Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • that was a good saving on an £8k debt dx
    • Find out how the UK general elections works, how to register to vote, and what to do on voting day.View the full article
    • "We suffer more in imagination than in reality" - really pleased this all happened. Settled by TO, full amount save as to costs and without interest claimed. I consider this a success but feel free to move this thread to wherever it's appropriate. I say it's a success because when I started this journey I was in a position of looking to pay interest on all these accounts, allowing them to default stopped that and so even though I am paying the full amount, it is without a doubt reduced from my position 3 years ago and I feel knowing this outcome was possible, happy to gotten this far, defended myself in person and left with a loan with terms I could only dream of, written into law as interest free! I will make better decisions in the future on other accounts, knowing key stages of this whole process. We had the opportunity to speak in court, Judge (feels like just before a ruling) was clear in such that he 'had all the relevant paperwork to make a judgement'. He wasn't pleased I hadn't settled before Court.. but then stated due to WS and verbal arguments on why I haven't settled, from my WS conclusion as follows: "11. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. "  He offered to stand down the case to give us chance to settle and that that was for my benefit specifically - their Sols didn't want to, he asked me whether I wanted to proceed to judgement or be given the opportunity to settle. Naturally, I snapped his hand off and we entered negotiations (took about 45 minutes). He added I should get legal advice for matters such as these. They were unwilling to agree to a TO unless it was full amount claimed, plus costs, plus interest. Which I rejected as I felt that was unfair in light of the circumstances and the judges comments, I then countered with full amount minus all costs and interest over 84 months. They accepted that. I believe the Judge wouldn't have been happy if they didn't accept a payment plan for the full amount, at this late stage. The judge was very impressed by my articulate defence and WS (Thanks CAG!) he respected that I was wiling to engage with the process but commented only I  can know whether this debt is mine, but stated that Civil cases were based on balance of probabilities, not without shadow of a doubt, and all he needs to determine is whether the account existed. Verbal arguments aside; he has enough evidence in paperwork for that. He clarified that a copy of a DN and NOA is sufficient proof based on balance of probabilities that they were served. I still disagree, but hey, I'm just me.. It's definitely not strict proof as basically I have to prove the negative (I didn't receive them/they were not served), which is impossible. Overall, a great result I think! BT  
    • Seeking further advice now. The 33 days in which the defendant has to submit a defence expires at 16:00 tomorrow. The defendant has submitted an acknowledgement of service but looking to get the claim awarded by default in failure to submit the defence. This is MoneyClaim Online and can see an option to request a default judgement but believe that is for failure to acknowledge the claim within 14 days??  So being MoneyClaim Online, how do I request the claim be awarded in my favour?
    • Have to agree with the above Health and safety legislation is specific in that the service provider in so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of all his employees and those not in the employ of the business. You claim is like saying you slipped in the swimming pool area while taking a dip. As rightly stated by by the leisure centre, a sports hall has dedicated equipment and you yourself personally have a legal obligation in mitigating danger or injury to yourself by taking account of your immediate surroundings. Where your claim will fail is if it is reasonable and proportionate to impose liability of the Leisure Centre? The answer has to be no.
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

H.O.L Test case appeal. Judgement Declared. ***See Announcements***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5063 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 heard on the news yesterday on working lunch I think it was,... that Virgin are opening their banks and that 'everyone will have to pay monthly fees for current accounts...if all the banks assume this position will that not diminish the argument of 'free-in-credit banking' ...and ironically deprive the consumer of that very 'Unfair Relationship' argument in the coming months???

 

m2ae:eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 5.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

We don't just report the news - we make it! :D

 

Just watch this space in July once HBOS hav ebeen in Glassgow Sheriff Court! ;)

 

BD

 

PS - I should have guessed from your photo you were an Essex girl (even up here we've heard of them).

Link to post
Share on other sites

We don't just report the news - we make it! :D

 

Just watch this space in July once HBOS hav ebeen in Glassgow Sheriff Court! ;)

 

BD

 

PS - I should have guessed from your photo you were an Essex girl (even up here we've heard of them).

 

I can't see a photo for that person lol ??? unless you mean on the article and wasn't it a male ???

 

The hint is in the first two words

 

A MAN who allowed his account to go a few pence overdrawn has been charged £80.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean the rather fetching figure in your posts with the matching outfit (including hat and glove) and the endearing suggestion as to what should be done with one's digit! :)

 

BD

 

PS I think I may be in love! :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean the rather fetching figure in your posts with the matching outfit (including hat and glove) and the endearing suggestion as to what should be done with one's digit! :)

 

BD

 

PS I think I may be in love! :D

 

You are so barking up the wrong tree lol :eek:

Edited by rdm2006
Link to post
Share on other sites

Is Barking not in Essex too? Anyway enough of this flirting or we'll get told off for being off topic!

 

BD

 

Barking is in Essex, however, Essex is not in the Midlands where I am and just like dearth vader was male so am I

 

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news concerning your love life :grin::grin::grin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Devastated. Friends bank charges claim struck out. We spent ages working on our written submissions, we incorporated the Supreme Court Judgement and the directing to S.5 UTCCR's we also sent the court an entire copy of the judgement. Additionally included the positive development in the Scottish case of Sharp v Bank of Scotland plc (2010). It didn't work Judge threw whole claim out.

 

Any suggestions anyone?

 

TheyrCriminals

Edited by TheyrCriminals
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Devastated. Friends bank charges claim struck out. We spent ages working on our written submissions, we incorporated the Supreme Court Judgement and the directing to S.5 UTCCR's we also sent the court an entire copy of the judgement. Additionally included the positive development in the Scottish case of Sharp v Bank of Scotland plc (2010). It didn't work Judge through whole claim out.

 

Any suggestions anyone?

 

TheyrCriminals

 

Did he give reasons? Who is we? Flagged up for site team attention

Edited by rdm2006
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

We phoned the court to find out the result but as yet we have not had the written Order through which we are hoping will shed some light on it but this is a massive setback. Can we get the claim reinstated?

 

TheyrCriminals

 

The strikeout order I received gave me 7 days (I think) to apply for the judgement to be varied or set aside. I came here for help, received stirling advice from the site team, and applied via N244 to have the strikeout judgement overturned. It worked, although it wasn't a bank charges claim - it was a finance company claim. Think the same or similar principles apply though.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/246352-finance-company-claim-strilkeout.html

Edited by HomerJSimpson
7 days not 14
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Devastated. Friends bank charges claim struck out. We spent ages working on our written submissions, we incorporated the Supreme Court Judgement and the directing to S.5 UTCCR's we also sent the court an entire copy of the judgement. Additionally included the positive development in the Scottish case of Sharp v Bank of Scotland plc (2010). It didn't work Judge threw whole claim out.

 

Any suggestions anyone?

 

TheyrCriminals

 

A simple strike out doesn't mean you can't try again unless it's judgment. Don't despair as provided you use different arguments as in GLC then you can re-issue however my advice before re-issuing is to await a Scottish judgment which if favourable you can use

Link to post
Share on other sites

you'll probably get an order through from the court giving you 7 days to stay, set aside or vary the claim. you need to apply with a N244 application giving your reasons why the decision is wrong and attach your proposed amended POC and relevant fee - it doesnt sound like you attended a hearing - some courts are doing this off their own backs then allowing people to overturn it later - I only know of one case so far other than yours that has not been allowed to continue - if a hearing is set you MUST ATTEND

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

We phoned the court to find out the result but as yet we have not had the written Order through which we are hoping will shed some light on it but this is a massive setback. Can we get the claim reinstated?

 

TheyrCriminals

 

I have just read Homer's Thread.

 

As JonCris has pointed out there has been no judgement and therefore no finality in the matter.Set asides are pretty common however you will need to be incisive in your follow ups and bear in mind that your issue IS one that applies within the context of the SC decision.

 

You will need to sharpen your sword and distinguish issues in SC decision from your situ.

 

Have a read although contextually Homer's was outwith the Banking structure but I am so sure you may identify with a few things.

 

Homer has successfully applied for a set aside (Procedure) and is currently awaiting response from the defendants.

 

HJs claim was also initially dismissed/struck out.

Edited by means2anend
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...