Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • A somewhat good result. After more chasing, they've sent me a spreadsheet of the accounts for fire protection, water charges and electric.  Communal Electricity - Estimated £45.00, Actual £241.73 - Revised: £41.63 Communal Water - Estimated £3.66, Actual £234.91 - Revised: £76.96 Fire Protection - Estimated £2.08, Actual £147.65 - Revised: £51.15 Still it seems too high, the total for this estate alone for water charges came to £62,950.07 last year. The thing is, they've listed blocks that don't seem to exist on our estate. Possibly from the new development that has only just been built on the estate, which was finished in the summer this year.     
    • The largest ever amount that went into that account was £500 which was about 7 months before it was blocked.    There was no going forward income as the 1st lockdown came 6 weeks later and I went straight onto universal credit after that and have been on it ever since.    Bottom line, at the time it was the only account I had add and all of my savings of £16500 were in there which I had no access to after it was blocked. Tried to contact the car finance company but no one was available throughout the pandemic likewise many other companies who registered a default
    • so you got the original letter asking for your side of the story and replied by email. post up what you said in your reply by email please and their reply.   you later got a letter stating this will be heard by the simple justice proceedure at xyz court on xyz date but still inviting you comment or plea?   how many time and how many days did you use this for and WHAT EXCATLY (the bit in black) on the letter from the SJP court have you been charged with..??   one specific event on xyz date ,...with other uses being by tickboxes to be taken into consideration and wiped if you agree?   what DATE is the court hearing?
    • A more controversial point is that Johnson has made it illegal to look after your family, requiring you to choose between them.   No one I know doubts or questions that people hosting raves and such like should be prosecuted given the situation, just as those gathering for fox hunts and grouse shoots should be, but effectively making people who are simply trying to safely and sensibly look after their own into criminals while the government pals do whatever they like and are thrown taxpayer money by the BILLION for nothing is obnoxious and abhorrent, especially when you can go to a restaurant or supermarket or transport hub and be in close contact with hundreds of strangers.     Oh look - 6 + 1 in close contact from 14+ households and only one wearing a mask - leading by appallingly bad example.    
    • got to have been due to them being suspect of large unaccounted for sums going in and out, sounds like a fraud investigation to me as thats the only real reason banks totally block everything.   you say this happened in january..why did you not immediately get all your going forward income paid to another account? that doesn't take 10mts.?   you are going  to have a hardtime claiming defaults on your credit file some +3mts later and a repo'd car some month later is their fault.
  • Our picks

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3775 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

HBSkeletonargument1-1.jpgHBSkeletonargument2.jpg

 

HBSkeletonargument3.jpg

Edited by pompeyfaith

If I have been of help to you please feel free to click my scales to the left Thanks.:)

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is what I have learnt here and offered as a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

 

Finally if you succeed with your claim please consider a donation to consumer action group as those donations keep this site alive.

 

CARTER V Co-Op

BANK CHARGES

REFUNDED £3567

 

POMPEYFAITH V Co-Op PPI

OFFER MADE BUT REFUSED

ONGOING AND STILL ONGOING

NOW WITH THE OMBUDSMAN

 

R.I.P BOB aka ROOSTER-UK you have always been a Gent on these boards and you will be remembered for that.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Pompey

 

Further to our private message exchange.

 

I think they could and probably should have ensured that the skeleton was served on you in better time knowing as they did the history of the matter in view of you being a Litigant in Person!

Link to post
Share on other sites

on 8

what are they talking about.

Id quot circumiret, circumveniat.

 

please do not take my word for anything please do your own research All that i make comments on are done in good faith and to the best of my knowledge

Link to post
Share on other sites

then look at at 10.

 

What do they want there cake and eat it

 

in my veiw it is one or the other.

Id quot circumiret, circumveniat.

 

please do not take my word for anything please do your own research All that i make comments on are done in good faith and to the best of my knowledge

Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed Lilly

 

I thought that was the job of the terms and conditions as governed by the CCA 1974

 

But then the terms and conditions they said where the ones where not the original ones which i signed too.

 

in fact i did not sign the original ones as they say as per rankie the original ones come with the card so in effect you dont know what you are signing.

If I have been of help to you please feel free to click my scales to the left Thanks.:)

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is what I have learnt here and offered as a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

 

Finally if you succeed with your claim please consider a donation to consumer action group as those donations keep this site alive.

 

CARTER V Co-Op

BANK CHARGES

REFUNDED £3567

 

POMPEYFAITH V Co-Op PPI

OFFER MADE BUT REFUSED

ONGOING AND STILL ONGOING

NOW WITH THE OMBUDSMAN

 

R.I.P BOB aka ROOSTER-UK you have always been a Gent on these boards and you will be remembered for that.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some excellent points raised there soothy:) PF I hope you are feeling a whole lot better now and ready to shoot these cowboys down in flames. Wishing you all the luck in the world and more:)

 

 

PS Well done with Co-op:D

<<<If I have helped please tickle the scales;-)<<<

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fedup,

 

Thank You yes i am now ready, well soon as i get payment of about £31,000 from the Co-op Bank as some of that will be used to fight these cowboys.

 

Im just going to put the P.O.C up again because they are adamant the account number is on there but for the life of me i just cant see it.

 

PF

If I have been of help to you please feel free to click my scales to the left Thanks.:)

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is what I have learnt here and offered as a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

 

Finally if you succeed with your claim please consider a donation to consumer action group as those donations keep this site alive.

 

CARTER V Co-Op

BANK CHARGES

REFUNDED £3567

 

POMPEYFAITH V Co-Op PPI

OFFER MADE BUT REFUSED

ONGOING AND STILL ONGOING

NOW WITH THE OMBUDSMAN

 

R.I.P BOB aka ROOSTER-UK you have always been a Gent on these boards and you will be remembered for that.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
courtpaper.jpg

If I have been of help to you please feel free to click my scales to the left Thanks.:)

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is what I have learnt here and offered as a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

 

Finally if you succeed with your claim please consider a donation to consumer action group as those donations keep this site alive.

 

CARTER V Co-Op

BANK CHARGES

REFUNDED £3567

 

POMPEYFAITH V Co-Op PPI

OFFER MADE BUT REFUSED

ONGOING AND STILL ONGOING

NOW WITH THE OMBUDSMAN

 

R.I.P BOB aka ROOSTER-UK you have always been a Gent on these boards and you will be remembered for that.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

no numbers there

 

ok so there refer to common law as in case law. IE rankin.

 

pf have a read

 

It is clear that s61(1)(a) is referring to the prospective regulated agreement, so that its requirements must be fulfilled by that document and not just by another document to which it refers”: Goode, Consumer Credit Law and Practice, paras 30.102-30.103.

 

This is interpreted by John McCloud, PhD, LLB, Barrister, Professor of Law, University of Liverpool:

 

On the same side as the signatures the document itself must contain the terms prescribed in the Agreement Regulations [Reg 6(1)]. To the extent that these rules refer to information which must be stated ‘together and as a whole’, that will ensure the larger list is included in the actual agreement rather than any document referred to in it.

Id quot circumiret, circumveniat.

 

please do not take my word for anything please do your own research All that i make comments on are done in good faith and to the best of my knowledge

Link to post
Share on other sites
ConsentOrder-1.jpg

If I have been of help to you please feel free to click my scales to the left Thanks.:)

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is what I have learnt here and offered as a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

 

Finally if you succeed with your claim please consider a donation to consumer action group as those donations keep this site alive.

 

CARTER V Co-Op

BANK CHARGES

REFUNDED £3567

 

POMPEYFAITH V Co-Op PPI

OFFER MADE BUT REFUSED

ONGOING AND STILL ONGOING

NOW WITH THE OMBUDSMAN

 

R.I.P BOB aka ROOSTER-UK you have always been a Gent on these boards and you will be remembered for that.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So they have lied to the judge by saying in the witness statement the account number is on the P.O.C

 

PF

If I have been of help to you please feel free to click my scales to the left Thanks.:)

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is what I have learnt here and offered as a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

 

Finally if you succeed with your claim please consider a donation to consumer action group as those donations keep this site alive.

 

CARTER V Co-Op

BANK CHARGES

REFUNDED £3567

 

POMPEYFAITH V Co-Op PPI

OFFER MADE BUT REFUSED

ONGOING AND STILL ONGOING

NOW WITH THE OMBUDSMAN

 

R.I.P BOB aka ROOSTER-UK you have always been a Gent on these boards and you will be remembered for that.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh one other point the barrister said on the 15th june in court that they will forgo all costs that i would have to pay , but that is not the case as the £290 on the P.O.C was charged to the card so in that total is £290 costs.

Edited by pompeyfaith

If I have been of help to you please feel free to click my scales to the left Thanks.:)

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is what I have learnt here and offered as a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

 

Finally if you succeed with your claim please consider a donation to consumer action group as those donations keep this site alive.

 

CARTER V Co-Op

BANK CHARGES

REFUNDED £3567

 

POMPEYFAITH V Co-Op PPI

OFFER MADE BUT REFUSED

ONGOING AND STILL ONGOING

NOW WITH THE OMBUDSMAN

 

R.I.P BOB aka ROOSTER-UK you have always been a Gent on these boards and you will be remembered for that.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The order made on 15th June is indeed a Tomlin Order.

 

Was there a statement of account sent with the POC at all.

 

Obviously as we have now established that they sent a pupil barrister to the hearing on 15th June the comments made above about the speculation as to why they sent a solicitor from Bradford to Pompey is irrelevant although one does wonder why they sent a more junior barrister in June to the one they used at the earlier hearing.

 

Its funny how the rep told you and the judge that she didnt know the history due to having only just received the papers. She had them on the previous Friday to do the Skeleton Argument an

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Never had a statement of account as the POC arrived from the bulk centre and as i understand it this should still arrive under separate cover.

 

Yes as you say the skeleton was prepared on the 12th and they had my email address as i had emails from optima so why could they not email it to me on the 12th its not rocket science.

 

PF

If I have been of help to you please feel free to click my scales to the left Thanks.:)

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is what I have learnt here and offered as a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

 

Finally if you succeed with your claim please consider a donation to consumer action group as those donations keep this site alive.

 

CARTER V Co-Op

BANK CHARGES

REFUNDED £3567

 

POMPEYFAITH V Co-Op PPI

OFFER MADE BUT REFUSED

ONGOING AND STILL ONGOING

NOW WITH THE OMBUDSMAN

 

R.I.P BOB aka ROOSTER-UK you have always been a Gent on these boards and you will be remembered for that.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Im a bit confused as to the differance between a Tomlin and a Consent either way it is stayed so i guess i can submit an N244 to get the ball rolling again ?

 

PF

If I have been of help to you please feel free to click my scales to the left Thanks.:)

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is what I have learnt here and offered as a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

 

Finally if you succeed with your claim please consider a donation to consumer action group as those donations keep this site alive.

 

CARTER V Co-Op

BANK CHARGES

REFUNDED £3567

 

POMPEYFAITH V Co-Op PPI

OFFER MADE BUT REFUSED

ONGOING AND STILL ONGOING

NOW WITH THE OMBUDSMAN

 

R.I.P BOB aka ROOSTER-UK you have always been a Gent on these boards and you will be remembered for that.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok off to bed now ill look in, in the morning.

 

Regards

 

PF

If I have been of help to you please feel free to click my scales to the left Thanks.:)

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is what I have learnt here and offered as a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

 

Finally if you succeed with your claim please consider a donation to consumer action group as those donations keep this site alive.

 

CARTER V Co-Op

BANK CHARGES

REFUNDED £3567

 

POMPEYFAITH V Co-Op PPI

OFFER MADE BUT REFUSED

ONGOING AND STILL ONGOING

NOW WITH THE OMBUDSMAN

 

R.I.P BOB aka ROOSTER-UK you have always been a Gent on these boards and you will be remembered for that.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

PF

I honestly think that looking at this objectively you have come out of this with one hell of a result .

The Tomlin Order pointedly makes provision for you to increase the payment ONLY IF YOU WANT TO . You could just set up a Standing Order and forget about it if you wanted to.

I think that MBNA will be absolutely furious with the way that this has gone especially as you have a property which they could have put a Charging Order over and have won damages against the CO OP which they could have tried to get their hands on.

I think that the fact that the judge left it in your court shows beyond doubt his disgust with the way that this case had been handled .

HOWEVER

I do sympathise with your view that justice was not done though. Reading between the lines of the Skeleton Argument they sprung on you on the day of the hearing it seems that they knew there were serious problems with the evidence. How else could you explain the deliberate emphasis on the fact that you had not challenged the witness statement evidence and had not notified the court as to who you wanted to appear at the court. They are paving the ground there for them to say ‘its not ideal but he should have raised it earlier himself. They also stress that the statements were verified by statements of truth as if to say “it must be true then”.

This is a bit of a sleight of hand really as they knew damned well what had been going on with your personal circumstances since the start of the case. You had written to them and I know that the lenders and their solicitors do monitor these forums just in case they can gather any useful info and tie it in with any of the cases they are dealing with and probably put 2 and 2 together and sussed out that you had made the postings – don’t worry though. They cant touch you now.

Furthermore this was not an interlocutory hearing. It was a TRIAL. It is very bad form for any organization taking a case all the way to trial to refuse to produce their witness for cross examination! This is not some one man band organization. It’s a massive Financial institution for gods sake. If these people cant produce a live witness they should not bring the claim. It was not a summary judgment application but a full blown trial. The witness should have been there as a matter of course.

Also it is true to say that you had not been told about the issues regarding those witness statements which I flagged up yesterday before the trial. No doubt had you have been made aware of the provisions of Part 32.14 of the CPR you would have challenged the authenticity of the statements and demanded that Dianne Powell present herself at court and give evidence on oath. No doubt you would have asked her who “Diane” Powell is and whether she is the same person as the Dianne Powell who signed the statement and how her name came to be misspelt on both of the statements. This may seem to be a triviality but in reality it is of vital Importance. She has signed a statement of truth to a statement which appears to be not in her true name. There is no excuse for this whatsoever and can only mean that the statement was prepared by somebody else and that Dianne Powell failed to read it before signing it. Optima seem to have failed to flag up this fundamental issue and failed themselves to check and read the statements before sending them to you and the court. Bottom line is that if Dianne Powell failed to read the statements thoroughly enough to point out that the author of the statements had spelt her name wrong and had blindly stated falsely that the Particulars of claim bore the account number how could any credibility be attached to the rest of her statement? If this seeming lack of care is not contempt of court I am a martian.

If Optima failed to advise their client properly as to the Importance of getting witness statements right or worse if they actually put words in her mouth they would also appear to be in contempt of court. Those statements should have been in Powells own words and in the first person. The constant use of the words “the claimant” and “the defendant” do strongly suggest third party involvement.

Seriously. I would take some advice on commencing proceedings for contempt of court against both MBNA and Optima. I think that I am right in saying that any contempt proceedings can be brought without interference with the terms of the Tomlin Order. Such proceedings can also be commenced by the Attorney General or Official Solicitor if he or she sees fit. This is clearly a case of Immense general Importance to the public as this sort of thing should not be happening at all in our judicial system let alone with 2 companies of the size of MBNA and Optima. Incidentally do not make the mistake of underestimating the size and clout of Optima. I have it on very good authority that Optima are funded and bankrolled to the tune of many millions of £ by one of the biggest PLCs in the country – Capita Group – see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capita I wonder if the Chief Executive and Shareholders of Capita are aware of just what their investment is actually buying and what is really being done in their name or on their behalf.

I will post up some caselaw on Contempt of Court soon.

Did you ever get the apology from Optima as mentioned by the judge?

You also need to get them to produce the original of the letter you sent them on 15th April as they have gone on record as saying that it was not received until 27 April.

I will be back.

Link to post
Share on other sites
PF

 

 

I will be back.

 

Oh I do hope you'll be sticking around soothy, this site thrives on knowledgeable people :-D :-D

 

S.

Are You as Anonymous on CAG as You Think You Are? *Link*

 

The CAG is a free help site,should you be offered help that requires payment,please report it to site team.

 

Deal with your debts:

STEP ONE - Dont Panic! | STEP TWO - Priority & Non Priority Debts | STEP THREE - Personal Budget Sheet | STEP FOUR - A SAFE bank Account | STEP FIVE - Dealing with Priority Debts | STEP SIX - Non-priority Debts | STEP SEVEN - Non-Priority Debt-Repayment Opt1 | STEP EIGHT - Non-Priority Debt-Repayment Opt2 | STEP NINE - Perils of Consolidation | STEP TEN - RE-Evaluate Frequently

 

***** SERIOUSLY IN DEBT, DONT KNOW WHAT TO DO, TRY NationalDebtLine's MoneySteps *****

 

 

IMPORTANT: Please take my advice in the spirit it is given and on the basis that I am expressing my opinion, These opinions are not endorsed by CAG in anyway and are offered informally without prejudice or warranty of any kind. These opinions are solely based upon the knowledge I've gained from this fantastic site and life in general. I have NO legal training.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wahey. Dianne Powell seems to have spelt her name right on this statement here

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/dca-legal-successes/170484-fairbyblue-mbna-restons-court-21.html#post2138178

 

At least the statement provided by Restons is more of a 1st person statement.

 

I think that it is clear that there is such a difference in styles and use of language between the statement provided on Fairyblues case and those produced by Optima on this case http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/151709-help-37.html#post2082886 to justify the authorship of the body of the statements coming under scrutiny.

 

Im trying to get my head round why she did two seperate statements on the same day. Why didnt Optima advise her that both statements could or should be combined. I cant believe the shoddyness.

 

Has anybody else got any examples of witness statements provided by Optima for comparison?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I my Case I found Interesting points about Ms D Powell witness statements regarding particularly the confirmation of the authenticity of the copy of the credit card agreement maintained by the claimant on a microfiche file.

Ms D Powell, witness statement on FairbyBlue statment

I Confirm and verify that the copy credit card agreement exhibited to this witness statement as “DP1” is a true copy maintained by the claimant on its microfiche records

Ms D Powel Witness Statement on my case

Attached to this witness statement at “DP1” is a true photocopy of a printout of a document which is stored by the claimant on a microfiche. The document is the credit card agreement between the claimant and the defendant pursuant to which the credit card was issued.

The discrepancies with the two statements are:

On the Witness statement of my agreement Ms. Powell does not say the words:

I confirm and verify

And also the words:

is a true copy

Ms Powell’s WS in my case, merely states that the copy provided by the claimant is:

A true photocopy of a printout of a document

And does not confirm as in the earlier statement that:

The copy credit card agreement is a true copy

MBNA/Restons case against me is based on an agreement that looks like a montage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

in court they refered to it as a consent order but u say a tomlin order are they one in the same ?

If I have been of help to you please feel free to click my scales to the left Thanks.:)

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is what I have learnt here and offered as a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

 

Finally if you succeed with your claim please consider a donation to consumer action group as those donations keep this site alive.

 

CARTER V Co-Op

BANK CHARGES

REFUNDED £3567

 

POMPEYFAITH V Co-Op PPI

OFFER MADE BUT REFUSED

ONGOING AND STILL ONGOING

NOW WITH THE OMBUDSMAN

 

R.I.P BOB aka ROOSTER-UK you have always been a Gent on these boards and you will be remembered for that.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

oh sorry i not been on until now but something unexpected came up we got another little fella in the family born 2.5 mths early weighing 2.7llbs

If I have been of help to you please feel free to click my scales to the left Thanks.:)

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is what I have learnt here and offered as a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

 

Finally if you succeed with your claim please consider a donation to consumer action group as those donations keep this site alive.

 

CARTER V Co-Op

BANK CHARGES

REFUNDED £3567

 

POMPEYFAITH V Co-Op PPI

OFFER MADE BUT REFUSED

ONGOING AND STILL ONGOING

NOW WITH THE OMBUDSMAN

 

R.I.P BOB aka ROOSTER-UK you have always been a Gent on these boards and you will be remembered for that.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...