Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • love the extra £1000 charge for confidentialy there BF   Also OP even if they don't offer OOC it doesn't mean your claim isn't good. I had 3 against EVRi that were heard over the last 3 weeks. They sent me emails asking me to discontinue as I wouldn't win. Went infront of a judge and won all 3.    Just remember the law is on your side. The judges will be aware of this.   Where you can its important to try to point out at the hearing the specific part of the contract they breached. I found this was very helpful and the Judge made reference to it when they gave their judgements and it seemed this was pretty important as once you have identified a specific breach the matter turns straight to liability. From there its a case of pointing out the unlawfullness of their insurance and then that should be it.
    • I know dx and thanks again for yours and others help. I was 99.999% certain last payment was over six years ago if not longer.  👍
    • Paragraph 23 – "standard industry practice" – put this in bold type. They are stupid to rely on this and we might as well carry on emphasising how stupid they are. I wonder why they could even have begun to think some kind of compelling argument – "the other boys do it so I do it as well…" Same with paragraph 26   Paragraph 45 – The Defendants have so far been unable to produce any judgements at any level which disagree with the three judgements…  …court, but I would respectfully request…   Just the few amendments above – and I think it's fine. I think you should stick to the format that you are using. This has been used lots of times and has even been applauded by judges for being meticulous and clear. You aren't a professional. Nobody is expecting professional standards and although it's important that you understand exactly what you are doing – you don't really want to come over to the judge that you have done this kind of thing before. As a litigant in person you get a certain licence/leeway from judges and that is helpful to you – especially if you are facing a professional advocate. The way this is laid out is far clearer than the mess that you will get from EVRi. Quite frankly they undermine their own credibility by trying to say that they should win simply because it is "standard industry practice". It wouldn't at all surprise me if EVRi make you a last moment offer of the entire value of your claim partly to avoid judgement and also partly to avoid the embarrassment of having this kind of rubbish exposed in court. If they do happen to do that, then you should make sure that they pay everything. If they suddenly make you an out-of-court offer and this means that they are worried that they are going to lose and so you must make sure that you get every penny – interest, costs – everything you claimed. Finally, if they do make you an out-of-court offer they will try to sign you up to a confidentiality agreement. The answer to that is absolutely – No. It's not part of the claim and if they want to settle then they settle the claim as it stands and don't try add anything on. If they want confidentiality then that will cost an extra £1000. If they don't like it then they can go do the other thing. Once you have made the amendments suggested above – it should be the final version. court,. I don't think we are going to make any more changes. Your next job good to make sure that you are completely familiar with it all. That you understand the arguments. Have you made a court familiarisation visit?
    • just type no need to keep hitting quote... as has already been said, they use their own criteria. if a person is not stated as linked to you on your file then no cant hurt you. not all creditors use every CRA provider, there are only 3 main credit file providers mind, the rest are just 3rd party data sharers. if you already have revolving credit on your file there is no need to apply for anything just 'because' you need to show you can handle money. if you have bank account(s) and a mortgage which you are servicing (paying) then nothing more can improve your score, despite what these 'scam' sites claiml  its all a CON!!  
  • 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
      • 160 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

Elliot v lloyds - the "test case" settled in full by Lloyds


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6322 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

About a week ago.

 

i am trying to find more details

 

 

Clearly Lloyds failed the test!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 138
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

They have no grounds to and this settlement by Lloyds will embarras the courts and make them less likely to do it again in the future.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Send an email to all the newspapers:D :D

What headlines do you imagine

 

"LloydsTSB Defence melts into insignificance"

"Claims put on Ice defence lawyer found in pool"

Lloyds TSB - N1 claim issued 18/07/06 - £3440 Offered unconditional settlement 23/08/06

Vodafone-Information Commisioner assessment -default removal -25/07/06

Link to post
Share on other sites

Would have been nice to have a test case behind us but I know a lot of people can't afford to wait for, possibly, months for the result. I think, on balance, this is good news.

 

If you read this Elliot - Congratulations!

BEFORE starting your claim read through the FAQ's and if there's something you aren't sure of then ask.

If you win, donate to this site

Contents of my posts are purely my own personal opinions, some formed by personal experience and some from research. If in doubt seek qualified legal advice.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone ring the Daily Mail. Having give this so much prominence they should give equal prominence to this total and utter humiliation of Lloyds. What will it take to get one of these banks into court and held accountable for their decades of unlawful charging?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent. Hopefully all those people who are starting to worry/be put off will read this and continue to proceed as normal.

Lloyds TSB - £972

S.A.R, prelim and LBA sent

Claim acknowledged

Defence received

AQ 20/06/06

***FULL SETTLEMENT RECEIVED 20/07/06***

 

Woolwich - £2288

S.A.R, prelim and LBA sent.

Offered half

Moneyclaim filed online 02/08/06

Judgement filed online 23/08/06

WARRANT FILED ONLINE 30/08/06

MONEY RECEIVED BY BALIFF 04/10/06

***FULL SETTLEMENT RECEIVED 09/10/06***

 

Smile - £175

Pelim 23/06/06

***FULL SETTLEMENT RECEIVED 07/07/06***

 

My Ex vs Woolwich - £715

S.A.R sent 30/08/06

Pelim 06/10/06

LBA 20/10/06

 

Advice & opinions provided are personal, and not endorsed by CAG or BAG, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

fantastic news!

NatWest - Settled in full 22/05/06

 

RBS- Prelim sent 9/05/06 £1,147

£500 offer 27/05/06, rejected 30/05/06

LBA sent 25/05/06 :razz:

MCOL 15/06/06

Defence received 20/07/06

Settled in full 01/09/06 wahey!!!!!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand...

Doesn't this mean that Lloyds admitted their wrong doing????

 

Doubt it, depends on the terms of the settlement. I'd imagine it was on the basis of no admission of liability on the banks part.

If my reply or advice was helpful, please click the scales!

-------

DISCLAIMER: My opinions are strictly personal, and should not be taken as a substitute for individual professional legal advice on your own particular situation.

-------

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great news. Thanks admin/mods. Good work. This site is worth every penny of the donation I am going to make when I get my cash back!!

Abbey - Prelim sent 17th May £2560.00 + £191.44

LBA sent 1st June

Claim Filed 27th June 3349.90 Inc Interest + Costs

Court Papers Served 3rd July

Claim Acknowledged 10th July

50% Offered 27th July

Settled Out Of Court 1st August £3080.45

Capital One - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) request 31st July

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great news.

 

Gosh you guys are good. Where do you get your information?

 

thanks.

 

Now lets get back to our claims!!;)

.

.

.

Sign the Phil Whitmore petition: http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/PAYUSBACK/ :)

 

 

Abbey Current Account claim for charges £1307.11

 

26/01/07 Awaiting court date

25/01/07 Courts lost my file!! Said it will be sorted soon

23/11/06 Defence recieved from Abbey

20/11/06 Statements a full 6 years received

16/11/06 AQ completed & submitted

30/11/06 Claim number 6SQ06250 recieved from courts

24/10/06 Claim submitted to courts x3 copies

21/08/06 Prelim letter asking for it back, sent to Pam Speed. 14 days up 05/09/06.

21/08/06 Data Protection Act non compliance letter sent. 7 days up 29/08/06

11/07/06 Reply to Pam Speed Data Protection Act fob off letter.

10/07/06 Data Protection Act fob off letter received from Abbey. dated 06/07/06.

29/06/06 Data Protection Act statement request sent

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well! I'll go to the foot of our stairs, as me mother used to say!!

Yes, but do you know what the rest of the saying is?

Link to post
Share on other sites

daily Mail is also being involved - but listen to radio 4 Moneybox this Saturday

Link to post
Share on other sites

daily Mail is also being involved - but listen to radio 4 Moneybox this Saturday

 

That's fantastic, now they can correct the rubbish they have written which has given the wrong impression to people. Do you think this settlement and aftermath will put more pressure on Lloyds

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am trying to get more info but my understanding is that the claim was for an indterminate amount "not exceeding £5000", that the Elliots don't know about this Group!!!! and started off their own bat. They first they knew that the claim had become significant was when they heard about it in the Mail. They didn't even know that it had been settled.

 

A journalist called phoned lloyds and Lloyds told him that it had been settled a week ago and so I suppose that the Elliots haven't heard the news yet.

Apparently they were horrified when they read the mail because they only wanted their money and had no interest in becoming a test case.

 

All of this has been told to me by a BBC journalist but I have yet to contact them myself alhtough I intend to do so as soon as I can get their number.

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6322 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...