If the info you have supplied the Court ties in with the amount claimed on the form then you should ask the Court exactly what the Judge requires. It may be that your schedule had become separated from the form. Given the time they have taken so far, you can also ask them if they have a leaflet (they will have) setting out the target times for these processes in that Court. The bank may still not defend the action despite their submissions to the Court. It would also be worthwhile checking that all your calculations are correct and that you have claimed for no more than six years up to the date of claim. Upon what terms did you accept the partial payment?

You do not need to give them any time as you are simply rejecting their offer. However, if you have an account with them they will normally transfer the funds into that account and you will have to specifically state in writing that you can only accept that sum as partial settlement of your claim.

In terms of my own action, I have been sitting on my hands awaiting the outcome of jonni2bad's action to have the default removed and I was sorry to learn of the outcome. The situation on my accounts is that following the refund of charges I have a residual overdraft of £800 and two savings accounts with a total credit balance of £1,100. So the net effect is that Halifax owe me £300-00. However, as I posted previously, I have no access to any of the accounts and when I check online I can only get to the "My Portfolio" page listing the accounts and balances and no further. At least, that was the situation until this morning as when I checked "My Portfolio" my current account - which as I have reported before is now called cardcash account - had a zero balance with a similar reduction in one of the savings accounts; but still no access available online to the other accounts. I have endured several 30 minute plus phone calls which I made to Halifax, Blair Oliver Scott and Wescot. In the case of the latter firm they say they knew nothing about my savings accounts, yet when I spoke to the Halifax they said that there were markers on the accounts and I needed to speak to Wescot. That is a very brief synopsis of what has gone on although I should add that I have sent several letters to the Halifax which I always send by fax as well as by mail. Needless to say, I received no reply. Having read jonni's report I have now decided to apply for judgement to be entered against the Halifax. Presumably the bank will respond by saying they have paid the monetary claim to which my response will be that I have received nothing. I will then apply for an Order regarding the default notice. However, I suspect I will have to commence a separate action under the Data Protection or Consumer Credit Acts to achieve that purpose. There is a side to these actions which does not appear to have been used. As we all know, the bank are settling without admission of guilt or liability. However, I do not think that they can do this literally hundreds of times and still pretend there is no liability on their part. I intend to make that point if my case comes to Court. I will seek to liken their claim of no liability with the blanket statements of no liability for hats and coats in a restaurant for example. Finally, another interesting twist to this case is that the default letter which Halifax sent me was dated 5 days after they wrote to the Court acknowledging my Court Claim which I think places them in an awkward position.

Jonni, regarding your point that people should not settle if they have a default issue, I think it's worth noting that Halifax often "settle" without prior reference to the customer. In other words they transfer the funds into the customer's account - which they may or may not have access to. However, in such a case, the customer cannot be deemed to have accepted that offer unless of course they withdraw the money! I am not sure the small claims court - and certainly not the moneyclaim precedure - are geared up (or willing) to deal with the default and restoration of facilities scenario. I have always been told that the Courts are reluctant to order positive actions which they cannot directly control - like the removal of a default for example. Another possibility is that the courts may feel that if you have had a default wrongly registered against you then your remedy is in damages. In my own case I have sat on my hands awaiting the outcome of your case and I will add a post in a few minutes to my own thread.

I will have their number with me but they cannot tell me definitively whether a Defence has been filed on 3rd August until 10-00am on 4th. This is because 'phone lines operate from 10-00 to 4-00 whereas their office works behind locked doors from 9-00 and until 5-00pm. For that reason I intend to fax through the Application to enter Judgement at 9-00am on 4th August which will take precedence over any fax or letter received from the Halifax on that day after the time of my fax.

Not really. I will complete the form with Friday's date and take their fax number with me. Then I will find a fax machine early on Friday morning and send it to them. Timing is quite important because the Court say that if the Defence is received at any time upto my applying for Judgement then they will accept that Defence no matter how long after the 28 day deadline.

I have just checked with the Court and Halifax have still not filed a Defence. I also found out that I can file an Application to enter Judgement by Fax provided that the document is dated and transmitted after the last day for filing a Defence.

I dont think you should be criticising yourself. Perhaps you should have been more severe in tying them to your deadlines rather than theirs. You do not have to accept that 7 days nonsense - if they want to they can issue a payment on the same day. If you want to send in the Bailiffs, go ahead. You may not get immediate results as they may take some days to respond and then they will probably send a letter to the Halifax informing them that they hold a Warrant of Execution against them. This will give them a period of 7-10 days to pay up. More likely, a Bailiff's warrant will probably concentrate the Halifax' mind and they will pay up.

We seem to be of one mind here. I have informed the Court that it's not settled and remind them each day when I call. I have also told them that the bank seem to be adopting a policy of bluffing Claimants into agreeing to withdraw the action. The Court are obviously aware that these actions are invariably settled prior to Hearing - or even Listing, and I get the impression that the Halifax are not winning any brownie points with their tactics. If I am right, and this is felt throughout the Court, then it may also be helpful at any Hearing as the DJ's are often somewhat cavalier in making Judgements based on their own feelings of the case, rather than a strict interpretation of the law. I agree about the telephone aviodance. On my wife's Claim, when they wrote that they were very anxious to speak to her about her concerns, they also included the standard clause about recording the conversation. I used that statement to say that as we would not have that recording for our own records it was not an appropriate course of action. I said that for this reason, some form of written record was advisable for both parties. I also suggested they could e-mail to the address held on their records to save time. I have discussed the procedure for entering Judgement in Default with the Court, as we are going away to North Wales for 10/12 days on Wednesday. Halifax have until Thursday to enter a Defence. If the Court receive an Application to enter Judgement at any time before the close of business on the last day - this Thursday in my case, they will return it to me. So I intend to send a timed delivery letter to arrive by 10-00am on the Friday morning. I will take my laptop and data card with me to stay in touch from time to time - hopefully daily. In any case, I am looking forward to the £5k+ treat in my wife's account as the refund may come towards the end of next week.

This message is primarily for jonni2bad and martin3030 though it may well be of wider interest. Jonni, the 6 legs of the 4th paragraph of my Claim read as follows: ************* 4) Accordingly, the Claimant claims: (i) The return of the amounts debited in respect of charges in the sum of £1,772-00 together with £11-86 interest charged thereon. (ii) Court costs of £120-00 (iii) Interest pursuant to Section 69 County Courts Act as set out on the schedule (iv) A declaration from this Honourable Court that the Term of the contract leading to the application of the charges is unenforceable. (v) The Claimant further seeks an Order that the Defendant Company must operate the three accounts in all respects as if the unlawful charges had not been debited to account number 12345678. (iv) The Claimant also seeks an Order that the Defendant must not record any deleterious information regarding the Claimant within their own records or with outside Agencies as a result of the operation of the account whilst the unlawful charges were debited to it. ************** As I see it, the bank does not want to argue the validity of the charges in Court, which is why all Claims for refund are being paid. On the basis of my Claim - and I suspect jonni's as well, they will be forced to confront the validity of the charges if they are to argue against the other legs of my Claim - which is why I have used the exact wording shown. I do not see how they can risk having this heard in Court without opening the whole can of worms they seem desperate to keep tight shut. They have paid my Claim into my current account which they have prevented me from accessing and their pretty standard letter of settlement included a paragraph as follows: ********* "I will write to the Court to let them know that your Claim has been settled and would be grateful if you would do the same" ********* They have until 3rd August to enter a Defence. I have checked daily with the Court to make sure no Defence or letter of reputed settlement has been received from the Halifax. I wrote to the Halifax to confirm this situation and the relevant part of that letter reads as follows: ************ "Thank you for your letter dated 25th July 2006 which I hope is in the spirit of aiming to achieve a settlement satisfactory to both sides. However, whilst I note your comments regarding payment into an account, as it stands at the moment that would not be a financial settlement as the bank have barred access to all my accounts and I am unable to see any of the transactions on any of the accounts. Also, there are three further legs to my Claim so it would not be appropriate to write to the Court to say that the matter has been settled. Were the situation to be restored to the situation that existed before I wrote to the bank informing you of the legal action, then the matter could be settled as you suggest without further recourse to the Court and involving no admission of liability on the part of the bank. Restoring the status quo requires only that the bank regard the accounts as if the refunded charges had never been applied. In practical terms this would involve the following:- 1) Restoration of normal online access to all accounts 2) Restoration of Roll number D/1234567-8 to normal current account status 3) Restoration of the £?00 overdraft facility as previously existing 4) Issuing of Visa Debit Card/cheque guarantee card as recently expired. 5) Issuing of a new cheque book on the aforementioned account 6) Issuing of a new Websaver card captured by a machine when the account was in credit whilst I was making a balance enquiry, and without any prior notice Should this not be acceptable to the bank then the Court Action must proceed as none of the legs of that action will have been resolved. To facilitate more rapid communication given the tight deadlines which apply to the action, may I suggest that the bank write to me at the e-mail address held on your records." *********** This letter was faxed and mailed on 26th July. No reply has been received.

Jonni, there seem to be some common issues in our proceedings and it might be helpful if we compare pleadings. I will post the 6 legs of my Claim under my thread entitled Garry Refer Drawer Kettle, and make some further comments on that thread.

Martin, I submitted my Claim through the local Court and included a paragraph specifically on removal of any default as well as any other deleterous information held internally or with outside agencies. They have paid the value of my Claim into an account they have denied me access to and Halifax have said that they will inform the Court that the Case is settled. I have written to all parties to say that it is not settled in any respect. My thread is under "Garry Refer Drawer Kettle"

Although they have paid up on my claim, I still do not have the breakdown so I will telephone the Court if there is nothing in today's post. Having refused their two offers of £300ish and £900ish against my wife's claim of £5,500, Halifax then ignored our offer of paying the Claim and costs without the Sect 69 interest as an immediate settlement without admission of liability. Crazy really as that will cost them an extra £600. This is the more exciting Claim as its much bigger and most of it will be a credit balance.

VICTORY NUMBER ONE FOR HENRYSDAD Following the usual pattern, I have heard nothing apart from the acknowledgement and intention to defend - that was on 6th July 2006. Until this afternoon when when I checked online I could see the balance on my account had fallen by about £1800. I cannot actually see the make up of the account as to how the deposit(s) were made up as they have barred me from going behind the My Portfolio/balance page. So my situation now is that if they re-instated my overdraft which was removed during this process, I would have £350 available. As it is, I still owe them £150 but I think there are 2 or 3 charges after the Claim which will need to be sorted - when I get to see the detail on the account of course. Needless to say, the battle goes on as there were 3 other legs to my Claim - but at least they have paid up. Now we just need to get my wife's much bigger Claim paid.

Well done cogsg - and ditto! My claim was ack. on 6th July and the money went into the account today. Regarding your other point, I think you will find that the acknowledgement includes a statement to the effect that they intended to defend the whole Claim. However, as your Claim has not been heard by the Court, they may let you amend the amount claimed. Your best bet is to telephone a County Court office to find out what you can do. As you have heard nothing from the Halifax you can regard the matter as not settled.

Still nothing on my account yet. Nor any defence received or even a reply to all my letterrs and faxes. Close of business tomorrow is the expiry time for the offer I sent them on my wife's account.

I tried to telephone Claire McBride today on the number she gave on her letter to my wife. The person who answered said it was not a name that meant anything to her! Unfortunately, due to Court proceedures they have only just issued that claim today. It will be deemed as having been served on 22nd July. The troubkle is that we will not now see this money till the second half of August when we could have used some of it for the holidays. I offered them by phone and fax an offer to settle for the full amount less the Sect 69 interest which would save them nearly £600 provided that the money is in the account by close of business on Tuesday 25th July. I am not holding my breath!

Well, in the post yesterday was a letter from Claire McBride, Review Manager Customer Relations. This is on my wife's claim for £5,000+ and they have now increased their offer from £320-00 to £954-00. This is just as attractive as the first offer and will not be accepted. The Claim has already been served in any event. As usual in our experience, correspondence form the Halifax never refers to our threats of, or actual, legal action.

I am checking the online details daily now, but nothing credited yet; though they have until 3rd August to file their Defence.

jonni2bad, that letter reads very well. Still nothing from them on my Claim since they acknowledged the Claim to the Court.

If you read the site thoroughly you will see this point covered. The essence is that if they cannot justify the charge and identify their associated costs how can they defend it in Court.

I have included it in mine though I am uncertain how a Judge will deal with it if the financial claim has been settled. However, it would need to be answered if there is a claim as in your and my case that we want to make sure that there are no defaults about. My point is that if there were no default leg to the action then I think the Court may refuse to rule - could be wrong about that though. I actually used my own wording to include internal Halifax records as well as external Agencies.

Jonni, have you included in your Claim the request that the charges be declared unenforceable?

I have had another threatening letter today telling me to settle the o/d by some date in August. The incredible thing is that none of their letters make any reference to my own letters to them, or to the proceedings which their own legal department have acknowledged. It is as if I am being dealt with two parallel parts of their business where their paths never cross.

The Court accepted the Claim on my wifes account today. This turned out to be a little tricky. I have posted previously that the Court had confirmed that if the Section 69 interest takes the amount claimed over £5,000 then the case can still be allocated as a Small Claim. However, what they did not say was that the issue fee is calculated on the total figure. This meant that the fee rose from £120-00 to £250-00 as the total claimed was around £5,500-00. This would have delayed the case as we dont have the extra dosh at the moment. I was therefore faced with amending the proceedings by removing all reference to the Section 69 Interest and throwing away nearly £600-00 or away splitting the action into two cases which would still have incurred two £120-00 fees. I sought the advice of a Court official off the record, I was told that he or she used to advise Claimants to delete the Section 69 interest from the front of the claim but leave the detailed claim for the interest in the Particulars of Claim. So that's what I did. The Claim will be sent out tomorrow and deemed served by 18th July I presume. Here's hoping.