNNNNGGGGGGGGG another £1.26 interest and I'll top that up when I've calculated my YB's up lol;) stay fresh peeps regards chris xx

Hi linz2011, You should be able to request a cheque, but it all depends if you owe them anything! If you owe them, then they will more than likely pay it in to clear any monies owed, but you can only ask and they can only say no. good luck stay fresh peeps regards chris

Hi ABG, its always a pleasure to help out, I hope you ammended my version of the request for the removal of the stay (if you used it) to suit your requirements etc, and if you didnt use it then thats fine! I'm at work so I can't spend too much time on the pc. lol;) i'm currently chasing Yorkshire for the missing statements I am owed and I am about to file against Abbey if Skipton are still going, but it's getting the fee and the time to call in as it is'nt on my doorstep. Keep me informed how you get on won't you, and if your succesful let me know your tactics. I am awaitng a reply from the courts regarding my request to have the stay removed, and just hope I don't get hauled up in front of the judge for something I have written regarding the banks power over the judicial system.!!!!! stay fresh peeps regards chris oh KKKKKKKKKKKKERRRRRRRRRRRRCHINNNNGGGGGGGGGG £1.26 today thanks again Mr Bankmanager.

congratulations Jackie, Its make for good moral when somebody starts to recoup THEIR money back. spend it wisely and have a good christmas. stay fresh peeps regards chris

Totaly agree with you gogivit, I too have a lot to lose, but like more than not now I just have to wait a bit longer and remember everything comes to he/she who waits! We've got this far and even though the light has just been moved a bit further away we are getting closer to the end of the tunnel and with victory for the OFT in sight, we should not lose direction and keep reminding the banks another day another dollar thats what they'll have to pay out. The longer they stall the more it will cost them. KEEP IT GOING!!!!!!! stay fresh peeps regards chris

sorry abg, this is a tweeked version of the removal of the stay I have just sent to the judge regarding my Nationwide claim:- Claim Number:xxxxxxxxxx In the xxxxxxxxxxxx County Court Between: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxClaimant -and- Nationwide Building Society Defendant FAO: Judge xxxxxxxxxx QC Mi Lord, I strongly object to the proposed order of a stay in respect of the claim detailed above upon the following grounds; The So Called ‘Test Case’. The fact that the so called ‘Test Case’ is not yet underway and will not even start until October 2007 at the earliest and the official start date of the ‘Test Case’ is preliminarily set for January 2008 does not in real terms exist. Yet, under extreme pressure from the banks and governing bodies the courts have been unwillingly (in certain districts) forced into bowing to the banks wishes, and to the dismay of the claimants who have spent a lot of time and court costs pursuing the money claim which they are rightly entitled too claim back. If the banks were to pursue a customer for monies owed to them in a similar situation, then the customer could not quote for a stay due to the ‘Ongoing Test Case’ and have this allowed on the same principles solely because the customer would not have the resources or power to fight the bank(s) on these grounds. Courts Backlog of Delayed Cases I am sure that the courts are fully aware of this gross delaying tactic being used by the banks to further enhance any difficulties from current and future claimants by putting pressure on the individual claimants in the form of a blanket stay to either stop any future claims, or to give up their current claim. Surely it would be in the Courts best interest to continue with all current applications already in the Court system to relieve the backlog of claims which will still have to be dealt with, Prior to the actual ‘Test Case’ starting, whether that be in October 2007 or early 2008. As the banks have shown in the past their blatant disregard to the courts directions during past claims, it is more than likely that the banks will again show their total disregard towards the Judicial system and once again not show up. The Banks are once again allowed to show their overriding power over the FSA, FOS and the OFT and have shown this with the way they have been granted their request to apply (and successfully) for Stay’s on most claims yet have been granted this under NO conditions regarding the claimants fair rights in the form of possibly 1 of the following 2 options: 1. The Banks/Building Society should cease to place any further charges on the claimants account (if still active) until the same request for the stay during the up and coming so called ‘Test Case’ is resolved. Or, 2. That ALL claims already in the Judicial System should be allowed to continue their course prior to the start of the so called ‘Test Case’ as this would free up valuable time for the courts when the so called ‘Test Case’ actually comes to court. Fairness There is no fairness what so ever taken into account towards the claimant on these current issues, since the Grant of the above stays have been allowed. It is also a well known and published fact that the Banks on more cases than not have failed to acknowledge their responsibilities towards their customers AND especially the courtstime and resources. The banks have shown their contempt towards the courts directions and have blatantly abused the legal system despite being ruled against in most cases by not turning up for the hearings, and in a lot of cases settling with the claimants on the 11th hour so to speak. On the directive of allowing the banks their request for (in most cases now) a ‘Blanket Stay during the current Test Case’ the customer now has no rights to contest this, as now with most cases the decision has already been taken by the presiding Judge prior to any request from the claimant therefore the banks are yet again blatantly abusing the legal system by requesting AND being allowed a stay on most claims on the proviso that the actual ‘Test Case’ does actually go ahead. How can the banks be allowed to have a ‘Stay’ on a claimants rights to claim back the monies taken from the claimants bank account and quote the forthcoming ‘Test Case’ which may not even start until early 2008. There is a minimum 2 months before the so called ‘Test Case’ may start and that is if the so called ‘Test Case’ was to start in October 2007. Surely this would be in the Courts best interest to settle most of the claims by continuing the claims pending the actual start of the so called ‘Test Case’ and therefore freeing up the courts valuable time and being seen as fair towards both the claimant and the Defendant as this would be allowed during any other type of court hearing and not just on the side of the powerful banks in this case. Human rights Although I realize it infringes my rights under the European Convention on Human Rights directly and as enacted in the Human Rights Act 1998. Article 6 of the Convention provides that; “1. In the determination of his civil rights… everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time.” I feel there is no point addressing the relevant human rights issue, as I do not believe this will be taken into account through the Judicial system and the overwhelming Directive from the Banks regarding the Blanket Stays. The Overriding Objective The Overriding Objective requires that my case is allowed to proceed speedily so that a just settlement may be obtained by the parties to this case. Dealing with cases justly includes ensuring that this case is dealt with expeditiously and fairly and in a way that is proportionate to the amount of money involved. It is submitted that the imposition of an indeterminate stay in a small claims track case involving a relatively small sum, at such an advanced stage in proceedings, is not just, nor is it expeditious, nor is it fair on a claimant who has outlaid sums by way of court fees in pursuit of a legitimate right to seek a remedy. Balance of convenience The sum claimed is insignificant to the bank but it is highly significant to me. Furthermore, had the bank granted me a personal overdraft earlier on in the account, I would not now be claiming the charges taken from my account, as on more than one occasion the charges were applied after a Direct Debit/Standing Order had taken my account over by less than £10, yet had an overdraft of £50 been allowed on my account then I would have had NO charges taken. When I contacted the bank for this request, and with the Nationwide Building Society knowing exactly when my salary was paid into my account every month, they could have accommodated my account but chose not to allow me this facility, I now believe the reason for this was solely to charge my account at their convenience and to fraudulently take monies from my account without my consent, and knowing that I have a very narrow margin for financial discrepancies, once I had been charged then it became clear that we would always be starting a new financial month with charges already effecting our income and outgoings. Additionally, the defendant remains at liberty to enter my name on the default register which it and other banks routinely do in respect of unlawful penalties which are unpaid by their customers. The banks have direct and privileged access to this register. They have no need to obtain a County Court judgment before they may enter a default on the register. This default remains on the register for 6 years and causes enormous damage to reputations. Were my name to be entered on the default register I would find it impossible to get credit or a mortgage and I would have to pay higher fees for any credit which I did manage to obtain. The banks would also remain at liberty to bring legal proceedings against me for the recovery of any debt which mostly or entirely consists of penalty charges, penalty charges which are contended to be unlawful, but which consumers would be helpless to challenge in the event that stays are imposed on any claim where a customer is seeking to dispute the lawfulness of them. It is submitted that a stay will mean great difficulty for me and yet be insignificant for the defendant bank. In fact a stay is supportive of the Nationwide Building Societies litigation strategy which is to frustrate justice by repeatedly taking the claimant to the door of the court and then to settle the claim, and now to use the cover for their delay to either defend or to ignore the claim by using the so called ‘Test Case’ as an excuse to extend their total disregard for the Judicial system, when I as a claimant have abided by all the correct procedures from my 1st letter to the Nationwide Building Society sent in April 2007, through to the actual Claim being filed at your court on the 16th July 2007, deemed served on the 19th July 2007,under the instruction laid out in your N1 claim form and subsequent guide regarding the same. Even after allowing the claim to be acknowledged by the defendant and the subsequent ‘Blanket Stay’ placed via the District Judge for Bradford District, I have now been put into a situation that is being controlled by the banks under the cover of the so called ‘Test Case’. I have been advised by the court that I may request the stay be removed at a cost of £65 and yet I was also informed that the ‘Stay’ would in all accounts ‘Not be Lifted’, so I feel that I would not benefit from a hearing and as I can ill afford a further £65 to pursue this path I shall just request the same through this letter. The Status Quo The stay does not maintain the status quo. As submitted above, a stay favors the bank by preventing the claimant’s pursuit of its legitimate remedy without placing any restriction upon the banks activities which I submit are unlawful and/or retaliatory. Furthermore, as submitted above the present case concerns a relatively small sum and is already at a stage in the courts proceedings, and therefore I submit that to impose an indeterminate stay is unnecessary, inappropriate, not in the interests of justice and further, is detrimental to my rights in a way which is unfair and inequitable. In the alternative In view of the preceding paragraphs, if the court accedes to the defendant’s application for a stay notwithstanding these objections, I respectfully request that the court issues the following injunctions: That the defendant bank is prevented from applying further penalty charges to my account until the final settlement of the matter. That the defendant is prevented from applying interest charges to any outstanding amounts which are comprised of penalties until the settlement of the matter. That the defendant is prevented from closing my account. That the defendant is prevented from making any entry on its own systems or from communicating any similar information to any third party about any matter insofar as it relates to penalty charges until the final settlement of the matter. That the defendant removes any derogatory entry on its own records insofar as it relates to penalty charges. (The Court has the power to do this under the Data Protection Act 1998 ) That the defendant arranges the removal of entries from the records of any third parties to whom it has previously communicated information insofar as it relates to penalty charges. (The Court has the power to do this under the Data protection Act 1998.) That these injunctions remain in place until the settlement of my claim. That should my claim proceed to a hearing that a decision should be made at the hearing as to whether these injunctions should be made permanent. That if the matter should not proceed to a hearing because the defendant decides to settle outside court, that these injunctions should become permanent. I, xxxxxxxxxxxxx, the Claimant, believe all facts stated to be true. Signed: Dated: 21st August 2007. . . ps this was for my intention only, and changed to suit my argument for what use I will have to wait and see. stay fresh peeps regards chris

Where is everybody??????????????????? stay fresh peeps regards chris

sorry jo:o stay fresh peeps regards chris