court ordered claim cancelled

[clayts]

Daily Mail (This is Money) article just seems to be a rerun of everything on here.

[Tigs33]

Just an idea, but can you put your claim through any court?? i.e. I live in Essex but could I put my claim through the courts in Kent if I wanted to??

 

If this is the case perhaps we should be advising people to avoid the Gloucesterhsire Court if they are applying stays to claims??

[Janet-M]

Is it just me, or does this quote sound like this is something serious? When you say doing everything you can, does this relate to the Elliot guy/gal, you know, trying to find them? Or is it to do with the change of events ie. the high court decision (if and when it comes)? I'm sure whatever the answer is, knowing the commitment of the admin/mods/helpers, and indeed the members, you will be one step ahead! Forgive me, I had a mad moment, in which I doubted I was doing the right thing.

 

NO that is just more speculation what I meant is we are trying to find out more about elliots case etc . If you read around people are still getting their claims settled every day

 

the 2 stays we know of have already been settled QUICKLY by the banks .so no need at all for anyone to be getting jittery .

[Seminole]

Just to reiterate this point:

 

There is no reason for anyone to delay putting in a claim.

[angelface69007]

Just to reiterate this point:

 

There is no reason for anyone to delay putting in a claim.

 

I have just spoken to my friend who is a lawyer and a pretty good one at that. I briefly mentioned the stays and also the 'test case' Elliot v Lloyds TSB and asked him why judges who be staying cases (albeit very few). I also asked why a small claims court would pass a claim up to the Mercantile court. I think I am right here, so please correct me if I am wrong...ok here goes...he said.... (sorry if I am repeating what you all ready know and I know there are repetitions here)

1. The Mercantile court is a commercial court
   
2. The sending would be related to a point of law
   
3. The case would only be sent up if the judge felt he didn't have the jurisdiction to deal with a case or that the background of the case was too complicated for him to deal with. ( but he also said that small claims deal with pretty straight forward cases on a day to day basis so there would be little confusion on points of law)
   
4. There is no precedent to be used against claiming unlawful bank charges as nobody ( as he is aware) has brought this type of claim before a higher court to date).
   
5. Should the case go before the Mercantile court and Elliot win, he is pretty certain the bank will go to the court of appeal.

He basically said that without any background information about Elliot's case. ie: the particulars of the claim, amount etc it would be difficult to even speculate why the case is going before this court. He did say 'obiter dicter' " he would try and find out as much as he can".

[pelham9]

LoydsTSB must have known about the test case before they settled with Joa and if they intended to defend the test case they would have applied for a stay themselves. In addition on learning of the test case and if they were confident that they would win they would have applied for stays on every other outstanding case. They have not done this.

 

There are only two possible explanations.

 

1. They are incompetent - we know that to be true!

 

2. They do not intend to defend the test case in court and if they do withdraw the stays they have engineered would be shown up as a sham and the publicity would be horrendous.

 

Take your pick. I favour 2 .

 

If I am right it is very important that every possible claim goes in now so that momentum is not lost. My own personal view is that these stays although I sympathise with the claimants concerned are a way that two very wise judges have devised to call the bank's bluff.

[bram stoker]

Nice one Pelham, I like your style.

[matrix]

This may have already been answered, but should i continue with my claim against Barclays bank, i don't like the idea of paying over £100 in courts fees only to have my claim rejected pending the outcome of this test case which is likely to be heard at the end of the year.

 

claim for over £2,000, 1st letter was going to be sent this week

 

i hope all courts don't reject our cliams, it would seem that something is in the air and i don't like the smell of it.

 

advise please

[barracad]

This may have already been answered, but should i continue with my claim against Barclays bank

Yes

 

And it was answered 4 posts before your post (#217), and several times before that.

[thunderpuss2k]

This may have already been answered, but should i continue with my claim against Barclays bank

See this post? Read up about six messages to Seminoles post this afternoon.

 

Originally Posted by seminole

Just to reiterate this point:

 

There is no reason for anyone to delay putting in a claim.

[Joa]

Matrix; the stay order is more like suspension then rejection. The claims are not rejected, but (just a handfull) "stayed", suspended.

In my case the stay order did not impede the settlement at all.

As for costs; log every penny, keep receipts for Recorded Deliveries, postal orders etc. I did and I demanded it back and got it.

So chill it's coming:)

[thunderpuss2k]

claim for over £2,000, 1st letter was going to be sent this week

Sorry if I'm sounding stroppy, but it's been a long tiring day. Just ask yourself this question. It's £100, and you're highly likely to get over £2k back. Good investment? I like to think so. By sending your first letter you're gonna lose a pound on recorded delivery. Second letter, another pound. By then you might even have an offer back, so might not even go to court.

[westy1978]

Just thought I'd put a little in here. This was in the Daily Mail Today. Page 45

BANK-CHARGE REFUNDS ARE PUT ON ICE BY THE COURTS (Fair play on charges by James Coney)

 

Legal bids to reclaim overdraft charges are being kicked out of county courts because of a test case that could finally force banks to come clean on fees.

In the past week, small claims court orders against halifax and Llyods TSB have be rejected by courts in Gloucestershire and Uxbridge, Middlesex on the grounds that a case has be submitted to a higher court which could set a precedent in these types of cases.

Test case involves a customer in dispute with Llyods Tsb which will be heard in London Mercantile Court.

Cases at teh Mercantile Court relate to comercial or business matters and are heard by a judge.

In recent months hundreds of current account customers have threatened their banks with court action in a bid to recover charges incurred when they have gone overdrawn accidentally.

...........

However if cases like this were to reach a higher court then a precedent would be set and banks and consumers would have to follow.

 

That is the main jist of the article. Lets hope the banks dont win.

[MARTIN3030]

Just a bit late with that Westy...............this article has been reported here at least 3 times now.........

 

[reload]

... and at best, the journalist has used incorrect phrasing on what is actually happening to the cases. They most definately are not being 'Kicked out of court'.

 

I comment on the report 'at worst' - I don't want to be sued for libel

[lee6370]

The daily mail has been running small acrticles for some weeks now, if anyone cares to look at them and the timelines they will see that it could be said they get most of what they print from this site.

 

To give you an example they printed an article about the banks abusing the legal system by getting people to submit allocation questionaires and then settling on the court steps, it was as if i was reading something written by BF himself, and funny enough this article was printed a few days after a post along the same line's by BF, so stop worrying about the daily mail they know what we know.

 

As for the stays and test case, if anyone is in any doubt, stop asking and just do some reseach, there are lots of cases about penalty charges/clause's and i'm not talking about the type of claims we are bringing. You'll find that the law is on our side.

[MARTIN3030]

Do you think it would be a good idea to make a sticky saying dont worry - the mods are working on it - business as usual - type thing ? there are loads of questions about this moneymail article all over the forums now, and quite a few newbies seem to be put off claiming by it.

 

 

For all the posts mentioning this ,theres another giving reassurance to the newbies that its business as usual

 

The claims go on.......and on.......and on.............

 

 

[Seminole]

And to add to the reassurance, there is a *lot* going on behind the scenes and we will have full contact details for Elliot and details of his claim within the next 24 hours.

[Mrs Charlton]

Just read the whole of this thing. (Yes my eyes are crossing now ;-) ).

 

Do we have any more info or is anyone in communication with jifaf regarding the challenge of the stay on his case?

 

I can understand why people are getting nervous with regard to the speculation around the Test Case, but I think (in my humble opinion ) that this should make us all claim even more, keep the pressure on the banks and make them sweat a little. If they think we will back down every time it seems to get a little too hot then the offers will dwindle and newbies will be scared out of claiming.

 

Whoever this Elliot guy/girl is, fair play to them and good luck.

 

When I first started reading this thread I admit I panicked a bit, but now after reading the whole thing, and seeing that there seems to be 4 cases that have been stayed, 2 of which have now been settled....the odds are still very much in our favour and I am still counting down the days til my Barclays MCOL can be filed. (13 to go ).

[andrew1]

My wife just laid the Daily mail article on my desk and said " now you can get on with some proper work, it's all come to a halt" I work from home but have spent many hours on the site and have a string of claims at one stage or another. I have just spent another hour reading this thread alone and for anyone reading out there it is only by reading the threads that you REALLY know whats going on. I can't thank you guys enough. When I had a lot of staff I always sung the praises of SYNERGY - my god you've got synergy here.

 

Onwards and upwards... ! bring em on !

[NitrousOxide]

Wonder what bank the Daily Mail are affiliated with.

[MARTIN3030]

My wife just laid the Daily mail article on my desk and said " now you can get on with some proper work, it's all come to a halt" I work from home but have spent many hours on the site and have a string of claims at one stage or another. I have just spent another hour reading this thread alone and for anyone reading out there it is only by reading the threads that you REALLY know whats going on. I can't thank you guys enough. When I had a lot of staff I always sung the praises of SYNERGY - my god you've got synergy here.

 

Onwards and upwards... ! bring em on !

 

 

Ha HA typical.........wives can be sooooooo impatient.

I had the same early on but I have to say mine doesnt read the Daily mail....

Tell you what though Andy she is well up for it now too after reading up on it herself on the forums in fact she is getting up much earlier these days.....to try and beat me to the letterbox ..........

 

[jayne67]

And to add to the reassurance, there is a *lot* going on behind the scenes and we will have full contact details for Elliot and details of his claim within the next 24 hours.

 

 

Can't wait. This will probably shed a bit more light on this subject for us, and perhaps end the uncertainty.

[pampam]

This could be a daft question but should I carry on with my claims.

I am just at the stage of filling in spreadsheats?

[skyrocket123]

Yes!