MBNA/Restons Claimform - old MBNA Card DEbt *** WON ***

[supasnooper]

I have never received any notification of the reduction of the credit limit being reduced to zero.

 

I've just gone through all the data that MBNA supplied as a result of an SAR request and it shows no correspondence prior to or after 31st July 2008 about the credit limit being reduced............unless MBNA haven't fully complied with the SAR request...............naughty, naughty.

 

I suppose I'd better invite MBNA's Data Controller to explain their position.

Edited April 16, 2009 by supasnooper
insert a space

[Viscount Stair]

To be honest, it shows all the hallmarks of a bright idea someone came up with back at the ranch to salvage the wreckage that the local agent had left them by (quite properly) conceding the point.

 

My initial reaction when reading it was Oh F***, then I thought it through and realised that it looks clever but has no substance whatsoever. However, it does look attractive, so it does need to be squashed quite hard.

[summerbreeze]

Very interesting and informative thread ... subbing

[citizenB]

I have never received any notification of the reduction of the credit limit being reduced to zero.

 

I've just gone through all the data that MBNA supplied as a result of an SAR request and it shows no correspondence prior to or after 31st July 2008 about the credit limit being reduced............unless MBNA haven't fully complied with the SAR request...............naughty, naughty.

 

I suppose I'd better invite MBNA's Data Controller to explain their position.

 

MBNA are a bit shy about parting with information that is older than 6 years. What was the start date of this account ?

[supasnooper]

Hi CB,

 

You must have read my mind as I was just doing my WS for the case.

 

The start date was June 2001.

 

They have supplied some data but I'm mindful to haul them in front of a Judge for failing to fully comply with my SAR as there is no record of any of phone calls from them to my home phone number or to the calls they made to my work telephone number.

 

However............................

 

I've found some very good news regarding this case but I do not want to say too much until Tuesday when my WS hits the Judges desk.

[Viscount Stair]

I am intrigued but I will be happy not to know too soon.

[citizenB]

Look forward to your update then

[supasnooper]

Don't worry, the Judge just needs to be the first to see it.

[Cartier-Bresson]

subbing

[supasnooper]

Just a quick one...........

 

Being mindful of the latest assertions of the claimant, I am also leaning towards citing Henderson v Henderson (1843) 3 Hare 100

 

(The rule in Henderson v. Henderson (1843) 3 Hare 100 is very well known. It requires the parties, when a matter becomes the subject of litigation between them in a court of competent jurisdiction, to bring their whole case before the court so that all aspects of it may be finally decided (subject, of course, to any appeal) once and for all.

In the absence of special circumstances, the parties cannot return to the court to advance arguments, claims or defences which they could have put forward for decision on the first occasion but failed to raise.

The rule is not based on the doctrine of res judicata in a narrow sense, nor even on any strict doctrine of issue or cause of action estoppel.

It is a rule of public policy based on the desirability, in the general interest as well as that of the parties themselves, that litigation should not drag on for ever and that a defendant should not be oppressed by successive suits when one would do. That is the abuse at which the rule is directed.")

 

As always, your thoughts and views are invited.

[ifoughtthelaw]

Fantastic thread, subbing with great interest!

 

Good luck!

x

[fairbyblue]

Good luck subbing

[citizenB]

There doesnt appear to have been any comment on this. so I have fetched it forward .

 

 

 

 

Just a quick one...........

 

Being mindful of the latest assertions of the claimant, I am also leaning towards citing Henderson v Henderson (1843) 3 Hare 100

 

(The rule in Henderson v. Henderson (1843) 3 Hare 100 is very well known. It requires the parties, when a matter becomes the subject of litigation between them in a court of competent jurisdiction, to bring their whole case before the court so that all aspects of it may be finally decided (subject, of course, to any appeal) once and for all.

In the absence of special circumstances, the parties cannot return to the court to advance arguments, claims or defences which they could have put forward for decision on the first occasion but failed to raise.

The rule is not based on the doctrine of res judicata in a narrow sense, nor even on any strict doctrine of issue or cause of action estoppel.

It is a rule of public policy based on the desirability, in the general interest as well as that of the parties themselves, that litigation should not drag on for ever and that a defendant should not be oppressed by successive suits when one would do. That is the abuse at which the rule is directed.")

 

As always, your thoughts and views are invited.

[cashins]

Sub

[Cartier-Bresson]

Just wondered where you are up to with your case Supa - doesn't seem to be much posted over the last couple of weeks. Are you awaiting another court meeting ?

[supasnooper]

Just got back from the Summary Judgment hearing.

 

Restons have discontinued.

 

They've said they will re-issue a fresh case against me as well as re-issue a Default Notice...............we'll see about that later.

 

My SJ hearing costs have been awarded to me, as well as other costs in dealing with the whole case, so a donation will be on its way to CAG once the payment has been received.

 

That only leaves me to say big THANK YOU'S to zazen.warrior and 42man who initially pointed me in the right direction and empowered me to take MBNA/Restons on; and to steveH2508, citizenB, surfaceagentx20, car2403, Viscount Stair, Josie8, diddydicky, i'vegotnomoney and atwozee for their legal insights and astute observations along the way

 

A Thank You to the CAG site itself.

Without this site and its members, I would have struggled to gain the knowledge and reference material that I needed.

 

It would be apt to finish by saying thank you's to perdita, fedup74, tiokim, angel_1, supermanX, mitzbag, elliesnan, bobgosing, sunflower99, phatram, summerbreeze, ifoughtthelaw, gazza112, sunshine54, cashins, cartier-bresson, and fairbyblue who have subbed to my thread and offered their support and wishes as well.

Edited June 2, 2009 by supasnooper
typo

[fairbyblue]

Get in there !!!!!!!! Well done. Brilliant result and thanks for all your help.:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

[citizenB]

Woohoo, way to go. Well done you. :D

[r&b]

excellent work SS

[fedup74]

Well done Supa so pleased for you and so thrilled that restons have eaten dust!! Let's hope this is the last you hear from the Warrington *****!!:razz:

[Tonka99]

Excellant news SS well done have a large G&T on me

 

Tonks:)

[Gazza112]

Supasnooper well done great result.

 

Gaz

[phatram]

Well done

[summerbreeze]

Fantastic ! Well Done

[atwozee]

Super job Supasnooper!!!!!