Sagaloo vs LloydsTSB * WON *

[sagaloo]

The District Judge will be in court tomorrrow and will hopefully be reviewing my case. I was thinking of faxing this amended letter (usually used re: stays) to encourage the Judge to set a hearing date sooner rather than later.

 

Does anybody have any comments - i would like to fax it off tonight.

 

To the Court Manager

 

 

I would be grateful that when passing my file to the District Judge you could bring to his attention the following issues.

 

My claim was originally filed on the 4th July 2006. The defendant’s solicitor completed their Allocation Questionnaire stating they would be unavailable for the whole month of September. In addition, they requested one month to attempt settlement.

 

On the 7th September I received a standard order for stay for settlement with consent of all the parties (stayed until 5th October 2006 with action to be taken on or before the 19th October 2006). During this period I have contacted the defendant’s solicitor on numerous occasions both by telephone and letter. Their verbal response has always been that they are awaiting receipt of their client’s instructions. With hindsight I believe their request for settlement has simply been a delaying tactic.

 

Although I realise that it is at the District Judge’s discretion as to when a case is heard I would be grateful if consideration would be given to hear the case at the earliest opportunity so that my case is provided with a fair and public hearing within a reasonable amount of time (in line with European Convention on Human Rights Act 1998 Art 6.1). Further, I believe that the defendant had no intention to discuss settlement during the period of the order for stay and that they were simply trying to wear my claim out in the process. To date, written requests sent to the defendant’s solicitor asking for explanations as tor why the defendant has not attempted settlement within the time allowed by the stay (despite the request by the defendant for additional time) have not been acknowledged.

 

I would therefore request that my case is allowed to proceed speedily so that a just settlement may be obtained by the parties in this case. There is no complicated issue of law. The common law relating to contractual penalties is settled law since the late 1800s and has been reinforced as recently as the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 which is itself the result of a European directive.

 

In addition, I am aware that Lloyds TSB has already settled 22 or more similar cases. I have attached a list of the cases. In most of these cases Lloyds actually filed defences and returned allocation questionnaires, obliging the claimants to do the same. However, in every one of these cases, Lloyds TSB settled prior to hearing. In addition, Peter MacNamara (Head of Personal Banking, Lloyds TSB) stated in a Radio 4 interview that Lloyds was making big profits out of its default charges and that this money was being used to fund free banking for its customers. The Claimant can supply a copy of this recording if the Court wishes.

 

Although the sum claimed may be insignificant to the bank it is not insignificant to me. Should the hearing date be set for some time in the future my ability to recover my money will be delayed while the defendant will not be prevented from levying its charges or interest on debt comprised of those charges. Therefore any delay in setting a hearing date has the effect of favouring a powerful, well resourced institution. In addition, any delay provides an opportunity for the defendant to close my account and to remain at liberty to enter my name on the default register in respect of unlawful penalty charges which are unpaid by their customers. The banks have direct and privileged access to this register. Any default entered remains on the register for a period of six years and I would find it impossible to obtain credit at normal rates if at all. I therefore believe that any delay in securing a hearing date will potentially result in great financial difficulty for me and yet be insignificant to the bank; indeed any delay in obtaining a hearing date would be supportive of the bank’s litigation strategy which appears to be to take the claimant to the door of the court and then settle at the eleventh hour.

 

Ultimately any delay in securing a hearing date will favour the defendant by delaying the claimant’s pursuit of a legitimate remedy without placing any restrictions upon the banks activities which the claimant submits are unlawful and / or retaliatory.

 

If the court is unable to set a hearing date within a very short timescale I would respectfully request that the court issues the following injunctions:

 

1) The defendant is prevented from applying further penalty charges to my account until this matter is settled. Please note, I have already incurred in excess of £1,000 additional penalty charges since my claim was originally submitted in July 2006. As a result my child benefit and CSA payments have been swallowed for the last 3 months by bank penalty charges and have therefore been unavailable for the purposes for which they were provided.

2) The defendant is prevented from applying interest charges to any outstanding amounts which are comprised of penalties until this matter is settled.

3) The defendant is prevented from closing my account until this matter is settled.

4) The defendant is prevented from making an entry on its own systems or from communicating any similar information to any third party about this matter insofar as it relates to penalty charges until this matter is settled.

5) The defendant removes any derogatory entry on its own records insofar as it relates to penalty charges.

6) The defendant arranges the removal of entries from the records on any third parties to whom it has previously communicated information insofar as it relates to penalty charges.

 

I also respectfully request:

 

1) That these injunctions remain in place until the settlement of my claim.

2) Should my claim proceed to a hearing that a decision should be made at the hearing as to whether these injunctions should be made permanent.

3) Should the matter not proceed to a hearing because the defendant decides to settle outside court, that these injunctions should become permanent.

 

 

If the court accedes to my request to set a hearing date at its earliest convenience I respectfully request that the case be allocated to the small claims track but that the defendant be ordered to make standard disclosure. It is submitted that an order for standard disclosure will greatly assist in bringing this and other similar claims to a speedy and just conclusion. Further, I believe the matter is suitable for the Small Claims Track as it involves no issue of law – the law is already well established in this area. It only involves questions of fact – in particular the true costs of the defendant’s default charges system. The OFT has already formed its conclusion about this. Standard disclosure will put the matter beyond doubt. As I rely upon the defendant as my fiduciary it is clear that they have a duty to act in utmost good faith in relation to their conduct of their contract with me. I submit that they have not acted in good faith in relation to me in the matter of penalty charges.

[freebird]

that looks good to me......has an admin/mod had chance to look it over for you ? I'm only saying that as a trained eye would pick anything out..........I only have the experience I've built up on here so don't trust me !

good luck though....

[sagaloo]

Freebird

 

Thanks - does anybody else have any comments before I send it off?

[sagaloo]

Nothing in the post today from Court or solicitor - will wait and see what tomorrow brings!

[GaryH]

Well worth sending I think. Don't expect a hearing any sooner than around December time though (depending on your location), they certainly won't prioritise your case - it'll have to wait in the queue with all the rest of the small claims backlog. That said, it should certainly sway the judge away from issuing further stays, plus it brings the issue of the banks blatantly abusive stratagy to the courts attention.

[sagaloo]

Called SCM yesterday and was told still no instructions from client and person dealing with it was away from the office.

 

Called today (just now) and was told they did have instructions and they would be writing to me in the next 3 working days.

 

I told the person on the phone that if I do not receive any correspondence within the next 3 working days, I will be photocopying all of the correspondence that I have sent to them (and which todate has not been acknowledged in writing by SCM or Lloyds) and will send it directly to the Chief Executive's office of Lloyds TSB plc.

 

I will definitely do this if I have not received anything by Wednesday morning. Perhaps that way, this ridiculous situation of a major corporation abusing the legal process will be reconsidered (or at the very least the CEO's office is likely to become very busy if others follow suit)! That may make the bank sit up and rethink its corporate responsibilities to all of its stakeholders.

[GaryH]

I've tried writing to the CEO a couple of times. It just gets opened by a lacky and sent straight to the service recovery department (aka customer care) and then you get the usual patronising "sorry your not happy" drivel from one of their lot, usually Martin Orton.

[sagaloo]

Hmmm .... but I might ask him to comment on how he thinks his top 10 ethical investors might respond to the way in which Lloyds appears to be dealing with this issue in a very unethical and non-transparent way. I am sure his customer service team will not know how to field this. I might just include a list of names, direct line telephone numbers and addresses, suggesting that if I don't get an answer directly from the horses mouth then I will make contact with the SRI (socially responsible investment) analysts at each of Lloyds' major institutional investors to canvass their views on lloyds approach to this issue.

[GaryH]

Go for it. Sounds like you've got some good idea's. Its not going to do any harm anyway and the more pressure we can put on them, from whatever angle, the better.

[freebird]

I left a "pointed" message on the cheif execs voice mail and politely asked for him/her to phone me back..that was on Friday !

I'll try again on Monday......

[sagaloo]

Freebird

 

I would be amazed if you had been able to leave a voice message direct to the Chief Executive, particularly if you are not sure whether he is male or female.

 

For your information, the following executive board directors (incl. biogs) would be the most obvious choices to complain directly to if you can manage to navigate your way through all of their gatekeepers. Correspondence I would imagine should be directed to their Head Office: 25 Gresham Street, London, EC2V 7HN. Switchboard: 020 7626 1500.

 

My letter if nothing received from SCM by wednesday morning is likely to go to all three of them!

 

J Eric Daniels, Group Chief Executive

Joined the board in 2001 as group executive director, UK retail banking before his appointment as group chief executive in June 2003. Served with Citibank from 1975 and held a number of senior and general management appointments in the USA, South America and Europe before becoming chief operating officer of Citibank Consumer Bank in 1998. Following the Citibank/Travelers merger in 1998, he was chairman and chief executive officer of Travelers Life and Annuity until 2000. Chairman and chief executive officer of Zona Financiera from 2000 to 2001. Aged 55.

 

Michael E Fairey, Deputy Group Chief Executive

Joined TSB Group in 1991 and held a number of senior and general management appointments before being appointed to the board in 1997 and deputy group chief executive in 1998. Joined Barclays Bank in 1967 and held a number of senior and general management appointments, including managing director of Barclays Direct Lending Services from 1990 to 1991. President of The British Quality Foundation. Aged 58.

 

Terri A Dial, Group Executive Director, UK Retail Banking

Joined the board in June 2005. Served with Wells Fargo in the USA from 1973 to 2001 where she held a number of senior and general management appointments before becoming president and chief executive officer of Wells Fargo Bank in 1998. A non-executive director of the LookSmart Corporation. Aged 56.

 

Also worth checking out their corporate responsibility section on their investor website - they make interesting claims about how they create value for their customers and how they behave in a responsible manner - not that any of their customers using this site will recognise their description of how they do business!!!!

[freebird]

wel I didn't ask the switchboard for that info she just volunteered to put me through to the voicemal, a woman's voice came on and then I left the message so it could have been a woman C/E or a P/A but either way I left a message, hoping that it would get to the right person..if you read my thread, you'll see that I was clutching a straws yesterday and after about my 20th phone call, any words of help seemed good !!!!!!

[freebird]

ps..ta for all that info, I might just fax them all on Sunday..I'll see what side of othe bed I get out of...lol.....and take my pick....

[sagaloo]

I suspect you were probably just directed to the lacky that GaryH mentioned above.

 

I wouldn't put it past Lloyds to set up an anonymous voice message purely for use when they can't fob enquirers off any longer - its probably located in the directors' carpark!!! or one of their "offshore" call centres!!

 

It will be interesting to see if you get any response.

 

Good luck, in the meantime have a good time on your daytrip tomorrow!!

[freebird]

Well I've got two imaginary letters winging thier way to me now and 1 C/E phone call so I bet even if I was fortunate enough to be going on a two week holiday, I'd still have no response.........

 

back to faxing on Sunday !

[sagaloo]

Freebird - can I ask something stupid?

 

If SCM are supposed to have written these letters are they saying they are lost in the post?

 

If so, can't you request they go to your file and fax or email you an electronic copy - I would have thought that given their track record to date the postal service between you and SCM would appear to be (suspiciously) unreliable. I know you have said you don't have a fax machine at home but I think Staples may provide a fax receiving service.

 

I would say to SCM that if they have already written and posted (and therefore would have expected you to have received a copy by now) that there wouldn't be any problem with them providing you a copy by some other means.

 

Or am I being stupid?

[freebird]

I asked the same question of a somewhat " irritable " Mr. Thomas who just kept talking over me yesterday ! he wouldn't let me speak and when I tried to talk he said stop shouting at me..I wasn't, I was just trying to get a word in edge ways........When I sent the faxes I asked Staples if they would keep any replies for me and phone me if one came through, but they haven't.......

SCM won't disclose their email addy and I've google searched to no avail.........

I even told him I'd send him the money to send it by courier and he then went on again about not taking instructions from me !!!!!!

He wasn't budging and just said I'd have to wait.............

When I first chased up the 1st. letter he just said ok then...you trace it with Royal Mail......but if you remember they weren't even accurate with the posting date, first it was the Thursday, then the Friday then they addmitted it wasn't sent until the Monday !

This recent one is supposed to have been sent out Tuesday gone...but he also said that it went to their infamous "clearing dept" first !!!!

[GaryH]

Its Eric Daniels by the way. Thats the big, big cheese. A yank, apparently. I think you'd have to penetrate quite a few layers of BS merchants before anything was actually read/heard by him though.

 

(no offence meant to any of our trans-atlantic cousins of course)

[sagaloo]

Freebird

 

Surely the point is that if SCM are trying to write to you it is because their client has instructed them to do so. If the methods they are using to pass on their client's instructions to you are flawed don't they have a duty of care to their client to ensure that client instructions are passed to you.

 

Therefore, aren't SCM failing their client - if you provide them with alternatives which are more likely (given track record) to ensure you receive their client's instructions (namely, email or fax) I don't see how SCM can complain. Yes, they are there to take their client's instructions and not yours but surely they are failing their client if they are unable to communicate with you.

 

Perhaps you should ask them whether their client has prevented them form communicating with the claimant in any other way than by letter and if so what is the policy should letters get lost in the post. I would ask them to confirm their response in writing.

 

I will be calling on Tuesday (if my letter is to be here by Wednesday) to ensure it has been written, posted and will be asking for a faxed copy on the basis of the logic I have outlined above - given your experience I will be doing all that I can to prevent SCM's obvious stalling tactics.

[freebird]

as crazy as it seems saga, I've even priced the fax machines so I can get one here at home !!!!!!!

and the cheapest I've seen so far is Comet or Currys for £39.........................

It's just so impersoanl using a Store's fax and then waiting on a reply...I don't know anyone personally who has one either so I'm going to try and get one !

I've been otherwise occupied in Hospital all day today ( see my thread) so SCM have been very far from my mind.........

[Zedwoo]

Any news sagaloo? I'm 10 days behind you, your determintaion is an inspiration.

[sagaloo]

Nothing as yet - will see if anything arrives in post tomorrow as that will be 3 working days as promised by SCM. If nothing, I will call SCM and if all else fails letters will be sent on Thursday. Also waiting to hear back from the Court as my papers were put before the District Judge last Tuesday - the Courts said it might take a week before they get through the backlog.

[sagaloo]

Received offer letter from SCM this morning with the usual strictly without prejudice, confidential & priviledged.

 

Incl. bank charges and statutory interest. Ignores £10 Data Protection Act request fee, no mention of the fees which incurred since claim - which I know they are not obliged to pay but I will include in my response indicating (again) I will raise a new claim.

 

The interesting point is that they have not included the interest amount calculated in the original spreadsheets representing the amount of interest charged as a result of the fee being taken. Does anybody have a suitable response to this (it is in the region of £500)? SCM say: "In addition, we see that you are claiming interest on interest and believe that you are unable to do this."

 

Also includes usual review of account and full and final settlement. Also says they will pay directly into my account - I have already told them I don't want them to do this. If they offer to settle can we specify how they pay?

 

Any views /comments?

[GaryH]

You're perfectly entitled to claim any interest that has been levied on top of an unlawful charge, and you need to assert that in no uncertain terms. They're trying it on a bit, they just want the last word as per usual.

 

As I understand it, you can have the money paid to you however you request it. Its your money, they have no right to dictate the form in which it is re-payed.

 

As for conditions, as you are probably aware, they have no right to try and impose them and you are not under any obligation to accept them. The more of us who refuse to be bound by the unfair and unreasonable conditions they try to impose the better. Having said that, it will delay your settlement, so its your decision.

 

Here's the letter I sent refusing the conditions; http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/lloyds-bank/7744-garyh-lloyds-tsb.html#post196108. In hindsight though, I probably should have elaberated a bit on why I considered the conditions unnaceptable, although this is by no means a necessity.

 

This letter, by Bean, may also be of use to you and I'm sure he would'nt mind you using any parts of it that are appropriate for your situation; http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/lloyds-bank/4887-beans-timeline-joint-acct-4.html#post177819

[sagaloo]

Thanks Gary

 

I will check later and draft something this evening when I get back from meetings - with a view to getting something on the fax and in the mail tomorrow.