Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi   I could be wrong here so could @namedisplay please clarify if I am correct or completely wrong?   In your post#1 you mention that due to your health issues and your mental state at the time you rang the Training Room and was told it would cost and initial £200 and then £15 per month until you finished the course.   Then further in post#1 The Training Room told you you were not eligible for an extension because you hadn't completed enough of the course.   With the above I now refer Post#12 which mentions your circumstances are covered by 13 in the TTR Terms and Conditions.   What is mentioned above seems conflicting from TTR for the following:   1. IMO that money of £200 and then £15 per month (on top of original Course Fees) was them at that time agreeing to an extension as per 13 in TTR Terms and Conditions   2. Them stating you can't extend Course as not completed enough of Course is not in TTR Terms and Conditions (that I and others can see) (Note they could be referring to 15 in TTR Terms and Conditions)   Can you clarify the above and were you informed those extra costs were due to an extension of your Course.   Again I will ask did you provide the Training Room with Medical Evidence when you asked the above?   We also still need to see the Letter from Training Room Threatening Legal Action (fully redacted) which you still haven't posted?   You need to send The Training Room a Subject Access Request (SAR) asking for 'ALL DATA' that simple phrase means whatever format they hold that data in whether it be written, email, recorded phone calls etc.   They then have 30 Calendar Days to respond to your SAR Request and that Time Limit only starts once they have acknowledged your SAR Request. They can extend that Time Limit if they need to prove identity before actioning the SAR Request so be aware of that.   A SAR Request is now FREE and make sure you get Free Proof of Posting from the Post Office     Your right of access ICO.ORG.UK   Can you please make sure you answer the questions asked of Caggers to assist you    
    • I've been trying to resolve a issue with 8 PCN issued by Tyne Tunnel 2 (tt2.co.uk). Tyne Tunnel 2 is a gated toll charged tunnel to cross the River Tyne in Newcastle. We moved in recently so all a bit new to us. My dad had been using the tunnel about twice a week and he had been paying cash for the toll fee at the booths. At some point in November 2021 they had done some constructions where the gates had been closed and payments had transitioned to online methods. My dad had been oblivious to this and been on his merry way multiple times thinking that he doesn't need to pay. So he received the first PCN some where end of November which had been issue on the 26th after which point I went on alert and sorted out the online accounts and such. However the current total of fines has amounted to £255.20 and I have appealed explaining that soon as the letters were received we have resolved the issue but they insist on us paying 8 PCN. I feel it's unfair that the fine is for the same offence which we couldn't have rectified or known until we received the first PCN letter and after the first PCN we have rectified it so feel they are being bit draconic. Any advice on this matter? 
    • No need to apologise! I am extremely grateful for both your help   Gosh very good attention to detail going on here   Great thank you, i will put them back as below   Good evening to you   DEFENCE   1.     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.     2.     Paragraph 1 is noted. It is accepted I have in the past had agreements with Lloyds TSB. I do not recall the precise details or agreement nor the claimant either, having failed to provide an agreement/account number within its particulars of claim and have therefore sought verification from the claimant.   3.     Paragraph 2 is noted but until such time the claimant can clarify the agreement account number any breach has yet to be proven.      4.     I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served by either the Claimant or Lloyds TSB pursuant to the Law of Property Act 1925.   5. Paragraph 3 is denied. I am unaware of any Notice of default served.   6.     It is denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant. The Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of the Agreement/Assignment/Default notice or Termination requested by CPR 31. 14.    Therefore 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 or evidence a Default Notice /Notice of Sums in Arrears, d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;   7.     As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.   8.     On the 5th of January 2022 I requested to The Claimants Solicitors, Mortimer Clarke by way of a CPR 31.14 copies of the documents referred to within the Claimants particulars to establish what the claim is for. Mortimer Clarke have failed to fulfil my CPR 31:14 request.   9.     On the 5th of January 2022 I made a section 78 legal request to the claimant for a copy of the Consumer Credit Agreement. The claimant has as of 27/01/22 failed to comply.   10.  By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
    • std letter the court send simply telling you the claimant has 28 days to do 'something' else the claim get autostayed.   go read a goof few 10's of PCN claimform threads.    
    • Update. I get the feeling they will try and take me all the way. Just have to wait and see. court letter..pdf
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

Lloyds TSB Business A/C - Returned Cheque Fee


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4692 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


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



Recommended Posts

Hi all


I know that a lot of charges to personal accounts etc are now stayed pending the court cases, but is this the same for a business account?


I have been hit with an unplanned overdraft fee of £15 and a returned cheque fee of £35 this week alone. I am sure if i go back there will be more fees as well.


Are these fees acceptable or are they the basis of me trying to formulate a claim to Lloyds to put the money back?


Any help would be most welcome.





Meekle Vs CAPQuest (littlewoods) No CCA produced WON Total alledged debt written off

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Meekle.


The current OFT case was supposedly instigated with the intention of clarifying the law regards such charges being applied to personal accounts, and primarily under consumer law such as the UTCCR99.

Thus their lawfulness was supposedly being examined under statutes that never did and still don't affect business accounts and such claimants cases.


However, as part of the case there was also surprisingly some consideration of their legality in a broader sense under common law.

The court has so far declared that it does not consider such charges as constituting penalties at common law (at least as far as current terms and conditions are concerned). To my mind (an opinion shared by many) their contested legality under common law (which has been the main backbone of business claims) has not been fought by the OFT strongly enough, nor analysed by the court sufficiently, with such possibility almost being consigned to a side issue.

Also, whether or not the courts current opinion also actually includes business contracts, and if so; which, how many, and from what period were included for consideration?

So it is also unclear as to how definitive and applicable to business account claims this current decision is, whether it can be contested, and how far back it should reach. The banks are obviously unsure about this too, which is perhaps why once many business claimants have managed to contest any stays, they have then often quickly received offers and settlements.


So the whole issue of business claims has become a bit of a grey area for all concerned, and although we have indeed heard of some claims being settled during this current period, these were mainly claims that had been instigated before the start of the OFT case, and perhaps were settled for economic reasons ie. costs already incurred and continuing to accumulate, along with the potential greater interest liability over time should the claims succeed.


The court is due quite soon to make some rulings regards whether older historical terms and conditions can be considered as unlawful or penalties (either by way of statute such as UTCCR or by common law), and perhaps a wider analysis of business accounts may then also be taken into account?


Further announcements are expected fairly soon. Dependent upon what happens next, further consideration of the strength of cases for business claims will be made, and perhaps new strategies evolve.


In the meantime, I suggest that you start to gather your evidence by way of adding up all of your charges (ever), start to read up on matters, and keep an eye on events.

Then also keep an eye on the forums and you'll find out how to act when the time is right.


I will also highlight your post, and ask for it to be moved into the business claims forum. There you will find a lot more info and news, and be amongst other business account claimants. I suggest once your there, that you perhaps read up a bit on the history of business account claims and then continue to watch out for any future developments.


Best regards



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 !

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

Hi photoman

Thanks for above i am going to make a claim against Lloyds for unfair charges on my business account , do you think i should base my claim on Common Law of Contract and the Unfair (Contracts) Term Act 1977, and if so is this the correct title .



regards carter55

Link to post
Share on other sites


  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...