Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I called the business centre that M&F were located at and they advised me to call BCWM, which I did.   A lady spoke to me and said she didn't have any information to hand so I'd have to email them my request. She asked me to provide as much info as possible including my full info so being vague might not be an option.   What do you think of me putting the following:   Dear XXX   It was lovely talking to you earlier. As discussed, my query is in relation to the following piece of land owned by M & F Finance (Ireland) Ltd, which I believe you manage:   Portwood Court, Great Portwood Street, Stockport, SK1 2ED (Title Number : MAN24187)   I have a possible impending legal matter that I'm investigating and therefore need to know who signed up Civil Enforcement Ltd (CEL) to manage the car park and whether CEL currently has legal permission to enter into contracts on your behalf.   Any information you can provide would be extremely appreciated.   Do you think this is okay? Should I just sign the email with my name but omit my address?
    • Hi there,   I just wanted to seek some advice as I've been sent a "Parking Charge Notice" for temporarily stopping outside the arrivals terminal at Southend Airport to pick up my disabled father, and now they want £60 off of me. I've appealed, which, as I expected, did nothing.  Should I just let the case go to court, as i feel I have a good defense. My Father is disabled due to the fact that he suffers from Peripheral Arterial Disease and Spinal Stenosis and can only walk short distances before his legs begin to seize up and turn to lead. This is why I had to temporarily stop for a short period outside the terminal. It was a cold, dark evening, pouring with rain, I didn't see any signs. My only concern was getting my Mother and Disabled Father out of the cold weather, into the car and off home.'   Any help appreciated, Thanks          
    • On the matter of the shed, I would move to have the lot replaced immediately. Inventory the contents of the shed, take photographs of their condition and then do what you can to deliver the contents of the shed to your parents. If you continue to keep their property – or at least property to which they are asserting title – on your land then this can only help them and be an encumbrance to you. Ideally you would instruct them to come along and collect it – but the easiest thing to do is simply to put it all into the back of the car or van or something and then to deliver it to your parents. Warn them that it is going to arrive and make sure it all arrives in good condition at a time when you know they are going to be in. Once it is taken to their property, photograph it again and inventory it again so that there are no queries later on. It will be a good idea if you have somebody with you to witness what goes on. If your parents have keys to anything else on your property such as the front door or a back garden door in order to access the shed, you should change those locks immediately and write your parents and tell them that the locks are now been changed, that their own keys will no longer fit and that they are not authorised to enter onto your property in any circumstances. However, I suggest that you deal with the contents of the shed first so that there are no suggestions that you are trying to hang on to some property which I suppose is of no interest to you  
    • People usually sell through estate agents near to where the property is located so try searching for 'estate agents near [postcode]' and go through the results to see if one jogs your memory. Likewise for solicitors.
  • Our picks

Enron

Enron vs NAT WEST Business Account OD Charges ** OFFER MADE

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 4157 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

Just had Nat West contact me this morning, opening the envelope I fully believed it to be a written justification of their charges.... which unsurprisingly was there.

 

However included along with this was an offer in full & final settlement of my claim.

 

This wasn't a partial offer, but an offer for the whole thing - well minus 50p but I can live with that.

 

So think that Nat West might be softenning on their stance.


Advice offered by ENRON is without prejudice and is for your judgement as to whether to take it. You should seek the assistance or hire of a solicitor or other paid professional if in doubt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, well, well ?

 

Very interesting.

 

Wonder if their a bit nervous about the imminent announcement upon historic terms, and/or if there will be anything more specific raised with regards the penalty aspect upon Business accounts ?

 

What rate of interest did you apply ?

 

PM


---------------------------

ARE YOU A BUSINESS CLAIMANT?

CAG NOW HAVE A BUSINESS CLAIMS FORUM !

GO HERE !

 

CAN'T FIND WHAT YOUR LOOKING FOR?

Look here.

Got your old T&C's ?

Visit this thread to help others.

 

-----------------------------

All opinions and advice I offer are purely my own, and are offered without any liability. If unsure seek the help of a licensed professional

...just because something's in print doesn't mean its true.... just look at you Banks T&C's for example !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spreadsheet had 8% on it, however this hasnt even been filed via the N1 yet - hence my surprise. That was gonna happen in a couple of days time.


Advice offered by ENRON is without prejudice and is for your judgement as to whether to take it. You should seek the assistance or hire of a solicitor or other paid professional if in doubt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brilliant well done


KBO

If you can't fight, wear a big hat.

 

Halifax... 2 successful claims....£518

 

CitiCards..... judgement and cheque (26/7/07) .... won £900

 

RBS business..... .....stay lifted reissued N1..... won £2105

 

Midland1 business.1996/1997.. first letter (27/6/07)....£1470

 

First Direct...... first letter (30/6/07).... £839.... stayed

 

plus another 13 banks/business/cc's to come for £10,000 plus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Congratulations Enron! :D Nice result!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been musing over recent events in regards to Business claims, and had the following thoughts/ theory.

 

It is curios that despite all the blustering and feather ruffling on behalf of the banks they have often consciously chosen to still deal with and settle a fair number of business claims, despite being so happy to keep all personal account claims held up in the system.

 

This is curious, because the main aspects of the OFT case dealing with the UTCCR do not apply to Business accounts anyway. So they can't be choosing to settle Business claims in some effort to pre-empt the (now more likely) possibility that the verdict under UTCCR may not ultimately go in the Banks favour?

If so, they would surely be choosing to cut their losses more effectively by doing the same with the vastly greater number of personal account claims.

 

Also, early signs from the recent ruling seem to indicate that the penalty under common law aspect do not apply to currents T&C's.

So this just leaves the possibility that the Banks are nervous (or perhaps maybe even believe they've little chance of success) regards the courts ruling regards all or some of the other historic terms.

 

This leads me to a couple of conclusions;

Firstly, that the Banks may not be so sure about winning the 'penalty under common law' argument all the across the board. Some terms (both personal and Business) may still actually be deemed as making such charges penalties under common law.

However, they probably figure, that even if some of the historic terms for personal accounts are actually deemed to make them penalties under common law, that most personal account claimants would not be too bothered to use it anyway (given that they can just more easily just claim using the less messy and less contentious statute of the UTCCR).

Secondly, I also think that if some (or even all) historic Business account terms are ultimately deemed as making the charges penalties under common law, they are worried that they could be left with a backlog of Business claims brought under common law. These could also include some hefty interest claims, especially as such a ruling could also open the door for claiming commercial compounded rates (and Business claimants are just the kind of people who would probably more readily fight for such).

 

 

In short Enron, perhaps they are choosing to settle now and pay 8%, rather than face the possibility that the door could still be flung open for some claims brought under common law, and this could then lead to Business claimants then also going for CCI too.


---------------------------

ARE YOU A BUSINESS CLAIMANT?

CAG NOW HAVE A BUSINESS CLAIMS FORUM !

GO HERE !

 

CAN'T FIND WHAT YOUR LOOKING FOR?

Look here.

Got your old T&C's ?

Visit this thread to help others.

 

-----------------------------

All opinions and advice I offer are purely my own, and are offered without any liability. If unsure seek the help of a licensed professional

...just because something's in print doesn't mean its true.... just look at you Banks T&C's for example !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didnt get the 8% as they have settled before I have filed paper - but they are settling for 50p short of what I was asking for.

 

My thoughts are that their is case law present that relates to penalty charges in the form of dunlop etc.

 

There is the likelihood that they don't want a big payout to hit the headlines, which would alert businesses to the prospect of claiming - as they are more likely to do so than the individual if such an event was to occur.


Advice offered by ENRON is without prejudice and is for your judgement as to whether to take it. You should seek the assistance or hire of a solicitor or other paid professional if in doubt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How long have they given you to decide to accept or not ?

 

How much would the 8% come to if you got it?

Would that be more or less than the court costs they would have to pay if you actually filed?

 

Ultimately the decision is your own to make, and should be based upon if you find the figure acceptable, how much you want/need to the money, personal circumstances, and whether or not your prepared to take any further possible risk.

 

I know what I would perhaps do, I would maybe consider If the deadline for acceptance encompasses the date that the next announcements may be made regards historic terms, so maybe wait and see if it goes in our favour. Otherwise, perhaps press them to agree to 8%, under threat that you would file anyway, and so ultimately costing them more.

But, I do only say perhaps, and this possibility is easy for me to offer, as my own Business claim was settled prior to the OFT case announcement.

At the time the common law aspects seemed more solid (they may still be, who knows, and who know what will happen with the next announcement). So, all in, circumstances at the time of my own case allowed me to put on pressure and push for and get the charges plus the 8% interest as an out of court settlement.

 

Whether the same leverage is available now is the golden question.

 

It is ultimately up to you what to decide.

 

 

Good luck, and whatever you do decide have no regrets.


---------------------------

ARE YOU A BUSINESS CLAIMANT?

CAG NOW HAVE A BUSINESS CLAIMS FORUM !

GO HERE !

 

CAN'T FIND WHAT YOUR LOOKING FOR?

Look here.

Got your old T&C's ?

Visit this thread to help others.

 

-----------------------------

All opinions and advice I offer are purely my own, and are offered without any liability. If unsure seek the help of a licensed professional

...just because something's in print doesn't mean its true.... just look at you Banks T&C's for example !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm probably inclined to accept.

 

My initial approaches have been outlined that in offerring to settle before a deadline they wont have to pay court fees or interest.

 

As such think it might appear poorly against me if I was to go back on what I earlier outlined. Shame because it's £214 interest.... but i'm more inclined to accept because of the ambigous nature of business claims at present, and think it's a fair result because of this.


Advice offered by ENRON is without prejudice and is for your judgement as to whether to take it. You should seek the assistance or hire of a solicitor or other paid professional if in doubt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm probably inclined to accept.

 

My initial approaches have been outlined that in offerring to settle before a deadline they wont have to pay court fees or interest.

 

As such think it might appear poorly against me if I was to go back on what I earlier outlined. Shame because it's £214 interest.... but i'm more inclined to accept because of the ambigous nature of business claims at present, and think it's a fair result because of this.

 

I think that is a wise decision in the present circumstances. I know someone with a Barclays business claim who has been asked to withdraw their claim otherwise Barclays will pursue them for costs for continuing to pursue a worthless claim. The interest would be nice but I don't think its worth taking the risk. Lets just hope yours is not the last business pay out! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've been musing over recent events in regards to Business claims, and had the following thoughts/ theory.

 

It is curios that despite all the blustering and feather ruffling on behalf of the banks they have often consciously chosen to still deal with and settle a fair number of business claims, despite being so happy to keep all personal account claims held up in the system.

 

This is curious, because the main aspects of the OFT case dealing with the UTCCR do not apply to Business accounts anyway. So they can't be choosing to settle Business claims in some effort to pre-empt the (now more likely) possibility that the verdict under UTCCR may not ultimately go in the Banks favour?

If so, they would surely be choosing to cut their losses more effectively by doing the same with the vastly greater number of personal account claims.

 

Also, early signs from the recent ruling seem to indicate that the penalty under common law aspect do not apply to currents T&C's.

So this just leaves the possibility that the Banks are nervous (or perhaps maybe even believe they've little chance of success) regards the courts ruling regards all or some of the other historic terms.

 

This leads me to a couple of conclusions;

Firstly, that the Banks may not be so sure about winning the 'penalty under common law' argument all the across the board. Some terms (both personal and Business) may still actually be deemed as making such charges penalties under common law.

However, they probably figure, that even if some of the historic terms for personal accounts are actually deemed to make them penalties under common law, that most personal account claimants would not be too bothered to use it anyway (given that they can just more easily just claim using the less messy and less contentious statute of the UTCCR).

Secondly, I also think that if some (or even all) historic Business account terms are ultimately deemed as making the charges penalties under common law, they are worried that they could be left with a backlog of Business claims brought under common law. These could also include some hefty interest claims, especially as such a ruling could also open the door for claiming commercial compounded rates (and Business claimants are just the kind of people who would probably more readily fight for such).

 

 

In short Enron, perhaps they are choosing to settle now and pay 8%, rather than face the possibility that the door could still be flung open for some claims brought under common law, and this could then lead to Business claimants then also going for CCI too.

 

Interesting points PM although it could possibly just be the fact that it is a small claim and the costs of defending would outweigh the cost of paying out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree Zoot, the no costs rule in SCT may be playing a part in influencing their decision regards the economic viability of continuing.

However, I do also sniff a touch of uneasiness in their camp, especially when I've also heard of some recent Business claims that would quite likely have ended up in fast or multi also being settled being settled post OFT?

 

It will be very interesting to see what happens next all round for everyone ?

 

Enron, I am pleased for you.

You have got a result, and in these uncertain times that is good, and also perhaps more than the zero you had perhaps at times envisaged becoming a real possibility in light of recent events.

I'm sure you have done ample work to get this, so deserve it, but you've also managed to avoid a lot more stress and hassle than it could have been.

 

As I said earlier, have no regrets.

 

Enjoy.:)

 

PM.


---------------------------

ARE YOU A BUSINESS CLAIMANT?

CAG NOW HAVE A BUSINESS CLAIMS FORUM !

GO HERE !

 

CAN'T FIND WHAT YOUR LOOKING FOR?

Look here.

Got your old T&C's ?

Visit this thread to help others.

 

-----------------------------

All opinions and advice I offer are purely my own, and are offered without any liability. If unsure seek the help of a licensed professional

...just because something's in print doesn't mean its true.... just look at you Banks T&C's for example !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have been through the process start to finish beforehand with Citi, and was willing to do so once again.

 

At the end of the day, if the claim wasnt won it would be £100 or so pound out of pocket with no possability of costs going against me, whereas if won the benefit of getting my money back plus interest would be £1120ish.

 

Getting back what I requested is a fair deal considerring that they have been relatively reasonable. Though obviously not happy that they still protest that their charges are fair.


Advice offered by ENRON is without prejudice and is for your judgement as to whether to take it. You should seek the assistance or hire of a solicitor or other paid professional if in doubt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done Enron :D


Steven

 

Using CAG Toolbar will generate much needed income - Download Here

 

Confused by Simple Interest? Confounded by Compound Interest? Read my Interest Tutorial

My Wins

 GE Money Won unconditionally May 2007

NatWest Won unconditionally August 2007

Brighthouse Won unconditionally August 2007

Goldfish Won unconditionally April 2008 (including CI on the basis of Sempra)

Clydesdale Financial Services (now BPF) Won unconditionally February 2008

 

Any opinions are without prejudice & without liability. Do not take any legal action on my advice alone. Almost everything I know concerning the law I learned from this site.

 

Please note, I will not give advice by PM. Please send a link to your thread and I will do my best to answer there.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi im trying to put a letter together for the courts to ask for my stay to be lifted for a small business account to be lifted, can anyone help or if there is a template available??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steven

 

Using CAG Toolbar will generate much needed income - Download Here

 

Confused by Simple Interest? Confounded by Compound Interest? Read my Interest Tutorial

My Wins

 GE Money Won unconditionally May 2007

NatWest Won unconditionally August 2007

Brighthouse Won unconditionally August 2007

Goldfish Won unconditionally April 2008 (including CI on the basis of Sempra)

Clydesdale Financial Services (now BPF) Won unconditionally February 2008

 

Any opinions are without prejudice & without liability. Do not take any legal action on my advice alone. Almost everything I know concerning the law I learned from this site.

 

Please note, I will not give advice by PM. Please send a link to your thread and I will do my best to answer there.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, i had a look on that, but the thing is i had got to the stage where bailliffs had actually gone in and its at that point, the banks applied for a stay. Its now id like to write to the judge and say business accounts need not be put on hold, (if im right),

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We believe you are right - the OFT case is based on the UNfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999, which do not apply to business accounts.


Steven

 

Using CAG Toolbar will generate much needed income - Download Here

 

Confused by Simple Interest? Confounded by Compound Interest? Read my Interest Tutorial

My Wins

 GE Money Won unconditionally May 2007

NatWest Won unconditionally August 2007

Brighthouse Won unconditionally August 2007

Goldfish Won unconditionally April 2008 (including CI on the basis of Sempra)

Clydesdale Financial Services (now BPF) Won unconditionally February 2008

 

Any opinions are without prejudice & without liability. Do not take any legal action on my advice alone. Almost everything I know concerning the law I learned from this site.

 

Please note, I will not give advice by PM. Please send a link to your thread and I will do my best to answer there.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Got Nat West/RBS now playing funny wotsits over the signature on the account.


Advice offered by ENRON is without prejudice and is for your judgement as to whether to take it. You should seek the assistance or hire of a solicitor or other paid professional if in doubt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Enron.

 

Great news on the settlement offer and looked forward to hearing that you've been paid.

 

:)


We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys, just wondering if someone could help me putting a letter together for a n244 just to ask the judge to lift a stay on a business account

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Enron, Any news on what happened with the signature problems you were having ?

Everything sorted, and maybe got your settlement yet ?

 

PM


---------------------------

ARE YOU A BUSINESS CLAIMANT?

CAG NOW HAVE A BUSINESS CLAIMS FORUM !

GO HERE !

 

CAN'T FIND WHAT YOUR LOOKING FOR?

Look here.

Got your old T&C's ?

Visit this thread to help others.

 

-----------------------------

All opinions and advice I offer are purely my own, and are offered without any liability. If unsure seek the help of a licensed professional

...just because something's in print doesn't mean its true.... just look at you Banks T&C's for example !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Finally got funds through on 1st July 2008.

 

Resent the second sheet after getting signature resubmitted for the account at the bank, made the signature and my agreement to their full & final settlement conditional on that payment was made within month of sending the second signed document..... just in case they decided to play games.


Advice offered by ENRON is without prejudice and is for your judgement as to whether to take it. You should seek the assistance or hire of a solicitor or other paid professional if in doubt.

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...