For anyone who finds themselves in receipt of a claim

[Laiste]

Hello everyone!

 

Just wanted to say, for anyone who finds themselves in receipt of a Court claim. If you want to buy yourself some time maybe for financial reasons, (the cost of filing a c/c) or just to have some time to put together a c/c; the best way of doing this where penalty charges have been levied to an a/c, is to file an Application Notice seeking a stay of proceedings until the OFT case has been heard next year. It will be granted without any problem, so is the best way of securing a stay if you need to, whatever your reasons! I have a draft of what would be appropriate to include in an App Notice if anyone needs it!

 

Hope this is useful!

 

Regards,

 

Laiste.

[caro]

This is an interesting idea Laiste. So if there's a claim against you, and the amount includes charges, the amount is in dispute due to the legality of the charges.

[patrickq1]

i had a good feeling that this could be done,thanks laiste only dificulty i see their is that the finance industry may try to circumvent this by offering their data to the debt collectors....

[patrickq1]

EU Council agrees to Internet snooping proposals - ZDNet UK

if you have not seen this report then it is worth a read

[patrickq1]

The UK's Information Commissioner (formerly known as the Data Protection Commissioner) is objecting to demands for personal data to be stored for longer then 30 days -- the current legal period deemed acceptable for business purposes

sadly elizebeth france is no longer at the helm...but if you look at my threads on this DPA and the DCAs you will be able to judge for yourself why i think the banks will pass information in order to keep a survailance tab on their customers who they regard as being in default

[Having_A_Knightmare]

Hi

 

Ive got a CCJ-C/O and thats got penalty charges in.

 

Could this be a way of getting it set a side.

 

HAK

[Laiste]

What I forgot to mention last night also is that where you are challenging the legality of a Default Notice due to penalty charges being included in the amount that was claimed, said Notice therefore being legally unenforceable, that would also be grounds for securing a stay, as it comes back to the legality or otherwise of penalty charges, which has yet to be established.

 

These arguments would also work where for example, a debt has been sold to a DCA and you are challenging the legality of the Notice of Assignment (NoA) on the basis that penalty charges have been included in the total amount claimed.

 

I hope this is helpful.

 

Regards,

 

Laiste.

[Laiste]

Stays and set asides are different. A stay delays proceedings for a period of time, which is generally a timescale determined by the Court. Of course an individual can politely request that the case is stayed for ??? weeks/months/yrs-last bit only joking! lol

 

A set aside basically overturns a Judgment. It doesn't mean the Claimant cannot issue a further claim, it depends on the particular circumstances surrounding why a set-aside has been sought.

 

Regards,

 

Laiste.

[car2403]

Hi Laiste,

 

As you know, I'm in this position with HFC/Restons - could you post/PM that Draft App Notice as it may buy me some time if I need it?

 

Thanks,

Chris

[pt2537]

Hello Chris,

 

I doubt you will get a response from Laiste as from my understanding she has been "Banned" from the site. im not in possesion of all the facts of how and why this happened so i cant help you any further,

 

 

regards

paul

[indebtstudent]

Would this only apply to bank charges?

 

Have a court case soon for Ge money which my relative cannot attend...

[caro]

I'm not clear what you're asking indebtstudent.

[sequenci]

Would this only apply to bank charges?

 

Have a court case soon for Ge money which my relative cannot attend...

 

if the penalty charges were from other agreements (such as credit cards, loans etc) then they are not part of the test case. however some judges might be stupid enough to grant a stay

[noomill060]

Why has laiste been "banned" from the site?

 

She was one of the few people that actually knew what she was talking about.

[noomill060]

"if the penalty charges were from other agreements (such as credit cards, loans etc) then they are not part of the test case. however some judges might be stupid enough to grant a stay"

 

Well, as they are generally "stupid" enough to grant stays, whether the CC companies ask for one or not, it would appear that what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

[PriorityOne]

Why has laiste been "banned" from the site?

 

She was one of the few people that actually knew what she was talking about.

 

She broke the forum rules apparently.

[noomill060]

In what way?

 

Perhaps a warning and deletion of the offending post would have been more appropriate, given the invaluable assistance she has given to others.

[PriorityOne]

It had nothing to do with an offending post. The mods. felt that she had broken the site rules and took the decision to ban her.

[conar686]

It had nothing to do with an offending post. The mods. felt that she had broken the site rules and took the decision to ban her.

 

Someone of her obvious skills, who has helped any number of people should not be banned without the opportunity of defending herself. I'm with Noom sounds like heavy handed censorship to me.

[Bookworm]

Who tells you she didn't have that opportunity? Sounds to me like you're just happy to claim heavy handed censorship without knowing the facts.

 

And before we get dragged down further into this, I am not at liberty to discuss the whys and wherefores, so I won't. I believe Laiste still has contacts here, so I am sure you could get her version of events, although you'd have to yet again remember her version is likely to be one-sided.

[conar686]

Who tells you she didn't have that opportunity? Sounds to me like you're just happy to claim heavy handed censorship without knowing the facts.

 

And before we get dragged down further into this, I am not at liberty to discuss the whys and wherefores, so I won't. I believe Laiste still has contacts here, so I am sure you could get her version of events, although you'd have to yet again remember her version is likely to be one-sided.

 

Perhaps if you MODs would come out of your shells to discuss questions asked of you from time to time then one would not assume censorship.

 

You make my point BW the English language is a wonderful thing and if used carefully can impart many meanings, however you just come across as being aggressive & unhelpful.

 

I don't want to know why Laiste got banned just why it was felt that after all her useful service & countless hours helping people on this site - she was not given the benefit of any doubt.

 

A reference to the regulation/T&C or whatever was broken may help others from potentially making the same mistake. I somehow doubt this will get a response.

[Bookworm]

*I* come across as rude and unhelpful? YOU have just accused the whole team collectively of "heavy-handed censorship" and *I* am rude? Wow. Talk of pots and kettles.

 

Fact 1: A ban doesn't come from moderators. It comes from Admin, in other words the site owners.

 

Fact 2: In the CAG history, the number of people banned has been less than 10, and maybe even less than 5. That alone should tell you something.

 

Fact 3: We can not publish on open forum the reasons why someone had been banned, and I personally (my personal opinion, NOT the forum's party line, mind!) think it is the right thing to do. If you were fired from a job, would you expect the managers to come out and tell everyone in the workplace why? Especially if you were at fault? Somehow, I don't think so.

 

We can't win. If we were to reveal all, we would be pilloried for not respecting someone's privacy, sullying one's reputation when that person is unable to defend themselves. If we don't, we get accused of censorship, and it automatically gets assumed that we are the ones in the wrong.

 

As for "coming out of our shells", it is a condition of being part of the team that we sign a confidentiality agreement, so that even if we become privy to some personal information, we can not repeat it. Unfortunately, pointing the part of the rules flouted would tell you exactly why Laiste was banned, and however much I would like to, (and I do! you have NO idea!), I can not do that.

[stevokenevo]

It had nothing to do with an offending post. The mods. felt that she had broken the site rules and took the decision to ban her.

 

Who tells you she didn't have that opportunity? Sounds to me like you're just happy to claim heavy handed censorship without knowing the facts.

 

And before we get dragged down further into this, I am not at liberty to discuss the whys and wherefores, so I won't. I believe Laiste still has contacts here, so I am sure you could get her version of events, although you'd have to yet again remember her version is likely to be one-sided.

 

I would be interested to hear why PriorityOne seems to know so much about the incident??

[PriorityOne]

.... because Laiste and I were known to have differences of opinion on here and I wanted people to know that it had nothing to do with those. I have never reported any of Laiste's posts and for what it's worth, do miss our spats on here.

 

 

FYI, the decision to ban her was posted by Robertxc on a another thread.... and that's how I know about it.

[conar686]

.... because Laiste and I were known to have differences of opinion on here and I wanted people to know that it had nothing to do with those. I have never reported any of Laiste's posts and for what it's worth, do miss our spats on here.

 

 

FYI, the decision to ban her was posted by Robertxc on a another thread.... and that's how I know about it.

 

I'm sure others who know you & Laiste and that you had differences of opinion would assume any untoward involvement in the matter P1.