Test Case DEFENCES Discussion Thread

[crfx250]

I thought it would be a good idea to have a thread for views on the banks

defences for the OFT test case and to make people aware that the defences can be read here http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/113391-oft-banks-documentation.html

 

The defences are photocopies from the court and the law firm who got them for me said they had to wait in line for five hours to get them such was the demand. The court has 3 staff just working soley on copying them. But at 85 quid a set they must be coining it in.

[einyuk]

I would like to thank you crfx for your time and effort, also at your expense in making these available...............

 

god bless

[crfx250]

No probs. I needed them anyway for my case against FSA. I'm not too

worried about the 85 quid for the photocoping, but the bill for someone

from from the solicitors I'm using to que up for half the day at court for

them and spend the rest of the day scanning 160 pages onto pdf files

is going to be interesting given that the solicitor on my case charges a

dizzying 350 sobs an hour.

[smutley]

crfx I think the dedication and time (and money) you spend on this is absolutely fantastic and think you should have some sort of honourary award!

Do you think I would benefit by adding the barclays defence to my bundle for objection to stay this friday?

[crfx250]

Thanks Smutley. I don't know, I'm really not the best person to ask but I'm sure someone on here would. Anyone?

[Bookworm]

I would think it highly counterproductive, actually, as the County Court judge will take one look, be reminded that this High Court case is the reason your bank is applying for the stay in the 1st place, and wash his hands of the whole thing as quickly as he can.

[dad]

Crfx250,

 

Thank you for going to the trouble of providing us with all of this. I have read the HBOS papers. It is remarkably similar to defences filed in many CAGer's cases. Two points immediately stand out:

 

1. They were asked to provide 'representative terms and conditions' and have provided terms dated October 2007 - ie AFTER they received the particulars of claim - naughty.

 

2. I think this is going to be a key bit of their defence:

(2) The HBOS unaranged overdraft fees are incurred in circumstances in which there is no,

alternatively no subsisting, breach by the HBOS customer of the HBOS Terms. In particular:

(a) the HBOS Terms do not prohibit an HBOS customer from making an informal

request for an unarranged overdraft and the mere making of such a request (or the

refusal of such a request by the relevant HBOS Bank) does not amount to a breach

of contract by that customer;

Now I certainly have paperwork that says otherwise.

 

It occurs to me that if you really wanted to introduce the cat to the pigeons the CAG could use some of its fighting fund to apply to be joined as a party to the proceedings.

 

Dad

[zootscoot]

the CAG could use some of its fighting fund to apply to be joined as a party to the proceedings.

 

We have looked into this and unfortunately it is not possible.

[bruce47]

Great news that they have arrived,

Just at a quick read through the defences they all seen to be aimed at the same points

They are not a penalty

They are in plain intangible language

They are not a beach of contract

They are in the main terms of the contact

From all the county court claims the banks know the above is wrong or they would of used this defence and defended every claim not spend 500 million or what the amount they have paid out.

They all have the "good faith" in the counterclaims as well?

When you read the OFT's POC 2, in my opinion they seem to be very strongly, aggressively not sure of the word i would use making it clear that the defences are not a defence and they intend to use there powers if needed.

They also mention a lot about when there investigations are complete at the end of the year they will use enforcement or seek an injunction.

Seems to me they mean business, I would like to know what the banks solicitors think to the new POC's???????

I think by christmas once the OFT's investigation is complete the banks are going to agree a lower amount £12 and pull out. But this would then not really solve any issues as people would still like credit cards go to the courts for the full amount. Clogging up the systems which is what the waiver is all about really

Or they may go to court as it is only in relation to the UTCCR's so they may appeal and drag it on for as long as they can,

Or as we are in England anything can happen and the judge sides with the banks

[smutley]

I would think it highly counterproductive, actually, as the County Court judge will take one look, be reminded that this High Court case is the reason your bank is applying for the stay in the 1st place, and wash his hands of the whole thing as quickly as he can.

 

thanks for the advice bookworm, although I will read barclays defense and do my best to understand, at least now I wont shoot myself in the foot on friday!