Jump to content

Stornoway

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    502
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Stornoway

  1. I'm following the new strategy for Allocation Questionaire's (no response from judge yet): In the Morpeth and Berwick County Court Claim number XXXXX Between Stornoway - Claimant and Citifinancial Europe PLC - Defendant Draft Order for Directions The Claimant shall within 14 days of service of this order send to the Defendant and to the Court: a) A schedule setting out each charge repayment of which is sought, showing the date, amount, and reason given (if any) for that charge being made; b) Copies of any statement or other document relied upon as showing that each and every charge has been made; c) A statement of evidence of all matters relied upon as tending to show that the charges are irrecoverable as penalties or otherwise; d) Copies of decided cases and other legal materials to be relied upon. If the Claimant fails to comply with this order, the claim will be struck out without further order. 2. The Defendant shall within 14 days thereafter file and serve a response to the Claimant's schedule, stating in respect of each item claimed; a) Pursuant to what contractual provision such charge was made, producing a copy of the contractual document relied upon; b) Whether such charge is accepted to be a penalty, and if not why not; c) If such charge is alleged to be a pre-estimate of the Defendant's loss incurred by the Claimant's actions (whether or not such action is treated as a breach of contract between the parties), all facts and matters intended to be relied upon as showing that such was a proper estimate of such loss, and all evidence to be adduced at trial as to what the true cost of dealing with the matter was; d) If such charge is not alleged to be a pre-estimate of the Defendant's loss incurred by the Claimant's actions then facts and matters intended to be relied upon showing the basis upon which the charge was calculated and all evidence to be adduced at trial as to show that the charge was fair and reasonable. e) Any witness statements. f) Copies of decided cases and other legal materials to be relied upon. If the Defendant fails to comply with this order, the Defence will be struck out without further order.
  2. My Particulars of Claim : 1. The Claimant has had a credit card account ("the Account") with the Defendant which has been open since before May 1999 and remains open. 2. During the period in which the Account has been operating the Defendant debited numerous charges to the Accounts in respect of purported breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant and also charged interest on the charges once applied. The Claimant understands that the Defendant contends that the charges were debited in accordance with the terms of the contract between itself and the Claimant. 3. A list of the charges applied is attached to these particulars of claim. 4. The Claimant contends that: a) The charges debited to the Account are punitive in nature; are not a genuine pre-estimate of cost incurred by the Defendant; exceed any alleged actual loss to the Defendant in respect of any breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant; and are not intended to represent or related to any alleged actual loss, but instead unduly enrich the Defendant which exercises the contractual term in respect of such charges with a view to profit. b) The contractual provision that permits the Defendant to levy such charges is unenforceable by virtue of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations (1999), the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and the common law. 5. The claimant claims compound interest on the amounts claimed, using the rate and method as applied by the defendant to monies it is owed. A schedule of the charges and interest calculated is annexed to the Particulars of Claim. The claimant’s ground for seeking restitution of the compounded contractual rate of interest is that the defendant would be unjustly enriched if the claimant's entitlement was limited to the statutory rate of interest in that the defendant has had use of the sums and would have used these sums to re-lend at commercial compounded rates. Additionally, the Claimant has not had the benefit of the sums and has therefore been unable to use said sums to repay borrowing elsewhere. 6. Alternatively, if the court decides that the claimant is not entitled to the contractual rate of interest (as outlined at point 5 above), then the claimant claims statutory interest under s.69 of the County Courts Act 1984. 7. Accordingly the Claimant claims: a) the return of the amounts debited in respect of charges on the Account in the sum of £1,100 b) the removal of any prejudicial information which the Defendant bank may have passed to third parties in relation to the Account and in particular the removal of all Default Notices registered with credit reference agencies since this was caused solely by the level of disproportionate penalty charges. The Claimant’s request is made under the Data Protection Act 1998, section 14, which gives the power to the Court to order the removal of inaccurate personal data. c) a refund of all interest paid on the said charges amounting to £1,300 d) Compound interest on the said charges at the contractual rate of 23.60% of £1,300, e) In the alternative to point d above, interest under s.69 County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgement or earlier payment at a daily rate of 85p. f) Court costs; 8. Alternatively, if the charges are a fee for a service, then they must be reasonable under S.15 of the Supply of Goods and Services Act (1982). I believe that the contents of these particulars of claim are true.
  3. I live in Scotland but i'm claiming in England by using a Mailbox I've set up as a correspondence address. The story so far ........ 17 Dec 06 - Sent SAR 04 Jan 07 - Request for ID rec'd and returned 28 Feb 07 - Statements received 07 Mar 07 - Prelim sent 26 Mar 07 - LBA sent 30 Mar 07 - Decline letter rec'd (no offer) 10 Apr 07 - MCOL submitted 18 Apr 07 - Claim Acknowledged 01 May 07 - I offered to settle at a modest discount (rejected 8/5/07) 01 May 07 - Usual standard defence received 05 May 07 - AQ returned under new allocation strategy (details below) Claim is for (approx figures) - 1100.00 charges - 1300.00 compound purchase interest (23.6%) - 1300.00 compound contractual interest (at 23.6% purchase int rate) - 3700.00 TOTAL I'm really enjoying this whole process and whilst I would be delighted to settle out of court to avoid wasting court time, cant wait until I have my day with the infamous Mr Smith. Their claim of £12.88 costs is absolutely laughable and has holes in it bigger than the Mersey Tunnel. My brother's new girlfriend is a barrister who is now helping me in the process so roll on my day in Morpeth & Berwick Court !
  4. Great minds think alike albeit you win hands down on comprehensiveness !
  5. its a personal choice as to whether you mcol or use local court. With Mcol you have very limited space to give details of your claim and I therefore use the local court. Have a look at the FAQ section which explains how to complete the forms - you dont have to actually go in to the court everything can be posted. good luck.
  6. Well done. Surely you have a strong case for claiming "wasted costs " ?
  7. I predict that his recent actions will completely clear his court of bank charges claims within the next few months - would anyone risk using Birmingham from now on ?
  8. in your letter you MUST use the templates in here which threaten court action. If you do that then Halifax will; - offer nothing at prelim - 50% refund at LBA - they will be prepared to negotiate upwards following LBA to a max payout of 100% of charges - if you launch court action they will pay out fairly quickly. If you have to go to court you can do it in england as i have done by using an english correspondence address. I opened a mailbox with "mailbox etc" in preston and put this address on the claim docs - all docs then get posted up to me.
  9. I had a response from Cap one today; they have ticked "i dispute the full amount of claim" and "do you dispute the claim because you have paid it - no" then they have completed the defence section but in the final paragraph they have said that without liability they have credited my account with the claim and removed default.
  10. what they are saying is that they have paid your claim - you've won. Why would you want to go to court ?
  11. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/lloyds-bank/35751-kevboy_telford-lloyds-2.html
  12. Rhetorical Question : How many cases have we won like yours (V) this 1 single case where a bank has won. It is un-nerving for people like me who are at court soon but suspect we need to keep it in perspective for what it is. Would love to see Kev' s POC though.
  13. Kev Do you have a thread running for the claim or can you start one so that we can see what steps you took and how your POC were laid out. Many thanks.
  14. Court action - if you dont then halifax treat the claim in a different less favourable way.
  15. Can i just jump on the bandwagon and say that if it wasnt for CAG then I quite possibly wouldnt be here. After sufferring a financial meltdown over the last couple of years, I'm now really getting my life back. I'm not going to get a pile of cash back from my claims but it is eliminating most of my debt. I now know how to control the various DCAs I have to deal with and have well and truly seized the initiative. I owe CAG an awful lot and there are many others like me. I am so grateful ......
  16. 1. Have a read of this thread which should help http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/80486-claiming-beyond-6-yrs.html 4. Have a read of this thread http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/53570-new-strategy-allocation-questionnaires.html?highlight=Allocation Hope it helps.
  17. Keep pressing re the statements - if they are outwith the 40 days then complain formally to the information commissioner (although this does take time for them to write to halifax and get a response). Halifax now seem to be taking a tougher stance so you'll get a KB at prelim letter stage and a 50% offer at LBA - phone them at this point and negotiate - make it clear you'll accept nothing less than full refund. If they wont agree then take court action and they normally pay out quickly with 8% interest. Stick to the rules and you'll get there in the end.
  18. Some great advice there CJ but ....Bankfodder advised me that I probably couldnt claim "wasted costs" if the Bank settled out of court pre hearing. In my case the settlement came before they even filed a defence.
  19. I've tried something similar a couple of times and to be honest they just ignore it. If you are only at prelim stage then I would start again, fresh prelim including contractual then LBA including contractual. Contractual is much more difficult concept and less easy to prove - i'm including it in all my claims but if the banks offer to settle pre court at charges + purchase int then i would definitely accept the offer. Good luck.
  20. Very interesting. I'm claiming charges + purchase int + compound contractual against citi and have gone down the same route at AQ with a request for full disclosure - will advise if I get the same response from them.
  21. The PM (Private Message) means Enron has sent you a CAG email - you'll find this in your inbox which you can access from the section at the top right of the screen. Stndard members dont know your external email address.
  22. If we do have some internal Citi paperwork to disprove their £12.88 figure then surely Citicards and their FD run the risk of finding themselves charged with perjury ? Would love to see that !
  23. You should phone the court who will guide you. You should be able to file for judgement. Who are you caiming against ?
×
×
  • Create New...