Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Great thanks, will leave 2 in then, replace 3 and I think its good to go.    This is exactly what I have in my word file ready to send, I think im happy with it and can send to mcol monday morning. Any further thoughts or things to update please let me know.   Again thank you both for your help, really is priceless.         Defence:   1.     The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.    2.     The Claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) Failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st October 2017.It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant to 7.1 PAPDC.   3.     Paragraph 1 is noted. It is accepted I have in the past had agreements with New Day LTD RE Aqua. I do not recall the precise details or agreement nor the claimant either having failed to plead an agreement/account number within its particulars of claim and have therefore sought verification from the claimant.   4.     Paragraph 2 is noted but until such time the claimant can clarify the agreement account number any breach has yet to be proven.      5.     I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served by either the Claimant or New Day LTD RE Aqua pursuant to the Law of Property Act 1925.   6.     It is denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant. The Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of the Agreement/Assignment/Default notice or Termination requested by CPR 31. 14, and will shortly be in default of my section 78 request, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:   (a)   show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement and; (b)   show and evidence the breach and service of a Default Notice pursuant to sec 87(1) CCA1974 on which the Termination referred to relies upon. (c)   show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d)   show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;   7.     As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.   8.     On the 17th of November I requested to The Claimants Solicitors, Mortimer Clarke by way of a CPR 31.14 copies of the documents referred to within the Claimants particulars to establish what the claim is for. Mortimer Clarke have failed to fulfil my CPR 31:14 request.   9.     On the 16th of November I made a section 78 legal request to the claimant for a copy of the Consumer Credit Agreement. The claimant has as of of 06/12/21 failed to comply.   10.  By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
    • Hi just a quickie   Now in reference to my Post#2 here have they actually provided you with those policies that I pointed out and importantly a copy of there Public Liability Insurance?   If they haven't   Make sure and send them a little reminder adding to the letter in Post#32 that so far they have failed to provide these and you require clarification as to their reason for this failure     Dear Sir/Madam   Complaint Reference: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX   Further to my recent letter about this matter Dated XX/XX/2021 I would also like to add that so far you have still failed to provide the following:   Copy of your Compensation Policy (not the leaflet) Copy of your Complaints Policy (not the leaflet) Copy of your Customer service Charter/Policy (not the leaflet) Copy of your Public Liability Insurance (not the leaflet) Copy of Repairs an Maintenance Policy (not the leaflet)   I asked for these is my letter to yourselves dated XX/XX/2021, to date you have failed to respond to this request nor is the Housing Association being Open and Accountable to it's Service Users and I require full clarification for the reason for this failure and when you are going to provide what I have requested.   If you refuse to provide these I require full clarification as to your reason with links to the relevant legislation and exactly which parts you are relying on for your refusal of my request.     Note: If they have answered this please ignore but from your responses I think they have tried to ignore this so you add this to put a rocket up their 'beep' so to speak.   You are more than welcome to the help it's what we are here for, you just look after yourself and take care     
    • The DVLA know less about POFA than my dog that died twenty years ago. They also never admit they have made an error.   Trading Standards would probably be a better avenue for you either on Council inaction on no pp thus appearing to aid and abet a PE scam, condoning PE committing an offence and allowing them to rip off the Council customers as well as financial impropriety by not insisting that PE pay for the requisite fees for permission. You could also complain to the ICO on the same grounds and get two investigations going.
    • I am surprised that POPLA found that your appeal had failed when Initial's response to the appeal had been withdrawn. There was no need for them to adjudicate. POP.LA should have agreed that you had won your appeal. I wonder if Initial  knew something that you and obviously POPLA didn't.  Ignore DRP. I was going to advise  you  write to Initial stating that as they had withdrawn their PCN on appeal so if DRP were acting on instructions from Initial they have breached your GDPR. However on second thoughts you may be best to send them a SAR first to get confirmation that they had withdrawn their claim before going for the breach.
    • so the eon A/C was never in her name anyway?
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Countdown to court case


bruce47
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5077 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

Hi i thought we could have a countdown to the court case as i guess the site is going to be busy with posts once the court case starts

 

7 days to go!!!

 

Feels like being a kid again waitning for christmas morning.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The case has now been set to start on Wednesday 16th at 10.30.

 

The venue is Royal Courts of Justice (Admiralty & Commercial Registry) in the Strand.

 

The consumer group Which? is planning an anti-bank demonstration outside

the courtroom on the first day.

 

A judgement on the case is not expected until May.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to be all negative or doom & gloom but presumably if we ( or the oft ) wins the test case the banks have a right of appeal so will we then not have to wait another 12 months+ for the outcome of that before we can start getting paid out again?

I really hope i'm about to be shot down in flames & told how wrong I am!!

I can find information that tells me there will be an appeal from either side and information that tells me there won't:?

Anyone know?

I HAVE ALL THE MONEY I'LL EVER NEED - IF I DIE BY 4 O'CLOCK THIS AFTERNOON!!:-|

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is unbelivable, no conclusion until May???

 

Is this set in stone? why would it take 4 months to set the judgement??

 

I guess April passes the only thing i can think of.

 

Is it common for a verdict to take this long?

 

If the court case goes ahead can the banks cut a deal with the OFT while the judgement is waiting to be set?

 

The crazy thing is, the Banks say the UTCCR's do not apply to current accounts. So we should all be able to claim the charges back like with a bussiness acount leaving out the UTCCR's in the 14 day letter.

 

Anyway 9 days to go!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think 12 months would be rather optimistic I'm afraid. Assuming the OFT win, the banks are certain to appeal. The right to appeal is written into the the test case agreement but it is unclear that the waiver and stays would be lifted before any appeal.

 

Depending on the judgment, the OFT will launch a second case to prove that the fees are illegal/unlawful. I have always thought, and still think, that the entire proccess could take several years to reach a conclusion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is unbelivable, no conclusion until May???

 

Is this set in stone? why would it take 4 months to set the judgement??

 

I guess April passes the only thing i can think of.

 

Is it common for a verdict to take this long?

 

If the court case goes ahead can the banks cut a deal with the OFT while the judgement is waiting to be set?

 

The crazy thing is, the Banks say the UTCCR's do not apply to current accounts. So we should all be able to claim the charges back like with a bussiness acount leaving out the UTCCR's in the 14 day letter.

 

Anyway 9 days to go!!!

 

The May judgement is the courts estimation. I don't think this is an unusually

long time and if anything I would say it is optimistic. Look how long Tom Brennans judgement took which wasn't even a case as such and was comparitvely straight forward with just one defendant.

 

The structure of the test case is such that there are 8 separate defences

for the judge to consider.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like it could go one of two ways now. Either they will wrap the case up very, very fast or they will drag it out for a very, very long time. I don't think there will be a middle ground.

 

Someone will have to make a decision on whether the benefits of refunding the charges are getting cash back into the economy outweigh the risks to the banks balance sheets in doing so. Its a tough one.....personally I think that failing to pay back the charges quickly will have devestating consequences to the wider economy. I guess we'll find out soon.........I still wouldn't discount completely the possibility of an 11th hour agreement though.

A £35 pound bank charge is not a charge for a service. Its theft.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Heres hoping for a last minute climbdown by the banks.

Week by week people are losing money due to the six year rule.

Just imagine how much the banks have made in the last six months alone.

They have carried on taking while we could not continue getting the money they have ripped out of our pockets.Even taking benefit money-they are not bothered.I will never forget the Whistleblower program.How much will they have saved by the trial and possible appeals process is finished.They will carry on taking through it all.Will never trust banks again.Sickened.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Will never trust banks again.Sickened."

 

You're not alone in feeling that way. Frankly - the way the banks are going they'll be lucky to ever get any trust back. I wouldn't be surprised to see another Northern Rock style run this year if the charges case drags on. People have had it.

A £35 pound bank charge is not a charge for a service. Its theft.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hello just been reading your thread i too have a thread abroadgirl v abbey

the oft test case starts monday for 8 days i was in court yesterday 8th jan please read what the judge said i have also put in a new thread in general about the stay and what happened i will check this thread again please do go and have a read hugs

take care

keep up the fight

hugs

abroadgirl (abg)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have read your thread and i guess it was to be expected so close to the court date.

 

But only 6 days to go then at least it has started however long it takes to come to an end

 

I hope as Alec says they may come to a agreement on the 11th hour fingers crossed!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm hoping the banks will lose in such embarrasing fashion any appeal would only delay them paying out. After that I would like to have a question style debate with the likes or Martin Lewis and representatives from here to quiz the directors of these companies on the charging structure AND the manner in which debt collection is organised.

 

Hey I like to aim high :)

The views I express here are mere speculation based on my experience. I am not qualified nor insured to give legal advice and any action you take will be at your own risk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Week by week people are losing money due to the six year rule.

 

I do not believe this is the case as the six year rule only comes in to it if your lodged paperwork with the courts is outside that time frame...however if you lodge your claim today, and it takes 10 years to hear your case it does not mean the banks can say you are outside the time limits as your claim was clearly lodged within the required time frame.

 

Well, thats what I believe is the case anyway.

 

Mailman

Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not believe this is the case as the six year rule only comes in to it if your lodged paperwork with the courts is outside that time frame...however if you lodge your claim today, and it takes 10 years to hear your case it does not mean the banks can say you are outside the time limits as your claim was clearly lodged within the required time frame.

 

Well, thats what I believe is the case anyway.

 

Mailman

 

Agree - once you've issued your claim there is no statutory bar limit.

 

10 years? Jeez Mailman, you're optimistic ain't ya?!

 

;)

Always happy to help where I can!

:lol:

Beware of legal advice given on a private forum - do you REALLY know who is posting? Are they REALLY accountable for their posts? What if you follow their advice and get something wrong?

It was Winston Churchill who said; "Democracy is the worst way to run a country except for all the others"

 

Advice and comments posted by car2403 are offered purely without prejudice. They reflect only my personal opinion and do not represent the opinion of this forum or it's management. You should always seek legal advice from a qualified legal advisor. As a member of the site team, I disable reputation - reputation points mean nothing, please check my posting credentials yourself and make an informed decision. You shouldn't PM me and await a reply - I may be too late with a response. No replies will be given in Private Messages - just as with getting advice from the forum, getting advice via Private Messages is dangerous. CAG is about sharing successes so others can follow your example, this is primarily why I'm here, so please don't be offended if I don't offer replies in PM that doesn't comply with this. Help CAG to help others by keeping your thread up to date.

 

 

USEFUL LINKS; New User Guide to CAG | Can't find what you're looking for? | Intro to Consumer Credit Litigation | Is My Agreement Enforceable | Default (Surleybonds) Template Letter | Defaults - background, removal methods, challenges and taking a claim to Court | Digital Signature Guide | Overdrafts and the CCA

Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not believe this is the case as the six year rule only comes in to it if your lodged paperwork with the courts is outside that time frame...however if you lodge your claim today, and it takes 10 years to hear your case it does not mean the banks can say you are outside the time limits as your claim was clearly lodged within the required time frame.

 

Well, thats what I believe is the case anyway.

 

Mailman

Thankyou i stand corrected-i will now consider taking a few cases to the court stage and will also tell a few friends who have charges near to the six years to take the gamble.I am sure the banks are going to be given a good thrashing.Thanks again Tawnyowl.A.fine bit of information.
Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...