Dear advisers, Following submission of my 180-page court-bundle in duplicate to Egg and the Court 14-days in advance of my hearing on 19 December 2006, I have received the following offer from Egg. Persuant to section 2.©.ii, I am disclosing to the extent necessary to professional advisers in the hope you can advise of whether I should accept this offer. "ChrisUK1978 v Egg Banking plc Claim number: 6QZ56499 I refer to the above claims in the High Wycombe County Court. 1. We view our terms and conditions as fair and in particular the charges levied persuant to Section 7.1 of your credit agreement (the "Agreement") with Egg Banking plc ("Egg") to be a genuine pre-estimate of loss rather than a penalty. 2. Notwithstanding our view, in the particular circumstances of your case we put forward the following settlement proposal: (a) Without any admission of liability and on a purely commercial and ex-gratia basis we will within 14 days of your acceptance of this proposal by returned of the signed Consent Order (see paragraph (b) below) pay you £84.65 in full and final settlement of the proceedings in High Wycombe County Court under claim number 6QZ56499 and of all claims, rights, actions and causes of action (including claims for interests and costs) you may have against Egg arising out of connection with any issue pleaded in this case. As you will appreciate this is the full amount of your claim against us broken down as follows: (i) £53.24 for charges and interest as detailed in the claim form; (ii) £1.41 for interest from the issue date until 19 December; and (iii) £30 for your legal costs. (b) As your acceptance of the proposal you will sign and return to us the Consent Order enclosed with this letter providing for dismissal of the proceedings on the basis of each party bearing their own costs. Once we have received the signed Consent Order we will lodge it at the Court to bring the proceedings to an end. © The terms of the settlement shall remain confidential between the parties and their legal advisers save that the same may be disclosed: (i) To the extent necessary for the purposes of enforcement of the settlement; and (ii) To any Court, government or other authority to the extent necessary for compliance with a lawful obligation by the party disclosing it and to the extent necessary to any professional adviser to that party in connection with the giving or receiving of advice in relation to such disclosure. 3. The above will remain open for acceptance for 7 days from the date of this letter, after which it will be automatically withdrawn. 4. Please can you confirm your acceptance of the above proposal by signing and returning the enclosed Consent Order. If you have access to a fax machine then please fax a copy of the Consent Order to the number listed above. If you have any questions on the contents of this letter, please contact me using the details listed above. Yours faithfully John Murphy Egg Banking plc" In submitting my court bundle I have incurred additional costs of around £50 in printing and posting in duplicate the evidence bundle to both Egg and the Court. Whilst the full and final settlement offer amount represents the claim amount as quoted on my N1 form, I have since accrued additional costs in the raising of the claim. The total amount stated on the court bundle that I intend to present on 19 December is £132.79 inclusive of costs and interest. As you can see, Egg's offer represents about 60% of the total claim. Egg have deliberately waited to see my court-bundle before submitting their offer, and subsequently forcing me to incur the costs of producing said documentation. They had approximately three months from my filing the MCOL documentation to make this offer, at which time it would have been acceptable. I would like advice as to whether I should accept the offer, or whether I should reply and advise that I will hold out for all costs. The underlying threat from the letter is that Egg will hit me with a counter-claim for costs if I don't accept this offer. My account has been closed with Egg for about 18 months, and the account has never been in arrears, so their costs will be limited to legal representation costs, I should imagine. The other pertinent details are that the judge ordered that Egg provide witness statements and supporting documents to the Court by 24 November, which I understand has not happened. Nor have they provided said details 14-days in advance of the hearing (5 December). I would appreciate guidance on what you feel I should do next, and what the likely outcomes will be. Many thanks for your time. All best, Chris.

Barcote, Very well done sir. I am in the process of gathering together my evidence bundle for Egg, having submitted this afternoon my bundle for Barclays. Reading your guidance as to what was important in your case I can see the persuasiveness of the arguements and shall be adding your detail to my bundle (in my own words, ofcourse). Thanks again for the efforts to share the salient arguements of your case, you have probably assisted more people than you could know. My date is 19th December, and ofcourse you can rely on my support if Egg do appeal, as unlikely as we both know that is. All best, Chris.

Schnide, I had a similar challenge from Egg, all fairly standard defence. They are, in essence, doing a lot of the work for you - para 3 is almost offering standard disclosure, this is the route which I have taken. Request, on the AQ that the judge orders Egg to divulge a thorough breakdown of costs. I went a stage further and requested that the judge order Egg to divulge the profit from overlimit charges over the last 6 years (if it is a genuine pre-estimate then the profit should be negligible). Section 4 will be an important part of the defence and an attempt to justify the disproportionate charges by weasling around the OFT comments of issuers with direct debits may be able to charge slightly higher - countered with the comments from the OFT in response to Ema Clayton's threats in the offer letter. Section 5 - well thats clearly not true. You also need to point out that this penalty charge area is also well covered by the UTTCR in respect to dispropotionate charges as Egg will claim that this extortion is offered as a service (for which you pay exorbitant fees) rather than a genuine penalty charge clause. Section 7 sets out fall back positions if they get trounced - and is countered by a request for standard disclosure. I was recently chatting to a friend of the family who is also a prominent barrister. In the conversation, I mentioned my fears of being out gunned and out manoeuvered by the legal big wigs, and she said that the judge will make sure that the lay individual will not be disadvantaged during the trial. Whilst it is unusual ground for you, I'm sure you'll be fine. You have the law on your side. Let ma know if I can help further. Regards, Chris.

Kev, I received the same response, as did a few others. I feel it shows Egg dirty-tricks cmpaign off to a tee and I will be submitting it as part of my court bundle (which I am busy preparing as we speak). Let me know how you get on with your action. Good luck. Chris.

Hi guys, I have recently had a phonecall with Nationwide following putting in a complaint at branch level on 21 October 2006, and being promised a response within 10 days. Having already filled in the N1 claim form, I allowed them to take a photocopy and send to Member Services to support my claim for reimbursement of the penalty charges. Apparently, no record now exists of my enquiry at the branch, save for one employee, who after an hours conversation in which she claimed no knowledge of my N1 form, miraculously remembered that she had forwarded it to the legal department on Monday 24 October 2006. I am vexed that Nationwide did not have the decency to inform me that I had gone overdrawn by letter and allowed me to find out some weeks later. In the meantime they amassed £7.46 in interest on less the £56 overdrawn for sixteen days (against their overdrawn interst rates). I now plan to take them to court as I have with Egg and Barclays. In conversation with the lady at the bank it is now Nationwide's policy to not refund any charges (even on first offence), however she did confirm that within £30 of the limit would not incur a charge. She also, rather helpfully, provided the detail of the Nationwide legal bod: Charles Bacon (01793) 655978 .. who I have left a message with asking for confirmation that my N1 form did arrive with him. If not it is missing and a direct contravention of the Data Protection Act, and I shall be taking this matter up with the Data Commissioner accordingly. As this is not yet a legal case, they had no business sending it to Charles Bacon, and furthermore, he had no business sitting on it without responding to me (as is my understanding from a conversation with the Customer Services Manager at my local branch). If I do not hear anything today I will go right ahead and submit my N1 claim form anyway, I have recordings of calls that show they have had ample warning, and furthermore ample chance to rectify these penalty charges. Does anyone know if Nationwide are still in the habit of shutting down accounts of those that successfully claim against them? What about associated joint accounts and credit cards? All best, Chris.

Husbandkhan, It was issued on the road immediately outside the propeties in which my fiancees freind lives. All best, Chris.

Hi all, My fiancee recently collected a ticket whilst visiting a very good friend and parking in a residents only parking area outside her immediate neighbours house. Her friend or her house mates could not locate the their parking permits, however they found one that was a few months out of date and displayed that in an attempt to show that she had the authorisation of a resident to park there. On returning some hours later she found that she had been issued a penalty charge notice, claiming a valid parking permit had not bee displayed. Our understanding is that her friend has valid permits they and they are currently misplaced. Would a letter confirming consent for parking from her friend and one from ourselves be sufficient for them to overturn the penalty charge notice? Is it possible for them to check their records for payment for that property? The residents parking system should be in place to protect the interests of the residents rather than revenue generation for the local council (or its appointed agent), however in this instance my fiancee's friend has paid half toward the ticket. Should my fiancee pay the ticket and appeal later, or is that seen as an admission of liability in the same way a speeding fine would be? The enforcement company are threatening to double the penalty if payment is not received in 14 days. Any help on disputing this ticket would be greatfully received. All best, Chris.

Schnide, I filled out the court allocation paperwork about a month ago for Egg and about 5 weeks ago for Barclays. Court dates for both are set at Barclays 12th December and Egg 19th December. Same court (obviously) and same judge. I will be presenting a similar evidence-pack to both so the Barclays case is a bit of a test-case. Having the same judge should be beneficial, and should put Egg at a slight disadvantage. How long ago did you send the AQ back? Have you heard back from the courts with an allocation yet? All best, Chris.

Court fee paid. Allocated 19th December. Account Closed. No Defaults. Its going to be a rough ride for little Eggy.

Wayne, I issued a similar gauntlet to Ms Clayton in response to her letter and she replied thus "In your letter you have asked for details of past cases which relate to this matter. I am sorry but I am unable to provide you with specific details as this would be a breach of Data Protection due to disclosing customer details." In my letter I pointed out that court cases were a matter of public record (being conducted in the public interest). I did not ask her for any details pertaining to her customer specifically, I have requested case reference number etc. As someone else pointed out here, they WILL have to disclose those if requested in court, and I will do my darnedest to push for that. Ah, the sweet aroma of tomato fertiliser.... In what I can only assume is a misguided attempt at being helpful, and completely without scripting or prompting from my original letter, Ms Clayton adds "If you remain unsatisfied please contact the Financial Ombudsman Service." Now just how much Russian Roulette do Egg expect to get away with before their luck runs out and it all turns to custard? All best, Chris.

Guys, Worryingly, Egg manipulate the wording of the OFT report to bully the customer base by making strong inferences that the OFT support their £16 charging regime. I started a thread in this forum on Saturday containing the wording of an email I sent to the OFT by way of a complaint (rather than repeat myself at length, the post can be found http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/egg/39955-egg-its-wild-claims.html). If, as I suspect, Egg are using this defence as a very large stick with which to bludgeon it's more litigious clientele, others may wish to add their voice to the complaint against Eggs bastardisation of OFT report to suit its own ends. I feel certain that the OFT cannot be aware of the claims Egg are making on its behalf, and are certainly not content with Eggs tall tales. If Eggs claims were true then the OFT would have court-cases coming from its metaphorical ears from all other banking institutions with wails of “no fair!” Egg seem to regard themselves as untouchable by either the judicial system or by the OFT. In the immortal words of Judge Dredd, (filling mouth with marbles for a second-rate impersonation) “I am the law!” I fear it will take a concerted effort from multiple angles to topple this Goliath. All best, Chris

Michael, Nicely put good sir. I am awaiting the processing of the two AQs submitted to my local County Court. I suspect this stay may also happen, would you be prepared to provide the wording of that letter and the case references in the event of the same happenning to me. Your letter is learned and very elopquently put. Many thanks. Chris.

Kevin, Thank you for letting me know - I was so enraged by Eggs sanctimonious attitude, on their claims of buddying-up with the OFT and other points, that I felt I had to write to the OFT and make them aware of what Egg were claiming on their behalf. I would assume you received the automated, “… you will receive a reply within 10 working days…” letter from the OFT? My correspondence began on Saturday so I should have heard something by 6 November. I will of course post again with the outcome. In the meantime, well done for raising your objection to Eggs bullying tactics directly with the OFT. I feel if more of us complain then the OFT will have to ask Egg to check their behaviour, at least in respect of what it claims about the OFT. There was another post in the forum with reference to the infamous successful case that Egg claim sets a precedent for them. The upshot being that when challenged Egg hide behind the Data Protection Act (for their customer, or them?). I was under the impression that the proceedings of court cases were public information, anyone know if this applies to County Court cases also? I see no reason why it should not. I have challenged Egg to quantify their unsubstantiated claims in a letter and I eagerly await their response. During the court case I will request that the courts request that Egg quantify this and their other spurious claims. All best, Chris.

Dear All, Like so many of you, I have recently received a offer of full and final settlement fom Egg that I can only assume is a mistimed April fools joke. The points of concern for me is Egg are claiming successful cases without admitting the judgement was for non-attendance of the claimant, and strongly intimating that Egg have the support of the OFT in their new charging regime of £16.00 per missed payment. The tone of this letter has so angered me that I have emailed the OFT with an official complaint and asked them to investigate the claims that Egg are making on the OFTs behalf in sasid letter. The wording of my email went a little something like this... "Dear Sir, I would like to bring to your attention the misconduct of Egg PLC. I am currently in the process of taking County Court action to recover modest bank charges from Egg PLC dating back to 2002 / 2003. Having submitted a claim, Egg have rather predictably filed their standard defence. Accordingly I was issued an Allocation Questionnaire which I have duly filed and am currently awaiting a response from the Court with a suitable date. The issue that has caused me significant concern is that I have recently received a derisory settlement offer, the tone of which is designed to be threatening and intimidating. I have attached a copy for your reference. In point 5 Egg claim to have negotiated special terms with the OFT, which suggests they have your carpet approval to charge £16.00 to each and every customer for each and every missed payment. They seem to be misquoting note 4. from your press release. “4. The OFT is not proposing that default fees should be equivalent to the threshold, and a court will certainly not consider that a default fee is fair just because it is below the threshold. Where there are exceptional business factors, so that the presumption that a default charge over £12 is unfair is not applicable, this does not necessarily mean that the current level of the default charge is consistent with the OFT's interpretation of the requirements of unfair contract terms legislation. But for example, where a card issuer has a policy of requiring customers to pay minimum monthly repayments by direct debits, such as that operated by Egg, and offers credit cards only to customers that satisfy a relatively high scoring requirement it may be able to set a fair default fee at a level above the threshold.” I feel that in misquoting the OFT Egg intend to give the very real impression that the OFT support there minimally modified charging regime in an attempt to dissuade customers from claiming monies for charges that have been applied to their account illegally. I would request that the OFT treat my request as an official complaint against Egg PLC and I feel an investigation into what Egg are claiming on your behalf is in order. It seems that the content of this letter is reasonably standard, with a number of people within the ConsumerAction forums (http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/egg/) having also received and identically worded letter. In my case it has only served to anger and strengthen my resolve to take these charlatans to Court, however I fear that others may be more intimidated by Egg’s bullying manner. Please do let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Yours faithfully," If more of you have received Eggs letter that can be considered, at best, economical with the truth then possibly if a number of us email the OFT ([email protected]) it would serve to highlight the wave of support within the forum, and hopefully the OFT will do a little something to reign in Egg's fanciful claims. All best, Chris.