Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi    I have just received my first ever PCN from Islington Borough 52JM failing to comply with prohibition Highbury Hill.   My home in Dalston is up for sale, yet had to relocate whilst we have been in lockdown restrictions, Prior to lockdown I travelled via Highbury hill, and was unaware of any planned traffic filters.     There Is no advance signage warning of traffic flow change (nor alternative direction indicators)  leading to the camera.   Does anyone know when this change was implemented as I am highly confident this change was not showing on my Sat Nav system (waze).     Also there is a young tree planted directly in front of one of the two signs, obscuring view of the change.   As a diligent driver I would welcome any advice to how I could challenge this PCN.     Thanks in advance   Darius
    • Filling out the defence but stuck on this one:   3. It is denied that the Claimant has complied with Schedule 4, Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 [set out the specific ways in which the requirements of the paragraphs mentioned above have not been met]. Only include the above paragraph if you have checked the POFA and can refer to the specific paragraphs which have not been complied with. Otherwise delete it. Do not forget to renumber the remaining paragraphs.   Have they complied with PoFA 2012?
    • The contract you posted does not refer to any price increases but nor does it explicitly indicate it is a fixed price.   The summary section of Virgin Media's terms found here states the following:     Section N of Virgin Media's terms and conditions indicate that you have the right to cancel if they change the price of your contract, which Virgin Media reserve the right to do.   The same terms and conditions also indicate you should be notified of any price increases before they are applied to your account.   It appears VM indicated the price would change in January so the qualifying period to cancel was up to 30 days after notification of the price increase. I am unclear as to why VM referred to a 3 month cooling off period as I can only find reference to a 14 day cooling off period once a contract has been agreed.   Cancelling the contract at this stage does appear to imply an early termination fee is owed unless it could be clearly evidenced the contract was mis-sold or that VM are in breach of the contract for example by not providing the advertised speeds.     Slick's suggesting to find evidence on your account indicating the contract is fixed wold be very useful as unfortunately none of the communication that has been posted refers explicitly to a fixed price contract.   One option would be to raise a complaint as suggested by slick132, which is unlikely to result in any action in time to prevent the higher direct debit being collected. If the complaint remains unresolved for a period of 8 weeks or a deadlock letter is produced you could then take the same complaint to the Communications Ombudsman. VM are likely to make every stage of the complaint process cumbersome but while the payments continue would have no grounds to move an account to collections or mark a credit file.     The second option, provided there is sufficient evidence to clearly show the bill (considered by VM to be a debt) is unsubstantiated, is to remain in control of such payments and cancel the direct debit when there is a disagreement in order to not immediately be forced to be out of pocket and in the position of having to demand a refund.   In my experience companies can be more responsive when they think you owe them money, than the other way around. This is likely to entrench the company's position and is usually followed by several threatening e-mails designed to cause alarm about accounts being referred to collections and the threat of having credit files being marked.   While marking a credit file may affect the consumer it also carries risks for any company that incorrectly marks a credit file as people have successfully claimed against companies should it affect the obtaining of credit in future.   Provided there is jusitification, indicating to VM that their claimed debt is unsubstantiated and in dispute should result in a halt of any collections procedures until the dispute is resolved.   As a show of good faith you could continue to pay what you think is owed until the dispute is resolved, this would significantly reduce the amount that is in dispute.        
    • Well it's up to you what kind of job you want. We have advised you that you are entitled to get a job that is equivalent to the quality/condition of your vehicle. Personally I agree with you that I wouldn't want dent simply filled either. They are charging you £60 for the quotation. That's very reasonable. They suggested that you should not have contact your insurance company. They are wrong because if later on it turned out that you had an accident and your insurance company discovered that they had not been informed about a previous incident, it could be a basis for declining liability. I now suggest that you write a letter to the neighbour and tell them that as they know, they cause damage to your vehicle and that you are proposing to have it repaired and you are now seeking quotes. Tell them that you will be providing them with copies of any quotes that you receive so that they can understand why's happening and also they can comment. Tell them that there is likely to be a fee for the quotations and that you will be adding that the final bill and you are now giving them a few days to respond and to comment. Tell them that you have already contacted the BMW repairer and they have told you that it will cost £60 for a quotation. You are letting the neighbour know in advance. You can tell your neighbour in the letter that they can avoid those fees if they are prepared to accept verbal quotations. However in the event that they don't reply or that they object then you will pay for those quotations and as you have said, you will be adding it to the bill. It's very important that you lay down a paper trail so that they are informed every step of the way and they are made aware in advance of any expenses which you are incurring on their behalf.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • Ebay Packlink and Hermes - destroyed item as it was "damaged". https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/430396-ebay-packlink-and-hermes-destroyed-item-as-it-was-damaged/&do=findComment&comment=5087347
      • 32 replies
    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
  • Recommended Topics

  • Recommended Topics

I am going to court on thur (6th July), help!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5260 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

i too now see it strange that the judge told me the next case will be for me to prove that these charges are penalty charges
There's nothing strange about this. You've come to court demanding money, their response is "Prove it".

 

Of course you can PM me. Also, it would be useful to see the text of your claim which you submitted to the court.

Robertxc v. Abbey - £3300 Settled in full

Robertxc v. Clydesdale - £750 Settled in full

Nationwide v. Robertxc - £2000 overdraft wiped out, Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Style Card - Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Abbey (1) - Data Protection Act action. £750 compensation

Robertxc v. Abbey (2) - Data Protection Act action. £2000 compensation, default removed

 

The opinions on this post are those of Robertxc and not necessarily the opinions of the group and do not constitute sound legal advice. You are advised to seek professional legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 142
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Yes, I agree it would be useful to see your text. Do you mind, Manolo?

 

Robert, is there anything you recommend would have been useful for Manolo to say at the time? I'm putting myself in her shoes (as I will quite possobly be there in the not too distant future). Do you think it would be useful to take supporting documentation to the first hearing, such as a copy of the OFT ruling?

 

Whilst I accept that the banks have a 'right' to defend themselves, the only reason I do think this is 'unusual' (rather than 'strange') is that, as far as I am aware, this is the first time this has happened.

 

Am I right, or is there a link to other similar cases?

Abbey - 547.00 settled in full.

Second claim: £204 WON.

Barclaycard - 142.88 incl interest due WON BY DEFAULT as they didn't even bother entering a defence. Barclaycard paid up £184.88.

 

MBNA - Concluded £634.31

Capital One Concluded £148

Kinda disappointed I've no more banks to go after now...

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok, here is what i put in my claim

 

The pursuer Kerry Finch, has held a bank account with the defendent since febuary 2005 the account no being ******. The defendent deducted from the account various amounts of money in penalty charges during the period July 2005 to May 2006. These were in respect of 'charges as notified' (levied if a cheque, direct debit or standing order payment was returned because the specific overdraft had been exceeded) The pursuer contends that these charges were legally unenforceable and the pursuer is demanding repayment of money. The defendent has refused full payment of these monies due.

No admissions are made by the pursuer as th the incorporation of any term into the contract between the pursuer and ther defendent purporting to entitle the defendednt to levy penalty charges. If the defendent is able to establish that the contract did containthese terms, the pursuer will will contend that these charges are unenforcable by law, being penalty charges designed to penalise the pursuer for breach of conduct and generate profit for the defendant for the actuall loos occouring to the defendant rather than being liquidated damages designed to compensate the defendant for the actuall loss occouring to the defendant as a result of the breach.

The pursuer claims from the defendant a sum eqivilant to the to the amount unlawfully debited from the pursuers account from July 2005 to May 2006. The sums are in the attached schedule.

The contractual provisions that permit the defendant to levy such charges in unenforcable by virtue of the unfair contract terms in consumer contracts regulations(1999), the unfair contract terms act(1977) and the common law

The defendeant has a branch in Aberdeen therefore it is under the jurisdiction of this court.

 

Phew that took me ages to type and i am suddenly worried you guys are going to tell me i said loads of wrong things!

ABBEY Total £1277 First Claim £687 hearing date 6/7/06

BOS Total £1069

RBS 3/7/06 Statments arrived

NW Waiting on Statements Data Protection Act UP!!

SENT NON-COMP 28/6/06 sent letter to Data

Protection Act manager

 

Total £2286

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it looks fine to me - but wait until someone more experienced than me gets back to you. Did you attach all the correspondence between you and the bank also?

Abbey - 547.00 settled in full.

Second claim: £204 WON.

Barclaycard - 142.88 incl interest due WON BY DEFAULT as they didn't even bother entering a defence. Barclaycard paid up £184.88.

 

MBNA - Concluded £634.31

Capital One Concluded £148

Kinda disappointed I've no more banks to go after now...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I said the letters could be made avalible if needed and I made sure that I tool them with me to the prelim hearing.

ABBEY Total £1277 First Claim £687 hearing date 6/7/06

BOS Total £1069

RBS 3/7/06 Statments arrived

NW Waiting on Statements Data Protection Act UP!!

SENT NON-COMP 28/6/06 sent letter to Data

Protection Act manager

 

Total £2286

Link to post
Share on other sites

I reckon you have it covered then. Would still like to see if Robert has anything more to add...? Or any others? Is Manolo the 1st to this situation..?

Abbey - 547.00 settled in full.

Second claim: £204 WON.

Barclaycard - 142.88 incl interest due WON BY DEFAULT as they didn't even bother entering a defence. Barclaycard paid up £184.88.

 

MBNA - Concluded £634.31

Capital One Concluded £148

Kinda disappointed I've no more banks to go after now...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any news on this? Assuming that my BoS case goes to court, it'll be Aberdeen as well. Best to be prepared in advance.

 

How have people contended that the charges are penalties? Referrring to Lord (erm, thingy) from the bank who said (something)? Can't find that now. Anything else?

 

Actually, this link:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/faqs-please-read-these/633-case-guidance-notes.html

 

Did you use this Manolo?

BoS:- D P A sent 09/06 Prelim. request 29/06 £1755 plus interest

1st claim Filed 5/10/06 SETTLED 19/10 £747.80 plus £534.31 interest

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. Please can a MOD (Robert?) reply to this..?

 

Scotland seems to be lacking in support a bit....

Abbey - 547.00 settled in full.

Second claim: £204 WON.

Barclaycard - 142.88 incl interest due WON BY DEFAULT as they didn't even bother entering a defence. Barclaycard paid up £184.88.

 

MBNA - Concluded £634.31

Capital One Concluded £148

Kinda disappointed I've no more banks to go after now...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow Manolo,

 

May I say very well done for the effort so far.

 

I am intrigued by your experiences and response from the Sherrif Courts in Aberdeen. I too will be heading down there soon (I suspect) with a claim again LTSB.

 

My understanding on legal matters with the courts is to prove beyond all reasonable doubt your case is here on merit in legal terms (and for me that means to be armed to the teeth with one example after the other of the evidence) given that the sheriff is wholy impartial and is there to make a lawful decision based on the evidence and arguements presented from both sides.

 

So, do you think that the Sheriff didn't really have the time of day for things like this (likely due to the amount being presented just now).? Did you hear of anyone else on that day presenting a similar claim?.

 

Good luck, and keep us posted.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Manalo,

 

I currently have one week before sending my LBA. Having read your thread am more inclined to see the process through to the BITTER end. In regards to the Abbeys solicitor asking for a copy of the terms and conditions I would say send it to him with a letter as requested I am providing you with a copy of the terms and conditions but at the same time further request a full and complete breakdown breakdown of the costs to the bank of my breaches of the terms and conditions. It appears to me from what I have read on this forum and witnessed from watching various documentaries specifically Panorramma, That the Banks DO NOT under any circumstances want to disclose their costs. They have refused many such attempts from both the media and account holders to divulge this information. Would be very interested to know how your meeting with the Court Advisor goes. Additionally as I said above play them at their own game by giving them the information they have asked for while at the same time making a request of your own. As it appears I would say that the main objective of our actions is to force the banks to reveal their costs in recovering their loses as it beggars belief that the loses are in the region of £20-£40. The other advantage is that you can use the Banks tactic against them being reasonable polite and fair minded in regards to your dispute. I'll say goodnight and all the best for the future with these last words.

 

The difference between a gentleman and a man is that a gentleman says one thing while thinking another.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Manolo, I noticed in a posting by joneshousehold in the Abbey forum that he has posted a copy of a letter he received from Abbey. In the letter they refer to their charges as PENALTY charges. Would that not be evidence for your case that Abbey in fact refer to their charges as a Penalty therefore proving they are? maybe you could get a copy of the letter. Just a thought

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey manalo heres a link for you that should provide you with all the evidence you require http://www.oft.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/2EBC491E-303E-4FAA-A24D-32EF8396255E/0/oft842.pdf

 

As it states specific laws and goes on at length it would at the very least increase the legal costs of bank since their solicitor would have to read the entire document and have to spend vast amounts of time to find a defence against it(assuming he can). Oh and one more thought having read other threads it might be advisable to ask the court if the contract can continue to exist without the unfair term there by preventing the bank from shuting down your account. Check section 8 paragraph 2 from this link http://www.oft.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/ED56F34D-AEA1-48BD-95D7-8FFE8A44F012/0/oft311annexeb.pdf

 

note all info comes from the OFTs website. Really hope this helps.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Manolo. I to am very interested in this thread as i have filled my claim with HBOS on the 3/7/06. I wish you all the very best for this and you have showed great strength so far so keep it up. I will let you know how i get on with my HBOS claim to see if it helps you.

 

GO FOR IT !!!!!!!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Robert... Are you there? Would really value your opinion..?

Abbey - 547.00 settled in full.

Second claim: £204 WON.

Barclaycard - 142.88 incl interest due WON BY DEFAULT as they didn't even bother entering a defence. Barclaycard paid up £184.88.

 

MBNA - Concluded £634.31

Capital One Concluded £148

Kinda disappointed I've no more banks to go after now...

Link to post
Share on other sites
the lawyer on the other side handed the judge their defence, (which i only got today in the post when I came back form court!!)and said that i had a contract with them under the terms and condition and that bouncing dd etc breached this contract which was why they took the money. And they said that i had failed to submitt a copy of the terms and conditions to either the court or themselves

 

Hi Manolo, a sassenach's view!!

 

1. Defence filed too late? Surely you/court should have received it prior to hearing and by a specific date?

2.Solicitor admitted breach of contract. You cannot be penalised for a breach.

3.T & Cs? Complete red herring!!

 

Unless Scottish law is different!!:)

 

Elsinore

BANK CHARGES CAMPAIGN CONTINUES - PLEASE SIGN THIS PETITION

 

Aktiv Kapital £300.00 SETTLED IN FULL

Capital One £741.47 SETTLED IN FULL

Citi Cards £1221.00 SETTLED IN FULL

LTSB(personal) £3854.28 SETTLED IN FULL

LTSB(business) £7487.97 SETTLED IN FULL

 

What poor education I have received has been gained in the University of Life

Link to post
Share on other sites

Manolo a good effort but I reckon you could stream the letter down quite considerably whilst still making the points you are putting over.

I also spotted some spelling mistakes........easy corrected but no ones mentioned?

 

Any signs of a mod yet?

 

:rolleyes:

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Manolo... are you still around?

Abbey - 547.00 settled in full.

Second claim: £204 WON.

Barclaycard - 142.88 incl interest due WON BY DEFAULT as they didn't even bother entering a defence. Barclaycard paid up £184.88.

 

MBNA - Concluded £634.31

Capital One Concluded £148

Kinda disappointed I've no more banks to go after now...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Manolo, must congratulate you on your performance today, sounds like you told them as it is, I must say I am personally dissapointed as this is yet another stalling process these people are playing. But hey ho, justice will prevail. With regards to you submitting evidence to confirm charges were penalty charges,

 

 

5) Separatim, the defenders charges represent an unfair penalty charge in terms of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (SI. 1999/2083) (the ‘UTCC’). The pursuer’s contract falls within the ambit of Regulation 5 of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (SI 1999/2083) as the pursuer is a consumer. The defenders charges constitute an unfair penalty under reference to paragraph 1(e) of schedule 2 of the said regulations:

Indicative and non-exhaustive list of terms which may be regarded as unfair

1. Terms which have the object of effect of-

(e) requiring any consumer who fails his obligation to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation’.

Reference is made to the following three cases from the Office of Fair Trading’s Unfair Contract Terms Bulletin 21 (July to September 2002), issued in May 2003:

OFT case 15 – Kids of Wilmslow Ltd.

Clause 7 of the company provided for the supplier to charge interest on unpaid fees at an excessive rate above the bank base rate. Also unclear as to how the interest would be charged. The OFT amended the clause so interest was charged on unpaid fees at 3% per annum above the bank base rate. Further, an administration fee of £10 per letter sent concerning unpaid fees was deleted.

OFT case 18 – Legal & General Franchising t/a Parker Estate Agents.

A commission clause had the potential to allow the estate agent to charge a penalty fee for late payments. The OFT revised the clause to reflect the company’s practice of charging 8% per annum or the current rate of county court interest on late payments.

OFT case 4 – Dampcure-Woodcure/30Ltd.

Clause ‘W’ had the potential to impose a high financial penalty of payment was not received within seven days of the date of invoice. The OFT revised same to make clear that interest will be charged at 4% above a high street bank rate per annum if payment not received within 7 days of the date of invoice.

Accordingly, the defenders are fairly compensated for unauthorised lending by the imposition of their unauthorised overdraft interest rate. The imposition of further charges is unfair in terms of the UTTC. Reference is made to guidance issued by the OFT on 26 July 2005, which stated that 'a charge is likely to be disproportionately high if it is more than a court would be likely to award if the lender sued the card/account holder for breach of contract'. The court is asked to declare the imposition of the defender’s charges as unfair and irrecoverable in terms of the UTTC.

 

Sorry about the wording but ive just copied it from my "details of claim", now is the above not evidence which could be submitted, also could you not bring to the courts attention the fact that your bank have settled similar cases in the past.

 

Just to add:

The law relating to penalties has been established through case law. The cases date back to the nineteenth century and the courts have been consistent in the way that they have ruled on penalty clauses.

 

Wilson v. Love (1896)

 

A tenant farmer agreed to pay an additional rent of £3 per ton by way of penalty for every ton of hay or straw that he sold off the premises during the last 12 months of the tenancy. The clause was regarded as a penalty because at the time hay was worth five shillings a ton more than straw.

 

Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co. Ltd. v. New Garage and Motor Co. Ltd. (1915)

 

In the particular case, the judges held that the sum specified in the contract was reasonable and was classified as liquidated damages. However, in this case, Lord Dunedin laid down rules which are still applied today in these types of cases:

 

i) The sum is a penalty if it is greater than the greatest loss which could be suffered from the breach – in other words, if it is "extravagant and unconscionable".

 

ii) If it agreed that a larger sum shall be payable in default of paying a smaller sum, this is a penalty. Ford Motor Co. v. Armstrong (1915)

 

In this case, the judges reached the conclusion that the sum to be paid for a breach of the contract was substantial and arbitrary and bore no relation to the potential loss of the other party. It was, therefore, a penalty.

 

Bridge v. Campbell Discount Co. Ltd. (1962)

 

In this case a customer bought a car under a hire purchase agreement. He paid the initial and first payments and then cancelled the agreement. The company tried to recover the sums specified in the contract for canceling the agreement, but the courts held that the sums payable were excessive and constituted a penalty clause. It was, therefore, unenforceable.

 

Murray v. Leisureplay (2004)

 

Mr Murray was sacked by Leisureplay and he claimed three years' salary as per his contract of employment. The courts decided that this clause was a penalty clause and he was not entitled to this level of damages.

 

There have been several other cases over the past century. Any good book on contract law or business law will contain references to "penalty clauses", "penalties" or "liquidated damages" cases and a discussion of the law.

 

 

Hope this helps!!!!

Regards o0oLiamBeeo0o

 

None of that is evidence - it is law, a lot of it English law. I suppose the English law could be used as a persuasive authority; however the law isn't in dispute.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Manolo you have inspired me to fight my corner against the BOS after reading of your conquests. Hopefully you will get what you deserve. I am off for my forms from the court tomorrow & will lodge claims this week. I hope putting in claims a couple of weeks after the deadline I set them is ok as I have been on hols but no response from them anyway

Mike

Mike

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi GoForIt, with my previous post I was simply posting this for reference purposes, to show that these charges are indeed unfair and unlawful (and the ruling of unfair/unlawful has already been laid out). Ok they do not relate to bank charges but the principle, I feel is the same; what is and what is not unfair/unlawful?

 

Even although, as you say most of it is English law, the definition of unfair/unlawful is the same whether in Scotland or England, in my opinion anyways.

 

Also I wasnt disputing the law, just giving my 2p worth.

 

Regards

o0oLiamBeeo0o

Prelim Req sent 12 June 2006,

LBA sent 26 June 2006,

Confirmation of court action sent 24 July 2006,

Court return date 20 October 2006 - LTSB did not reply,

Court hearing date 27 October 2006 - Decree granted in my favour,

Recall of decree recieved 16 November 2006,

1 December 2006 assigned as recall of decree,

26 January 2007 assigned for full proof hearing,

16 January 2007 1st offer recieved and declined,

23 January 2007 2nd offer accepted, awaiting monies to hit bank account

 

All advice & opinions of o0oLiamBeeo0o are personal opinions, if in doubt seek advice from a qualified professional !!

 

vvv My Thread vvv

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi guys, not dropped off the end of the world, just been v busy. Will come back tomorrow and update every one. x

ABBEY Total £1277 First Claim £687 hearing date 6/7/06

BOS Total £1069

RBS 3/7/06 Statments arrived

NW Waiting on Statements Data Protection Act UP!!

SENT NON-COMP 28/6/06 sent letter to Data

Protection Act manager

 

Total £2286

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Manolo (and everyone)

 

I have really enjoyed reading about your progress and found it really useful. I'm looking forward to hearing how you are progressing.

 

What are you using for evidence to support your claim that the bank charges are penality charges? I have read the evidence provided earlier in the thread and I was wondering if you or anyone else was using any other cases etc? I am nowhere near this stage but trying to prepare.

 

thanks

caz

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cazza hello.......where you up to with Halifax?

 

 

As you will see by the threads and posts there is a structured approach which we are all using.

Can hardly be a bad thing since the banks are taking notice and paying out.

The reason quite simply is because (or up to now at least) they have neither the will nor the ammunition to defend when it comes down to the 11th hour.

 

Basically the claims are being waged on these principles.

 

 

Claimant has account (A/C No) with Defendant from (Date)conducted on their standard terms and conditions. Claimant is claiming the return of (£0.00) taken by Defendant in charges over (X) years. The Defendant's charges are a disproportionate penalty and therefore unenforceable as they are contrary to common law. They are also invalid under the Unfair Contracts Terms Act 1977 s.4 and under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999.Para.8 and sch.2.1.e.

In the event that the charges are not a penalty they are unreasonable within the meaning of the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 s.15. Defendant has declined justification of charges despite repeated requests. Claimant claims interest under Sec.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% a year from(Date) to (Date) of (£0.00) and also interest at same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of (£0.00)

 

 

 

As far as I know this in itself is proving to do the job.

 

It is after all.......self explanitory as much as the banks tend not to agree !!

 

:)

 

This is the basis of the claim and only be used at the court stage.......no need to remind the banks early on........they know exactly whats coming if you start a claim.

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5260 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...