Egg CCP PPI Court Claim Mrs P

[phatram]

Thank you for your letter dated 19/JUNE/2008.

I accept your offer of £645.66 as part payment of my total claim of £1702.74 as shown on the enclosed up to date schedule. I shall, however, be continuing with my claim for the full amount stated.

I require the sum of £645.66 to be paid to the following account:-

The Co-Operative Bank Plc

Mr P

Sort code XXXXXX

Account No XXXXXXXXX

I expect this payment to be in my account within 14 days of the date of this letter. Upon clearance of the funds I will notify the Court of your part-payment.

I remain,

Yours sincerely,

Mr P

This was delivered to Eggs solicitors today.No doubt their next offer will be a little higher as in my wifes claim.

[angry cat]

Excellent!

 

AC

[phatram]

Jk EVERSHEDS

 

 

 

 

 

 

Date 20 June 2008

Your ref

 

Direct dial 0845 498 7245

Direct fax 0845 498 8075

 

 

 

 

Dear Sir

Thank you for your letter enclosing a copy of your Allocation Questionnaire filed at the Court on 13 June 2008.

We now enclose a copy of the Allocation Questionnaire today sent to the Court on our client's behalf.

In relation to your draft directions, we do not agree with the same. Please see the draft directions contained within our Allocation Questionnaire. You will note that we have requested that both parties file Witness Statement's of fact by 11 July 2008, and the matter be listed for a final hearing thereafter.

We also attach for your attention a Consent Order. Should you agree to the draft directions, please sign and return the Order so that we may file the same with the Court.

We look forward to hearing from you. Yours faithfully,

Eversheds LLP

[phatram]

IN THE DERBY COUNTY COURT Claim No XXXXXX

 

 

 

ME

 

Claimant

 

 

and

 

 

EGG BANKING PLC

 

 

Defendant

 

 

CONSENT ORDER

 

BY CONSENT IT IS ORDERED THAT:

1. Both parties file Witness Statement's of fact by 11.07.08;

2. The matter be listed for a final hearing on the first available date after 11.07.08.

Dated

We consent to an order in the above terms

 

Claimant Solicitors for the Defendant

[phatram]

Can I just copy the POC and use it for the witness statement?

[steven4064]

THe witness statement should certainly be based on the POC but should give more detail - quotes from settled cases that apply and the legislation relied on. Here is an example (obviously a different case, but togive you the idea) http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bailiffs-sheriff-officers/53570-new-strategy-allocation-questionnaires-3.html#post482194 (Statement of evidence = witness statement)

[phatram]

1. I, the Claimant, am a litigant in person in this case.

 

2. I make this Witness Statement in support of my claim against the Defendant for the refund of mis-sold Credit Card Repayment Protector insurance and interest thereon, levied to my credit card account by the Defendant bank.

 

3. I make this Witness Statement from information and facts within my own knowledge and which I believe to be true.

 

4. I signed a credit agreement with the Defendant on 16/7/02.

 

5. On 23/9/04, I transferred balances of other credit cards to my Egg credit card. As admitted in the Defence, point 6, the option for CPR cover was not optional – it was pre-selected. I believe this was also the case when I entered into the agreement in July 2002

 

6. On 20th July 2007 Egg informed me they would be in touch with me shortly concerning my claim for CCRP. This they failed to do and I was forced to recommence my claim on 19th March 2008

 

7. On 19/03/08 I wrote to the Defendant, setting out the nature of my complaint and requesting that the Defendant refund the mis-sold insurance and interest.

 

8. Upon unsatisfactory response from the Defendant, on 07/04/08 I again wrote to the Defendant requesting a refund of said charges and advising I would file a claim should I not receive a satisfactory response.

 

9. Upon a further unsatisfactory response from the Defendant, on 28/04/08 I filed a claim at Derby County Court for the return of the charges levied by the Defendant, as particularised and detailed in the Particulars of Claim.

 

10. The Defendant acknowledged service of the claim on 29/05/08 ?

 

11. The Defendant filed its defence on 29/05/08

 

 

12. The Defendant maintains the insurance was optional , but at no time did they inform of this.

 

13. There is, in fact, no requirement to take CRP with the Defendant’s card and here I had been misrepresented and there had been concealment aimed at increasing revenue through staggering CRP commissions.

 

14. The defendant responded on 1/04/08 that their decision was final

 

15. The fact that on 1/04/08 and 19/06/08 the Defendant made offers of CCRP repayment makes me believe Egg plc have already admitted mis-selling this insurance.

 

16. The Claimant claims

i) Compound interest on the charges applied thereon to the Claimant’s account (“the principal claim”), at the annual rate of

22.9 %. This is the rate applied by the Defendant to the Claimant’s unauthorised use or borrowing of the Defendant’s monies, as provided for in the contract.

 

The Claimant’s case for claiming this rate is based in equity, and a legal requirement for fairness and balance.

 

The Claimant deems the Defendant’s principal indebtedness to the claimant to be unauthorised, since it is comprised of insurance charges that were imposed upon the Claimant, they were not explained and were in fact mis-sold, not advising the Claimant that alternative products were available elsewhere.

 

ii) In the alternative to e i), if the Court is unable to agree that the claimant is entitled to the contractual rates of interest, on the grounds stated, the Claimant avers that the defendant would be unjustly enriched if the Claimant’s entitlement was limited to the statutory rate of interest in that the defendant has had use of the sums and would have used these sums to re-lend at commercially compounded rates. On these grounds the Claimant seeks restitution of the compounded contractual interest at the defendant’s authorised borrowing rate of 22.9 % per annum.

 

iii) In the alternative to e i) and ii), if the Court finds that the Claimant is not entitled to contractual interest, the Claimant claims interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984.

 

17. In answer to point 8 of the defence, I cannot believe that Egg can be so arrogant as to assume my claim to be an insignificant loss to myself. I of course have every statement to prove my loss.

Summary

18. The claimant believes the defendant has used the CPR as a means to hide the true costs of its “cheap credit-card”. This is something that many of the defendant’s customers must be suffering. Indeed the OFT and FSA have shown that CPR carries the largest commission of all insurances. The OFT has also shown that the PPI (CPR) is very often mis-sold, as it has been in this case.

The OFT and FSA have been very concerned over the behaviour of financial institutions with respect to PPIs. As such most financial institutions are now refunding mis-sold PPIs. Where this has not been repaid, there are many cases where either the FOS or County Court, have ruled in favour of the claimant.

 

19. The defendant has repeatedly misrepresented itself and concealed information in an attempt to keep the PPI alive.

 

 

20. The above summarised actions add up to, what the claimant believes, a planned and organised attempt to conceal the true costs of the defendants credit card account.

 

Conclusion

21. The Defendant, through varying manners, has taken the monies outlined from the claimant’s credit-card account, made obvious attempts to prevent access to information, tried to confuse the claimant and wasted the claimant’s time, all in an effort to maximise profits at the claimant’s expense. As such, the claimant requests all the monies requested and costs relative to the amount of time wasted. It is the understanding of the claimant that some county court judges have seen so much of this behaviour by the financial institutions that costs are often awarded in these cases.

 

22. Statement of Truth

 

I, the Claimant, believe the facts stated within this Witness Statement to be true.

 

Signed:

 

 

Should I add any more? and is point 17 perhaps a little strong?

[bathgatebuyer]

I think section 17 perfectly fine! (Mind you, I've seen some of the things I wrote in my case against the Halifax!).

 

What about saying something about them being unqualified to suggest the extent of your loss?

[phatram]

I think section 17 perfectly fine! (Mind you, I've seen some of the things I wrote in my case against the Halifax!).

 

What about saying something about them being unqualified to suggest the extent of your loss?

 

 

17.In answer to point 8 of the defence, I question Eggs ability to decide what is or is not a loss to myself. I cannot believe that Egg can be so arrogant as to assume my claim to be an insignificant loss to myself. I of course have every statement to prove my loss.

[phatram]

Back from hols to this,

 

WITHOUT PREJUDICE SAVE AS TO COSTS

Dear Sir

 

Thank you for your letter of 20 June 2008, in relation to our offer.

We have now received instructions from our client and confirm that the offer of £645.66 is in full and final settlement of your claim.

Should you wish to reject this offer our client will fully defend this matter. Yours faithfully,

Eversheds LLP

I believe they should pay me interest so stuff 'em.

[phatram]

Notice of Allocation to the Small Claims Track (Hearing)

To the Claimant

In the DERBY County Court

Claim Number

Claimant

(including ref.)

Defendant

(including ref.)

Date

10 July 2008

 

 

 

 

Seat'

 

 

 

DISTRICT JUDGE DOUCE has considered the statements of case and allocation questionnaires filed and allocated the claim to the small claims track.

The hearing of the claim will take place at 14:00 on the 10 September 2008 at Derby County Court, Combined Court Centre, Morledge, Derby, DEI 2XE and should take no longer than 90 minutes. A hearing fee of £150.00 is payable by 28 July 2008 by the claimant unless you make an application for a fee concession. Failure to pay the fee will result in the hearing being removed from the list.

The court must be informed immediately if the case is settled by agreement before the hearing date.

The hearing fee will be refunded in full if the court receives notice in writing at least 7 days before the hearing date, that the case is settled or discontinued.

Each party shall deliver to every other party and to the court office copies of all documents (including any experts' report) on which he intends to rely at the hearing no later than 14 days before the hearing.

The original documents shall be brought to the hearing.

Signed statements setting out the evidence of all witnesses on whom each party intends to rely shall be prepared and copies included in the documents mentioned. This includes the evidence of the parties themselves and of any other witness, whether or not he is going to come to court to give evidence.

The court may decide not to take into account a document or video or the evidence of a witness if these directions have not been complied with.

Date: 1 July 2008

Notes

 

If you cannot, or choose not to, attend the hearing, you must write and tell the court at least 7 days before the date of the hearing. The district judge will hear the case in your absence, but will take account of your statement of case and any other documents you have filed.

If you do not attend the hearing and do not give notice that you will not attend, the district judge may strike out your claim, defence or counterclaim. If the claimant attends but the defendant does not, the district judge may make a decision based on the evidence of the claimant only. Leaflets explaining more about what you should do and what happens when your case is allocated to the small claims track are available from the court office, or online at http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/cms/infoabout.htni.

[deb4tlj]

Subscribing with interest - feel I will have the same long drawn out fight on my hands with GE Money.

[phatram]

G'day,

I've just received Smeggs witness statement. I'll post it for people to look at and hopefully pick a few holes in it.

[phatram]

IN THE DERBY COUNTY COURT

Party: Claimant

First statement

Dated: 11.07.08

CLAIM NO: XXXXXXXXX

 

BETWEEN:

 

PHATRAM

Claimant

 

-and-

 

EGG BANKING PLC

Defendant

 

FIRST WITNESS STATEMENT OF XXXXXXX XXXXXX

I, XXXXXXX XXXXXX of Egg Banking Pic whose registered office is at Citigroup Centre, Canada Square, London, E14 5LB say as follows:-

1. I am a CRO Manager within the Customer Relations team at Egg Banking Pic

2. Save where otherwise appears, I make this Witness Statement from facts and

matters within my own knowledge which are true to me.

Background

3. On 16.07.02, the Claimant entered into a Credit Card Agreement with the

Defendant ("the Agreement"). The Agreement is regulated by the Consumer

Credit Act 1974.

 

4.

The Claimant applied for this Agreement online.

 

Defendant's policy

5. On making an application online for CRP Insurance, there is a lyes/no' option on

the application screen, and it is for the customer to make their decision as to

whether they require the CRP insurance.

6. The terms and conditions for the CRP insurance are provided to the customer

and they are asked to read and agree them before being able to proceed with

their application.

[phatram]

egg

7. When the Claimant made his application online, it was the Defendant's policy to

send out the terms and conditions with the agreement forms for the credit card,

The terms and conditions were specific to the type of CRP insurance cover the

customer had selected, and also included information on how to proceed should

they wish to claim against the CRP insurance and also provided details on

cancelling a CRP insurance policy.

8. There is a 14 days cooling off period for the Defendant's credit card. If a

customer wishes to cancel the CRP insurance within 30 days of the account being

set up on the Defendant's accounting system then no premium will be charged.

If the customer contacts the Defendant after the first monthly premium is paid,

and requests that the policy is cancelled then the Defendant will refund the

premium.

9. The CRP insurance is paid for monthly and is based on a percentage of the

outstanding statement balance.

______ 10. Where a customer arranged a balance transfer online, during the time that'the____________

option for CRP cover was pre-selected to yes, the Defendant will issue a refund to the customer as they would have had to opt out of the CRP insurance rather than opt in, and this is not in line with their company policy to treat customers fairly.

11. The Defendant's policy for processing balance transfers online is that the

customer would need to log on to their account inputting their security details.

The customer would then need to go to the 'Move Money' tab and select the

option to 'Make a balance transfer to your Egg Card'. The customer would need

to input the details of the account that they are transferring the balance from,

(in the case of a credit card it would be a 16 digit card number) and the amount

they wish to transfer, the customer would then be asked to confirm this. The

balance transfer process takes 7-10 working days to be completed and for the

money to be transferred. During this process the customer is given the option to

apply CRP to thefr account. From 30.07.04 - 02.06.06 the option for CRP

insurance was already pre'-selected for customers.

Defendant's application for CRP insurance

12. On making his application, the Claimant requested Credit Repayment Protection

insurance ("CRP") by selecting a tick box on screen. The insurance was optional

and was not a condition or a requirement of the Agreement. If taken out, the

[phatram]

CRP insurance provided cover for the payments under the Agreement in the event the borrower was ill or unemployed in accordance with the policy terms.

13. On 10.06.04, the Claimant cancelled the CRP.

14. On 23.09.04, the Claimant requested that the balances owing on his other credit

cards be transferred onto his Egg credit card. These transfers were completed

online. Again as part of the application the Claimant was offered CRP. The option

for CRP Insurance was already pre-selected, but could have been de-selected as

part of the application process, should the customer not require it. The Claimant

had the option to de-seiect the option for CRP insurance at the time of making

the balance transfers but he did not do so. Accordingly, the Claimant took out

CRP in relation to the balance transfers.

15. The Claimant cancelled the CRP insurance again on 01.12,04.

16. On 01,04.08, the Defendant refunded the Claimant in the sum of £32.73, being

the amount due to refund the premium paid from 23.09.04 - 01.12.04 including

interest calculated at 1.167% per month. The premium was refunded as it is the

Defendant's policy to refund premiums where a customer has arranged a

balance transfer and the option was pre-selected to yes.

Claimant's Claim

17. I understand that the Claimant claims that:

17.1 The CRP insurance was negligently misrepresented to the Claimant under S.2 of the Misrepresentation Act 1967. S.2 (1) of the Misrepresentation Act 1967 states:

17.1.1 Where a person has entered into a contract after a misrepresentation

has been made to him by another party thereto and as a result

thereof he has suffered loss, then, if the person making the

representation would be liable to damages in respect thereof had the

misrepresentation been made fraudulently, that person shall be so

liable notwithstanding that the misrepresentation would be liable to

damages in respect thereof had the misrepresentation been made

fraudulently, unless he proves that he had reasonable grounds to

believe and did believe up to the time the contract was made that

the facts represented were true.

17.1.2 The Defendant offered the Claimant CRP Insurance when making the

online application by way of a tick box. The CRP insurance was an

[phatram]

optional insurance that the Claimant could have taken out if he wished to do so, the Claimant ticked the box therefore indicating he wanted the insurance. This was the Claimant's choice, and the CRP insurance was not misrepresented.

17.2 The Defendant was under a duty to the Claimant to explain the terms of the CRP

insurance and to make the Claimant aware that alternative suppliers of CRP

Insurance existed.

17.2.1 The CRP insurance was optional and it was for the Claimant to review the policy being offered fay the Defendant against other similar products being offered by alternative suppliers and to confirm he wished to purchase the policy.

17.3 The CRP was applied incorrectly, and that the Agreement was not executed in

accordance with the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

17.3.1 The amount of credit is stated on the Agreement and the CRP insurance was optional.

13. The CRP insurance was an optional insurance which the Claimant had the option

to select or reject both at the application stage and also during the cancellation period.

STATEMENT OF TRUTH

I believe the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.

 

 

Name....

Dated...... l

 

Egg Banking Pic Citigroup Centre Canada Square London E14 5LB

[phatram]

Anyone ?

[phatram]

Notice that Acknowledgement of Service Has Been Filed

To the Claimant

In the DERBY

County Court

Claim Number

 

Claimant

(including ref.)

MR P

Defendant

(including ref.)

Egg Pic

Date

08 August

2008

 

 

The Defendant filed an Acknowledgement of Service on

08 August 2008

 

The defendant responded to the claim indicating an intention to defend all of the claim.

The defendant has 28 days from the date of service of the claim form with particulars of claim, or of the particulars of claim, to file a defence.

The acknowledgement was filed by the solicitors acting for the defendant who have given the following name and address for service of documents

Eversheds Lip

1 Callaghan Square

Cardiff

CF10 5BTThe court office at DERBY County Court, Combined Court Centre, Morledge, Derby, DEI 2XE is open between 10am and 4pm Monday to Friday. When corresponding with the court, please address forms or letters to the Court Manager and quote the claim number. Tel: 01332 622600 Fax: 01332 622543

[phatram]

What do I do now ?

Getting a bit excited about making my debut in court, my mates are calling me Rumpole!

Cheeky sods.

[phatram]

bump

[phatram]

Hi

 

Getting a bit worried about Court date. Any advice on Court bundle etc would be gratefully accepted

 

Thanks

Edited August 29, 2008 by phatram

[bathgatebuyer]

Sorry Phatram, can't offer anything other than words of support here (and a wee bump!).

 

Can't believe that Egg have allowed it to get to this stage, and that they even use as part of their defence, "The option for CRP Insurance was already pre-selected"

[phatram]

Hi

 

Getting a bit worried about Court date. Any advice on Court bundle etc would be gratefully accepted

 

Thanks

Bump

[hellhasnofury]

Hello Phatram,

 

Have you had a look through this sticky for any info to put in your court bundle.

 

Useful Documents for PPI Bundles