Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Can I just leave it as saved and not submit or do I need to delete everything?
    • don't file yet not needed till/by 4pm tomorrow   let andyorch check things over 1st    
    • well the claim is stayed so don't panic for now.   is this the ONLY payment made and how did capquest get this out of you? by phone?   explain what caused you to make the payment and how you did it please   dx                
    • Lovely stuff.    1.The claim is for the sum of £882.53 due by the Defendant under the CCA 1974 for a Shop Direct account with the account ref of ********************    2.The Defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a Default notice was served under s.87(1) of the CCA 1974 which has not been complied with.   3.The debt was legally assigned to the claimant on 08/01/18, notice of which has been given to the defendant.   4.The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £70.60 - The claimant claims the sum of £953.13   #####Defence######   The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.   1. Paragraph 1 is denied. Whilst it is admitted I have held various catalogue agreements in the past, I have no recollection of ever entering into an agreement with Shop Direct and do not recognise the specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 78 request pursuant to The Consumer Credit Act 1974.   2. Paragraph 2 is denied I have not been served with a Default Notice pursuant to sec87(1) the Consumer Credit Act 1974.   3. Paragraph 3 is denied. I am unaware of a legal assignment or Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 Section 136(1)   4. On receipt of this claim form I, the Defendant, sent a request by way of a section 78 pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, for a copy of the agreement, the Claimant has yet to comply and remains in default of the said request.   5. A further request made via CPR 31.14 to the claimant’s solicitor, requesting disclosure of documents on which the Claimant is basing their claim. The claimant has not complied.   6. It is therefore not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to:   a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement and; b) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for and; c) show the nature of the breach and evidence by way of a Default Notice pursuant to sec 87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim   7. As per Civil Procedure 16.5 it is expected that the claimants prove the allegation that the money is owed   8. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.   I will get this put into the defence section. Thank you again.
    • just remove the 2nd part where you mention some reply.
  • Our picks

freakyleaky

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

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3423 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

The redoubtable Mr Crow

denied that victory for the OFT implied there would be a deluge of litigation in other industries where cross-subsidies were common in pricing tariffs.

Any idea which areas of finance might be covered by this rather broad statement?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well we are talking about the OFT here....who are privy to many things that we arent.

It would also be their remit to sort out any such deluges-perhaps theres a feeling that Mr Crows team will be deserving of a break after all this is sorted.....the customers of the banks will be best placed to decide if he has earned that at the end of it all !


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.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think earlier in the thread it was mentioned the probably decision by the HoL will not be for a month or two once final arguments are made.

 

I still keep wondering why all the banks seem to have changed anything they class as a charge to being called 'Default Charges' both with current accounts and credit cards?! Probably they've known something long ago that we all nothing about yet?

 

Michael

 

 

Its not so recent-if you look at the terms and conditions supplied to Smith and look at the dates-its remarkable how many were changed not only on or around the time the OFT began its original investigations-but also to compliment the later rulings on common law in October.


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.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

HSBC WON three times!!!!! Read about my continuing battle (claim FOUR!) Link HERE

Capital One WON Link

HERE

GE capital (5 accounts) WON link HERE

Lloyds bank account WON second claim starting! link HERE

Budget insurance cough up WON link HERE

Principles WON link HERE

A&L (Mrs Crusher's account) claim link HERE

Barclays claim link HERE

 

Any advice given is on an informal basis only and without prejudice or liability. In in any doubt, consult a qualified lawyer.

IF YOU HAVE GOT YOUR MONEY BACK, PUT SOME BACK INTO THE SITE TO HELP KEEP IT OPEN!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it just me who has got a very bad feeling about all this?... I reckon its been decided already and guess who is guaranteed not to be fairly treated by all this....


27th April - Requested Statements

13th May - Received Statements:D

15th May - Preliminary request for £4780 sent.:D

16th May - Royal Mail confirm Letter received.:D

23rd May - Received Letter considering claim. :grin:

30th May - Letter Before Action sent. :D

10th July - Times Up!! FOS claim going in.

16th July - Measly 30% of claim offered as goodwill

17th July - Rejected offer letter sent

25th July - Acknowledgement of Reject Letter received

26th July - Screwed over by the OFT,Banks, FSA & FOS all in one go.:evil:

Never even felt it happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We can only wait and see Deso-its in the hands of the Gods.


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.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We can only wait and see Deso-its in the hands of the Gods.

Errr no Martin it's in the hands of the doddery old lords pmsl :p


I QUESTION THEREFORE I AM!! [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Unfortunately i'm not an expert in any given field legally and my advice and that of the Consumer Action Group and the Bank Action Group is given without prejudice and without liability so please if in any doubt whatsoever seek help from an insured qualified professional. Contents of my posts are purely my own personal opinions and not condoned or endorsed in any way, shape or form by CAG. Thank you! :p

 

 

I have been smoke-free for 4yrs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont have any problem associating them with Gods.....on the provisio of course that any rulings go our way.

If it goes the banks way-then I reserve my OWN judgment to amend the reference to GODS to something more befitting;)


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.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For fear of CAGBOT.

I loved the exchange between Lady Hale and Crow QC. Very witty I think. Cannot mention where as it was not from the press reports :D


.

FSA Waiver on Bank Charges:http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Doing/Regulated/Notify/Waiver/pdf/dir_quart_0709.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You will recall there was quite a bit of wit in the main exchanges in 2008.

Still falls short of a Brown v Cameron session tho.: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.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You will recall there was quite a bit of wit in the main exchanges in 2008.

Still falls short of a Brown v Cameron session tho.:rolleyes:

Nah, can't remember last year except that I took one week off work and the bank got government money and the CEO resigned and the share price was almost as good as a chomp bar that I remember from my younger days. They were great.....chomp bars that is :D


.

FSA Waiver on Bank Charges:http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Doing/Regulated/Notify/Waiver/pdf/dir_quart_0709.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Errr no Martin it's in the hands of the doddery old lords pmsl :p

Don't forget the lady CG(no doubt she will not be indecisive :D)


.

FSA Waiver on Bank Charges:http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Doing/Regulated/Notify/Waiver/pdf/dir_quart_0709.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is everyone out enjoying the sun?


HALIFAX: 13/01/07 Sent S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) letter (marked as rec'd 16/01)

Paid in full in March 07

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so wots happening with this case now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
so wots happening with this case now?

Law Lords are considering their verdict which could come before the end of July(recess for the court) or October in the new Supreme Court.


.

FSA Waiver on Bank Charges:http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Doing/Regulated/Notify/Waiver/pdf/dir_quart_0709.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He said if the courts upheld the right of the OFT to scrutinise bank charges, then the charges might be deemed unenforceable for a time period dating all the way back to the 1990s.

That was because European Union regulations on unfair terms in consumer contracts had been introduced into UK law during that decade.

 

 

 

I assume this would be because the charges are unfair as opposed to penalties?.


An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep. UTCCR started in 1995.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yep. UTCCR started in 1995.

 

The customer must have entered into their banking contract after July 1st 1995 to fall under the scope of the regs........Just my luck.... March 1995.


An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The customer must have entered into their banking contract after July 1st 1995 to fall under the scope of the regs........Just my luck.... March 1995.

But were your terms not amended during that period of time? Remember the terms being amended may come under UTCCR


.

FSA Waiver on Bank Charges:http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Doing/Regulated/Notify/Waiver/pdf/dir_quart_0709.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry bud...incorrect.

 

The UTCCR is capable FROM 1995 regardless of whether you opened your account before or after that date.

 

So basically all charges and restitution can be claimed FROM 1995 onwards and not, say, 1994 or 1990?

 

Hope that clears that up. ;)

  • Haha 1

srfrench :eek:

 

Fight incompetance, stupidity, greed and unfairness......There's no excuse and no place for it in society, unless they really are! :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The customer must have entered into their banking contract after July 1st 1995 to fall under the scope of the regs........Just my luck.... March 1995.

 

I don't think so. The regs aren't retrospective, (so don't apply prior to enactment) but they will apply from the day they came in to force, regardless of when you entered the contract.

 

In short, any charges that were unfair after enactment of the regs will be recoverable. Put it another way, the Banks should have made sure that they complied with the regs when they were enacted. :rolleyes:


Always happy to help where I can!

:lol:

Beware of legal advice given on a private forum - do you REALLY know who is posting? Are they REALLY accountable for their posts? What if you follow their advice and get something wrong?

It was Winston Churchill who said; "Democracy is the worst way to run a country except for all the others"

 

Advice and comments posted by car2403 are offered purely without prejudice. They reflect only my personal opinion and do not represent the opinion of this forum or it's management. You should always seek legal advice from a qualified legal advisor. As a member of the site team, I disable reputation - reputation points mean nothing, please check my posting credentials yourself and make an informed decision. You shouldn't PM me and await a reply - I may be too late with a response. No replies will be given in Private Messages - just as with getting advice from the forum, getting advice via Private Messages is dangerous. CAG is about sharing successes so others can follow your example, this is primarily why I'm here, so please don't be offended if I don't offer replies in PM that doesn't comply with this. Help CAG to help others by keeping your thread up to date.

 

 

USEFUL LINKS; New User Guide to CAG | Can't find what you're looking for? | Intro to Consumer Credit Litigation | Is My Agreement Enforceable | Default (Surleybonds) Template Letter | Defaults - background, removal methods, challenges and taking a claim to Court | Digital Signature Guide | Overdrafts and the CCA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so is it looking good for us then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
so is it looking good for us then?

it's definitely interesting to understate the case, lol


.

FSA Waiver on Bank Charges:http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Doing/Regulated/Notify/Waiver/pdf/dir_quart_0709.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think so. The regs aren't retrospective, (so don't apply prior to enactment) but they will apply from the day they came in to force, regardless of when you entered the contract.

 

For protection under the regs the customer must have entered into the contract after 1st July 1995. I believe the customer isn't covered from the 1st July.

Edited by paulwlton

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...