HilaryFrances v Yorkshire Bank (Leeds)

[Castlebest]

No Olden but we are here

 

The one major benefit to most of us there today is that the judge has ordered that the banks are not able to harass, abuse, threaten (via letters or otherwise) or enforce disputed debts (through collection agencies) arising from charges or closure of accounts, in the interim, otherwise we can put in an application to him directly to strike out the defence (stay) on grounds of abuse

vbrep_register("1176457")

 

I think thats a good result, The courts are currently taking between 6 and 12 weeks to list hearings which means if you won a stay appeal hearing now by the time your case got listed for a hearing it would be late December or January. The test case is due to start in January.

 

Bl**dy annoying but I think we have to live with it for now. I think we may see a melting in the attitude of the Judges after the first instance judgment in the test case, but we will see.

 

pete

[Castlebest]

all the cases he heard, including mine, have been deferred whilst he considers his judgment.

My judge has done this too I'm pretty sure because he wants to consider how to control the banks during the period of the stay to prevent them pursuing the debt or reporting defaults to the credit agency's

 

I think he has already made his mind up though because he also said that it the banks want to pursue us for the costs for today we would have to come back to court.

My judge asked in court if the barristers wanted costs and when they said no he said there would be no costs associated with his order. I think you can also look at this as telling the banks if they want costs they will have to face him again and say why.

 

So we not only may have to pay for the banks cost we all may end up with a county court judgment as well, so be warned.

You wont get a CCJ from an appeal hearing.

 

He said that there was no guarantee that even if the stays were lifted we would get our money sooner than if we waited for the outcome of the test case. He also said that the banks could argue that the high charges were meant as a deterrent and not just to increase profits as some cynics might suggest.

Err yes otherwise known as a penalty charge

 

Well done Hils it looks like you put up a very good show

 

pete

[Castlebest]

A number of judges have recognized that problem with the stays, and have either made further directions with the stay to limit the banks actions during the stay of have warned the banks that if they do take any actions during the stay the stay will be lifted immediately and the case will go to hearing.

 

Notable one of these was Carlisle v Clydesdale (was a Leeds case too) I have a transcript of the judgment in PDF format. If you want a copy PM me your email addy and I will send .

 

pete

[Castlebest]

Thanks Caro I can stop emailing it now lol

 

pete

[Castlebest]

Olden, read from point 11 on page 3, where the judge gives his thoughts on the banks actions during the period of the stay and Mr Toledo tries to query his decisions .

 

pete

[Castlebest]

yes basically they are allowed to add charges to your account but not pursue you for recovery or inform the credit agency's of any supposed defaults.

 

If your still using your account this doesn't help a lot because the new charges will still just eat up your wages/benefits BUT if you open a parachute account and move all of your finances to that they can do what they like to your old account and they are stuck with it until after the test case

 

pete

[Castlebest]

its one hell of a penny when it drops isn't it you do have to make sure the recovery from your claim will cover the overdraft in your old account when all of this mess is over but basically yes.

 

If you can get your judge to use the Carlisle v Clydesdale judgment as a template there is nothing stopping you effectively putting the bank on hold too .

 

pete

[Castlebest]

Hi castle about the banks may ask for costs, I thought if they consider that to have the stay, they won the hearing therby entitling them to costs?

 

I'm honestly not sure how the costs work on appeals on county court fast track, I believe we have been very lucky to date in that costs haven't been asked for by the banks maybe zoot can shed more light on when costs do / do not apply.

 

pete

[Castlebest]

All the HSBC barrister who was up against me said was all the points she wanted to make were contained in her skeleton argument, she didn't go into any detail verbally.

 

pete

[Castlebest]

She did just before we went into court... I couldnt say a lot because I did exactly the same to her

 

pete

[Castlebest]

Dont be daft there is nothing to worry about, just watch whats happening and listen to whats being said and when the time comes if you get a chance say your piece

 

pete

[Castlebest]

Same here hill's my hearing was the 8th Oct, I poned the court and the file is still with my judge

 

pete

[Castlebest]

Hill's did you get the Carslile v Clydesdale directions with your stay? i.e they cant chase you for the "debt" while the stay is in place?

 

pete

[Castlebest]

I know of one case where the claimant proved his case for hardship in court and got a court date for his claim only to have the bank appeal against it and the stay put back

 

the only comfort are the Carlisle v Clydesdale directions (if you still owe the bank money) and the statutory interest which is building on your claim value

 

pete