Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Speaking of the reformatory boys, here they are with all of their supporters, some of whom traveled with them from miles away, all carefully crammed together and photographed to look like there were more than about 80 .. rather like Farages last rally with even fewer people crammed around what looked like an ice cream van or mobile tea bar ... Although a number in the crowd apparently thought they were at a vintage car rally as they appeared to be chanting 'crank-her'. A vintage Bentley must be out of view.   Is this all there is? Its less than the Tory candidate. - shut up and smile while they get a camera angle that looks better
    • in order for us to help you we require the following information:- Which Court have you received the claim from ? Canterbury If possible please scan redact and upload a full page copy of page 1 of the claim form. ( Name of the Claimant ? Moneybarn No 1   How many defendant's  joint or self ? One Date of issue – top right hand corner of the claim form – this in order to establish the time line you need to adhere to. 29/05/24 Acknowledged by 14/06/24  Defence by 29/06/24  Particulars of Claim PARTICULARS OF CLAIM   1.  By a Conditional Sale Agreement in writing made on 25th August 2022. Between the Claimant and Defendant, the Claimant let to the Defendant on Conditional Sale. A Ford Ranger 3.2 TDCi (200 P S) 4x4 Wildtrack  Double Cab Pickup 3200cc (Sep.2015) Registration No, ******* Chassis number ***************** (“The Vehicle”).  A copy of the agreement is attached   2.  The price of the goods was £15,995.00.  The Initial Rental was £8500.00.  The total charge for credit was £3575.;17 And the balance of £11,070.17 was payable by 59 equal consecutive monthly instalments of £187 63. payable on the 25th of each month.   3.  The following were expressed conditions of the set agreement,   Clause 8: Our Right to End this Agreement  8.1   Subject to sending you the notice as required by law, any of the following events will entitle us to end this Agreement: 8.1.2  You fail to pay the advance payment (if any) or any of the payments as specified on the front page of this agreement or any other sum payable under this Agreement. 8.1.3 If any of the information you have given us before entering into this Agreement or during the term of this Agreement was false 8.1.4 We consider, acting reasonably, that the goods may be in jeopardy or that our rights in the goods may otherwise be prejudiced. 8.1.5 If you die 8.1.6 If a bankruptcy petition is presented against you; if you petition for your own bankruptcy, or make a live arrangement with your creditors or call a meeting of them. 8. 1.7 If in Scotland, you become insolvent or sequestration or a receiver, judicial factor or trustee to be appointed over any of your estate, or effects or suffer an arrestment, charge attachment or other diligence to be issued or levied on any of your estate or effects or suffer any exercise, or threatened exercise of landlords hype hypothec 8.1.8 If you are a partnership, you are dissolved 8.1.9 If the goods are destroyed, lost, stolen and/or treated by the insurer as a total loss in response to an insurance claim. 8.1.10 If we reasonably believe any payment made to us in respect of this Agreement is a proceed of crime. 8.1.11 If steps are taken by us to terminate any other agreement which you have entered into with us.   Clause 9.  Effect of Us Terminating Agreement   9.1 If this Agreement terminates under clause 8 the following will apply 9.1.1 Subject to the rights given to you by law, you will no longer be entitled to possession of the goods and must return them to us to an address as we may reasonably specify, (removing or commencing the removal of any cherished plates) together with a V5 registration certificate, both sets of keys and a service record book. If you are unable or unwilling to return the goods to us then we shall collect the goods and we'll charge you in accordance with clause 10.3 9.1.2 We will be entitled to immediate payment from you for all payments and all other sums do under this agreement at the date of termination 9.1.3 We will sell the goods or public sale at the earliest opportunity once the goods are in a reasonable condition which includes a return of the items listed in clause 7.1.4 9.1.4 We will be entitled to immediate payment from you of the rest of the Total Amount Payable under this agreement less: ( a) A rebate for early settlement ias required by law which will be calculated and notified to you at the time of payment (b) The proceeds of sale of the goods (if any) after deduction of all costs associated with finding you and/or the goods, recovery, refurbishment and repair. Insurance, storage, sale, agents fees, cherished plate removal, replacement keys, costs associated with obtaining service history for the goods and in relation to obtaining a duplicate V5 registration certificate   4, The following are particulars required by Civil Procedure Rules. Rule 7.9 as set out in 7.1 and 7.2 of the associated Practice Direction entitled Hire Purchase Claims:-   a)     The agreement is dated 25 August 2022. And is between Moneybarn No1 Limited  and xxxxxxxxx under agreement number 756050. b)    The claimant was one of the original parties to the agreement. c)    The agreement is regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. d)    The goods claimed Ford Ranger 3.2 TDCi ( 200 PS) 4x4 Wildtrack Double Cab Pickup 3200 cc (Sep2015} Registration No ^^^^^^^ Chassis number ***************** e)     Thw total price of the goods £19570 f)     The paid up sum £1206 5 g)    The unpaid balance of the total price £7505 (to include charges) h)    A default notice was sent to the defendant on 20th February 2024 by Firrst class post i)      The date when the right to demand delivery of the goods accrued 14 March 2024 j)      The amount if any claimed as an alternative to delivery of the goods 7505 22 include charges ]= 5.  A the date of service of the notice the instalments were £562.89 in arrears. 6. By reason of the Termination of the Agreement by the notice, defendant became liable to pay the sum of £7502 7. The date of maturity the agreement is 24th August 2027. 8. Further or  alternative by reasons of  the Defendant breaches of the agreement by failing to pay the said instalments, the Defendant evinced an intention no longer to be bound by the Agreement and repudiated it by the said Notice the claimant accepted that repudiation 9. By reason of such repudiation the claimant has suffered loss and damage.   Total amount payable £19570 Less sum paid or in arrears by the date of repudiation £12064 97 Balance £7505 (to include charges.) ( The claimant will give credit if necessary for the value of the vehicle if recovered.)  The claimant therefore claims 1.    An order for delivery up of the vehicle 2.    The MoneyClaim to be adjourned generally with liberty to restore,  Upon restoration of the MoneyClaim following return or loss of the vehicle. the Claimant will ensure the pre action protocol for debt claims is followed. 3.    Pursuant to s 90 (1)  of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. An order that the Claimant and/or its agents may enter any premises in which the vehicle is situated in order to recover the vehicle should it not be returned by the Defendant 4.    further or alternatively damages 5.    costs.   Statement of truth The Claimant believes that the facts stated in these Particulars of Claim are true. The Claimant understands that the proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes or causes to be made a false statement in the document for verified by statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. I am duly Authorised by the Claimant to sign these Particulars of Claim signed Dated 17th of April 2024   What is the total value of the claim? 7502   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? No   Never heard of this   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? n/a Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? No   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After  Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? In a garage  Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes  Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Original Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? n/a   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? They said sent but nor received   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? None seen   Why did you cease payments? Still Paying,   What was the date of your last payment? Yesterday  31st May 2024   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? Yes on 12 Feb 2024   What you need to do now.   Can't scan, will do via another means as you cant have jpg
    • Now that is an interesting article which adds afew perspective that I hadn't thought significant - but on reflection of the perspectives offered ... Now Starmer is no Blair, however 'blairite he may be perceived, but the Tories aren't tories and aren't even remotely liberal   The fast 'unannounced and unexpected election call from sunack may well be explained by the opinion linked that he hoped reform would be unprepared and effectively call a chunk of Farages largely empty bluster - making him look even more of a prat, leave scope for attacks on shabby reform candidates and mimimise core vote losses to reform - while throwing the 'middle ground' (relative) tories TO THE DOGS - and with the added bonus of likely pacifying his missu' desire to jogg off to sunny cal tout suite somewhat   thumb in the air - I expect about 140ish tory seats, but can hope for under a hundred Reform - got to admit the outside possibility of 1, maybe 2 seats with about 8% of the vote - but unlikely. I think projections of over 10% of the vote for reform is nudged and paid for speculation - but possible with the expected massive drives from Russian, Chinese and far right social media bot and troll prods targeting the gullible.
    • Commentary June 2024 WWW.ELECTORALCALCULUS.CO.UK Interesting article about just how bad it could be for the Tories.  Also Tories could be hoping on Reform not having candidates in many seats, as they were not ready.  
    • Even a Piers Morgan is an improvement and a gutless Farage Piers Morgan calls for second Brexit referendum WWW.THELONDONECONOMIC.COM Piers Morgan and Nigel Farage have faced off over Brexit and a second referendum in a heated reunion on BBC Question Time.   “Why don’t we have another referendum about Brexit?” he questioned. “I seem to remember when 2016 came around we were told there was going to be control of our borders and it was going to be economically beneficial to this country. And eight years later we have lost complete control of our borders… and economically it seems to have been a wilful act of self-harm.”   ... Piers missed off : after all somebody said a 48/52 decision would be "unfinished business" by a long way - was that person just bul lying (again)  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Lloyds TSB Credit Card - Claim form received


mcuth
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5652 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

lol that makes me laugh what companys think a acceptable WP is.

Your sounds reasonable but i can see them going for it really. The reason i say that is because they get nothing monetary wise out of you which is obviously what they want well they get a big legal bill but thats it.

OFT debt collection guidance

 

Please remember the only stupid question is the one you dont ask so dont worry about asking the stupid questions.

 

Essex girl in pc world looking 4 curtains 4 her pc,the assistant says u dont need curtains 4 a computer!!Essex girl says,''HELLOOO!! i,ve got WINDOWS!!'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 207
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I think your offer is far more reasonable mcuth :D

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
I've rejected this offer as unacceptable and countered with the following: £1k lump sum paid to me, along with all LTSB CRA data removed as compensation for their incorrect default procedures & reporting; balance to be written off with no further liability on either side; case to be discontinued with both parties bearing own costs :D

 

So, waiting to hear back from SC&M, but at the moment we're ready for the trial on 28th November - scheduled to last 1 whole day :eek:

 

Received a letter frm SC&M today - perhaps unsurprisingly they've rejected my offer :eek: Anyway, we're scheduled to be in court on Frida 28th, so bring it on :D

 

Cheers

Michael

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law.

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Michael

 

sorry i havent replied to your message mate, i really am struggling to find any spare time to breathe at the mo

 

i will see what i can offer if i get a spare mo, but im working all day tomorrow on a draft set of pleadings and i have a load happening next week so no promises

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Paul

 

sorry i havent replied to your message mate, i really am struggling to find any spare time to breathe at the mo

 

i will see what i can offer if i get a spare mo, but im working all day tomorrow on a draft set of pleadings and i have a load happening next week so no promises

 

No worries matey - have a CMC on 3rd December on that one. Would just be grateful of you having a look over, but know how busy you are :)

 

For this case, I have now received a binder full of case authorities, and there's a recorded delivery package waiting for me at the post office to pick up, which I presume is their trial bundle. However, I do believe that they were due to file & serve by 13th November....

 

Cheers

Michael

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law.

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

For this case, I have now received a binder full of case authorities, and there's a recorded delivery package waiting for me at the post office to pick up, which I presume is their trial bundle. However, I do believe that they were due to file & serve by 13th November....

 

Yup the new package is the trial bundle. They've included a supplementary Witness Statement that explains why the default on my CRF is dated Mar 07 when they allege a DN was sent in Dec 06 (apparently it's because they give so much time to comply with the DN :rolleyes:) - also that the reason the CRF Default is for ~£300 more than the DN is because they've added fees on. I think these are bogus arguments - a CRF Default date and amount should be exactly the same date as the DN if the DN requirements aren't satisfied (or at least the DN+10/14 days - i.e. the "if you do not do this by this date" date) - after all, I haven't defaulted on the "fees" that they've added on (which aren't included in the claim amount either) as they've not issued a DN for them....! Just need some case law for this one I think....

 

In the case authorities folder, there is a copy of the Rankine judgement - I'm presuming that they're going to rely on this for the "enforcement" definition (i.e. starting a claim isn't "enforcement"). Am I right in thinking that it's only a persuasive case, rather than a binding one - since my case and the Rankines' are completely different?

 

In Court tomorrow, so quick pointers on the above would be much appreciated please!

 

Cheers

Michael

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law.

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup the new package is the trial bundle. They've included a supplementary Witness Statement that explains why the default on my CRF is dated Mar 07 when they allege a DN was sent in Dec 06 (apparently it's because they give so much time to comply with the DN :rolleyes:) - also that the reason the CRF Default is for ~£300 more than the DN is because they've added fees on. I think these are bogus arguments - a CRF Default date and amount should be exactly the same date as the DN if the DN requirements aren't satisfied (or at least the DN+10/14 days - i.e. the "if you do not do this by this date" date) - after all, I haven't defaulted on the "fees" that they've added on (which aren't included in the claim amount either) as they've not issued a DN for them....! Just need some case law for this one I think....

 

This is supported by the ICO's guidance on filing defaults with the CRA's;

 

http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/library/data_protection/detailed_specialist_guides/default_tgn_version_v3%20%20doc.pdf

 

Recording the amount of default

29 Original amount and current balance

Default records should show the original amount of the default as a snapshot in time and should reflect subsequent payments by showing the current balance of arrears. A common cause of disputes relates to the accuracy of the current balance. The current balance should be filed both by those who file monthly account information and those who file only defaults. It should be updated regularly. Defaults should be shown as satisfied where all payments have been received. If the individual no longer owes any money to the lender the balance should be shown as zero. The satisfaction of defaults is discussed at paragraphs 49 to 51

 

The date of default

31 The date of default recorded on the file should be the date on which a decision to file a default becomes effective according to the criteria discussed in paragraphs 9 to 16. If a notice of intention to file a default is served (see paragraphs 32 to 37), the default date should be the date the notice becomes effective. When a default is filed after a genuine and agreed variation in payment schedule has broken down, it should record the date of that breakdown subject to the conditions described in paragraph 21

 

I'd also suggest that 6 months is not an "adequate time" to allow you to comply with a DN - it seems very lenient, to the point of being unreasonable;

 

32 Lenders should tell their customers about filing information with a credit reference agency as part of the account opening procedure, in line with the requirements of the ‘fair processing code’4. This explanation will not normally refer explicitly to defaults and will often be distant from the events which cause them. Therefore we strongly recommend that a notice of the intention to file a default should be served. Many lenders now subscribe to trade association codes of practice which require this. This practice helps the transparency of the credit reference process and may even prompt payment, so avoiding the need to file a default at all.

33 Notices to comply with Sections 13.7 of the Banking Code5 and 7.5 of the Lending Code6 should provide adequate warning. A notice of intention to file a default can be sent with a formal default notice served under Section 87 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. Where lenders are not required to issue these notices, they can send an intention to file a default through a final demand, letter or relevant account statement, which should make clear not only the intention to file but also the date of the intended default. The date should allow the customer enough time to respond properly. Lenders who have to provide a notice of intention to file a default under a relevant code of practice should be aware that not complying with the code may be taken into account in any assessment of the fairness of their processing.

34 When a default occurs in line with the criteria in this guidance, and the lender has given the customer 28 days notice of the intention to file a default, then subject to paragraph 37, the lender may supply this information to a credit reference agency despite no advance warning when the account was opened.

 

In the case authorities folder, there is a copy of the Rankine judgement - I'm presuming that they're going to rely on this for the "enforcement" definition (i.e. starting a claim isn't "enforcement"). Am I right in thinking that it's only a persuasive case, rather than a binding one - since my case and the Rankines' are completely different?

 

Spot on. There's a thread on Rankine somewhere...

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is supported by the Information Commissioners Office's guidance on filing defaults with the CRA's;

 

http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/library/data_protection/detailed_specialist_guides/default_tgn_version_v3%20%20doc.pdf

 

Perfect - thanks mate, hadn't even thought about the ICO's guidance :eek:

 

I'd also suggest that 6 months is not an "adequate time" to allow you to comply with a DN - it seems very lenient, to the point of being unreasonable;

 

Well, it's only 4 months, but absolutely agree - especially if the regulatory requirement to comply is 10 days (as it was then) :D

 

Spot on. There's a thread on Rankine somewhere...

 

Yeah, I've found the big one again - will have to wade through that tonight....

 

Cheers

Michael

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law.

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good luck for tomorrow mcuth :D

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mcuth.

 

I would just like to wish u luck.

 

GM

OFT debt collection guidance

 

Please remember the only stupid question is the one you dont ask so dont worry about asking the stupid questions.

 

Essex girl in pc world looking 4 curtains 4 her pc,the assistant says u dont need curtains 4 a computer!!Essex girl says,''HELLOOO!! i,ve got WINDOWS!!'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good look Michael,

 

We`re all behind you on this one.

 

I`m expecting a claim form from Lloyds any day now. I hope it`s after Christmas or that will really miff me off :(

 

 

 

N.P

If I have helped or made you laugh in any way in your hour of need, then please click my scales <<<<<<<<<< ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good look Michael,

 

We`re all behind you on this one.

 

Thanks :) Am just reading their skeleton and it seems pretty good. Nervous doesn't quite cover it....

 

I`m expecting a claim form from Lloyds any day now. I hope it`s after Christmas or that will really miff me off :(

 

Ouch - yeah, hope they hold off til next year

 

Best of luck, Michael:)

 

Thanks :)

 

BTW:

10. The parties shall make reasonable efforts to agree the contents of a trial bundle, to include all materials relied upon including a case summary and the skeleton arguments and authorities suppliedpursuant to this Order, and the Solicitors for the Claiamnt's [sic] shall produce such a paginated bundle and serve it on the Defendant by 4pm on the 3rd November 2008. The trial bundle shall be filed with the Court with sufficient copies for the Judge and any witness by 4pm on the 10th November 2008.

 

This was changed to 17th November after the Court's order, but their skeleton is dated 20th November!

 

What's interesting here is that in their skeleton they're making a bit of a deal out of how "deemed service" came into play for my Witness statement (I sent it by special delivery so it arrived on the day of the revised deadline, but they're saying "deemed service" meant it was received after the deadline), but then haven't complied with the order revising their bundle deadline to 17th November.... :rolleyes:

 

Cheers

Michael

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law.

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I'm back somewhat earlier than I expected.

 

I ended up settling with them via a Tomlin order - can't tell you what for as that's confidential, but it saved a full day in court with a judge who (as he revealed after we said we'd settled) was unlikely to side with me.

 

So, a bit deflated, but life goes on... will be back with a full account of events later, but thanks for all the support anyway.

 

Cheers

Michael

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law.

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to hear that it didnt go the way you wanted. I thought you had a very strong argument. :(

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Thanks folks - wasn't the way I wanted it to go, but I guess you could say that I bottled it really...

Ok, well I do remember saying that I'd update the thread with what happened, and I've been a bit slack on that - so, over a week later, here you go :D

 

I'd received the bundle on Tuesday and didn't have a chance to look through until Thursday night. I found their skeleton argument while I was looking through the bundle, and it was damn good - unfortunately given the above I didn't have a massive amount of time to prepare a response, so was pretty nervous from that point of view anyway.

 

I got to Court at around 0945hrs, hearing was listed for 1000hrs and to go on all day. Met the solicitor for LTSB and had a bit of a chat about the way things would be scheduled for the day (nice chap, we'd been amiable enough at the previous hearing and that continued) - he'd brought along another guy from SC&M and 2 witnesses.

 

Well, 1000hrs came & went, as did 1015hrs....1030hrs and we were called into see the DJ. Despite LTSB's solicitor phoning the Court to make sure they had a copy of Goode and that the DJ would get plenty of reading time for the weighty skeleton, neither had been planned in properly. The DJ got the bundle at 1700hrs the night before and had spent most of the morning trying to read the bundle and also hunting round to get a copy of Goode! Also, the DJ informed me that he was a LTSB customer in case that had any impact on my case.

 

We were duly informed that the DJ needed some reading time - LTSB's solicitor recommended that the DJ read the skeleton, and I recommended that he read my witness statement. The DJ had had a quick scan over the skeleton and suggested that it wasn't a Fast Track case, but perhaps even Multi-Track which would need an adjournment (not too chuffed at that)! He was minded to strongly suggest that we come to an arrangement while his reading time was taken.

 

So, at about 1140hrs we duly filed out of the room - LTSB's solicitor wasn't too happy that the DJ hadn't done the reading, maybe suggesting that the DJ didn't want to deal with a complex case on a Friday, especially as we were now running very late and hadn't even started the arguments. Of course, he was insistent that he had a very strong case and wasn't prepared to concede - likewise I told him that I thought I had a strong argument too.

 

I went outside to smoke and decided that the day was likely to be a very long one, and the LTSB skeleton was very very good, so I'd have a completely uphill battle. I went back in and had a coffee with LTSB's solicitor and decided that I wanted to settle - I came up with a deal that I thought fairly reflected what I wanted, and it was accepted. A draft Tomlin order drawn up & signed by us both, and we went back in to advise the DJ that we'd come to agreement.

 

The DJ advised that the settlement was a good decision by myself as I'd have an uphill battle - summing up that basically I'd had the money and should pay it back (a bit of a telling off really) - though he'd be more minded to be on my side if I'd suffered prejudice and owed more than I should've done due to a CCA breach. Anyway, he did say that every January the DJs get to go on "refresher" courses and he's requested the CCA as his chosen one - so I suppose that's a bit of a positive....

 

Shook hands with the LTSB & SC&M chaps afterwards - we'd shared a few chats & jokes during the morning, and it was nice that everything was amiable. All in all, not a scary experience, but intimidating and I'm disappointed I didn't have the guts to see it through to the bitter end - still, there's a settlement agreement that I'm happy enough with.

 

Cheers

Michael

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law.

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shocking.

 

The Judge lottery strikes again. Another Judge, with a slightly less favourable view of the Bank, probably would have decided differently.

 

This should be a warning shot to those taking on proceedings in Court - no matter how well prepared you are, no matter how much you feel you have a good case that will stand up, there is always the room for things to turn against you.

 

Having said all that, there is always the possibility of appeal, should things go in the wrong direction, so be careful what you are agreeing to in Tomlin Orders as you won't be able to appeal. IMHO, I would have went on with the case, as you would have had a chance to argue against reallocation, (which I did in my O2 thread) and then concede should that go against you. It did sound like the Judge had made him mind up before you even sat down, though, sadly.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael,

 

did you actually see the original copy of their agreement?

 

It seems odd to me that the T&Cs in your second scan (which I'm assuming they are asserting was on the reverse of the application form, in order to be within the 4 corners of the agreement), would state 'bank copy'. You don't normally have a bank copy without having a customer copy - I've never seen an application form set out this way before.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shocking.

 

The Judge lottery strikes again. Another Judge, with a slightly less favourable view of the Bank, probably would have decided differently.

 

This should be a warning shot to those taking on proceedings in Court - no matter how well prepared you are, no matter how much you feel you have a good case that will stand up, there is always the room for things to turn against you.

 

Having said all that, there is always the possibility of appeal, should things go in the wrong direction, so be careful what you are agreeing to in Tomlin Orders as you won't be able to appeal. IMHO, I would have went on with the case, as you would have had a chance to argue against reallocation, (which I did in my O2 thread) and then concede should that go against you. It did sound like the Judge had made him mind up before you even sat down, though, sadly.

 

Indeed - I think I actually got away lightly by settling in the end - and I really don't have the stomach for an appeal (I've got an MCE battle to fight next). Besides, it won't matter in the long term for reasons I'll disclose much later :)

 

Re the re-allocation bit, I can't see how a full day hearing would sit in the SCT - I thought SCT hearings were only allowed a maximum of like 4 hours or something?

 

did you actually see the original copy of their agreement?

 

Nope - they didn't have the original. Originally I thought this was a major plus point, but I read & re-read their arguments regarding submitting copies as evidence and cross-referenced it with the Civil Evidence Act, and it seems that as long as the copies form part of the records of the business, that's ok. Plus, one of their witnesses was the guy that orignally approved the card & "signed" the agreement!

 

I'm pretty sure that the actual Ts&Cs that they were relying on (not the first lot they submitted) were the correct ones from the back of the document.

 

Cheers

Michael

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law.

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your reply, Michael. It's unbelieveable that they can get away with this. They can draft up any rubbish, swear it was the same as the original, produce any one of their employees who will swear he witnessed all and the courts swallow it!!!:mad: I think they are committing forgery on a massive scale and getting away with it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re the re-allocation bit, I can't see how a full day hearing would sit in the SCT - I thought SCT hearings were only allowed a maximum of like 4 hours or something?

 

Nope - allocation is on complexity of the case and the amount involved. I have seen SCT claims lasting a whole day. I think there is a presumption that anything more than 8 hours would be off the SCT, though, because of the resources involved.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your reply, Michael. It's unbelieveable that they can get away with this. They can draft up any rubbish, swear it was the same as the original, produce any one of their employees who will swear he witnessed all and the courts swallow it!!!:mad: I think they are committing forgery on a massive scale and getting away with it.

 

I don't think it was a forgery.

 

Nope - allocation is on complexity of the case and the amount involved. I have seen SCT claims lasting a whole day. I think there is a presumption that anything more than 8 hours would be off the SCT, though, because of the resources involved.

 

That was the whole reason they got back to FT anyway - complexity. I found it really hard to argue against it too...oh well!

 

Cheers

Michael

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law.

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...