Freebird's flight path ***SOARING ABOVE THE CLOUDS***WON***

[caro]

Freebird, I have emailed you a list of Lloyds cases settled after a claim was issued, but before actually going to court.

[freebird]

just picked up your email and emailed you back thanks love x

 

I'm typing away and listening to this vid I came accross...it's my "namesake"

 

Lynyrd Skynyrd - Free Bird - Web Hosting

[freebird]

come on get in to the spirit of this and sing the tune......................

 

Oh yes, wait just a minute mister postman

Wait, wait mister postman

(Mister postman look and see) oh yeah

(If there's a letter in the bag for me)

Please mister postman

(I've been waiting a long long time)oh, yeah

(Since I heard from that bank of mine)

 

 

 

no luv, but I've got some bills and a bank statement for you !

 

and the clock tics on.....................................................

[sagaloo]

Freebird

 

any chance you can point me in the direction of this list of Lloyds claimed prior to court?

 

Many thanks

 

Sagaloo

[freebird]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/litigation/

 

 

I think this is the one, I added up about 22 Lloyds wins

[christinajanep]

ha ha oh freebird how i laughed at that, hows the asthma today

[freebird]

Wheezing A Bit Better But Lost The Voice...

 

Hurray Most Would Say Lol..........

[freebird]

I'm just posting this as this is the letter so far, I've just added my bit at the top but it's from the template with slight ommissions...........

 

 

 

THIS IS THE LETTER I ADDED MY PERSONAL SITUATION AT THE TOP, I HAVEN'T HAD CHANCE TO ADD UP ACCURATE NUMBER IETHER YET SO DON'T SEND IT WITH OUT CHECKING..

 

Lloyds TSB Bank, requested in their Allocation Questionnaire that they would be unavailable to attend Court, during the whole month of October to enable settlement negotiations. I wrote to Sechiari Clark & Mitchell and copied in Lloyds Tsb and Liverpool County Court, to initiate negotiations and suggest settlement. After following this letter up with several telephone calls a Mr. Thomas from Sechiari Clark & Mitchell eventually informed me that they had received my letter and that they were sending me a letter on 12th October 2006, which I still have not received. I have telephoned his office several time today and left messages to no avail. Therefore I respectfully request that the stay which has been ordered on my claim be removed.

 

 

Human rights

It interferes with my rights under the European Convention on Human Rights directly and as enacted in the Human Rights Act 1998.

Art.6 1. of the Convention provides that “In the determination of his civil rights … everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time.”

 

The Overriding Objective

It is submitted that the Overriding Objective requires that my case is allowed to proceed speedily so that a just settlement may be obtained by the parties to this case. There is no complicated issue of law. The common law relating to contractual penalties is settled law since the late 1800s and has been reinforced as recently as the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 which itself is the result of a European directive.

 

Lloyds TSB Bank

 

The defendants Lloyds TSB Bank have already settled 22 or more similar cases.

In the attached list of cases, the court will see that Lloyds were defendants in 22 cases. In most of these Lloyds actually filed defences and actually returned their allocation questionnaire, obliging the claimant to do the same. However, in every one of these cases, Lloyds bank settled the matter before the hearing.

In 2004 the head of personal banking of Lloyds TSB Bank Peter MacNamara stated in a radio 4 interview that Lloyds was making big profits out of its default charges and that this money was being used to find free banking for its customers. The Claimant can supply a copy of this recording of the court wishes.

 

 

Other cases

It is true that there are currently many other cases which are litigating on the same issue of contractual penalties. However the court may be unaware that not a single case so far has gone to a hearing.

Attached to this application is a sample list of 223( check this figure as I havn’t added them all up yet ) cases complete with county court reference numbers (Annexe 2) - of which the claimant is aware and which have been started since February of 2006. All of them have been settled before hearing.

Many of them have even received default judgments against the defendant banks in question which has then been set aside on application by that bank and then which has been settled by that bank rather than go to court.

In two cases the court has even ordered standard disclosure against defendant banks but those banks have then gone on to settle rather than reveal the details of its contractual penalties.

It is submitted that the predicted test case is most unlikely to go to a hearing and that it will be settled out of court and therefore produce no useful decision from a higher court.

It is further submitted that the defendant in the instant case has no intention of going to a hearing.

It is submitted that the pattern of cases settled so far suggests very strongly that the banks are merely using the justice system as a publicly funded means of intimidating their customers and dissuading them from pursuing their legitimate Right.

It is submitted that this is abusive of the justice system and of the public resource.

 

 

Balance of convenience

The sum claimed is insignificant to the bank but it is a significant sum to me. Further more although a stay prevents me from recovering my money, the defendant bank is not prevented from levying its charges or interest on debt comprised of those charges so the order of the court has the effect of favouring a powerful and well-resourced institution and does not place any restriction on their continued application of penalties which I say are unlawful.

Further, many banks are now routinely closing the accounts of their customers who commence claims against them. This amounts to a sanction for seeking a ruling from the justice system and as such is a basic denial of citizenship. I will remain at risk of such action despite the fact that my remedy has been placed on an indeterminate hold.

Additionally, the defendant remains at liberty to enter my name on the default register which it and other banks routinely do in respect of unlawful penalties which are unpaid by their customers. The banks have direct and privileged access to this register. They have no need to obtain a County Court judgment before they may enter a default on the register. This default remains on the register for 6 years and causes enormous damage to reputations. Were my name to be entered on the default register I would find it impossible to get credit or a mortgage and I would have to pay higher fees for any credit which I did manage to obtain.

It is submitted that a stay may potentially mean great difficulty for me and yet be insignificant for the defendant bank. In fact a stay is supportive of the banks litigation strategy which is to take the claimant to the door of the court and then to settle the claim.

 

The Status Quo

The stay does not maintain the status quo. As submitted above, a stay favours the bank by preventing the claimant’s pursuit of his legitimate remedy without placing any restriction upon the banks activities which the claimant submits are unlawful and/or retaliatory.

 

Test Case

It is agreed that a case in which the issues were fully argued would be of enormous benefit. However, as has been explained above, the banks so far have settled every one of the 223 example cases and it is clear that it is their abusive litigation strategy which is responsible for the problem of the large number of cases being started against them. Every one of the cases settled so far has presented an opportunity to settle the common issue of contractual penalties. Despite their massive resources and access to high level expertise the defendants have declined to allow the issue to be decided.

My case presents another opportunity for the question to be definitively settled as should the defendants lose, they have the resources to continue the matter through the appeals process and through the court hierarchy.

It is respectfully submitted that the court’s order to stay the claim creates more uncertainty and more difficulty.

It is respectfully submitted that if the predicted test case referred to by the district judge in his order, was actually in the course of a trial at the present moment so that it was more certain that the matter would be tried and that a decision would be likely to be reached, then there would be good grounds for staying all similar actions including my own.

However, it is respectfully submitted that none of this is at all clear and on the evidence of all of the cases conducted so far it is submitted that the predicted test case is most unlikely to be heard at all.

 

The OFT and their powers under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999

The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 gives the power to the Office of Fair Trading to seek injunctions to prevent the use of unfair terms in consumer contracts. More than that, the UTCCR specifically prevents the private citizen from pursuing this remedy on his own behalf.

The OFT conducted a 2 year investigation of the contractual charges regime. They received a great deal of confidential evidence from the banks.

The OFT has already announced that it considers that the contractual penalty charge regimes of these financial institutions are unfair.

It is not at all clear why the OFT has not now proceeded to seek injunctions in the face of the banks’ refusals to comply. This is particularly serious when the Regulations have prevented the citizen from doing so.

However, it is submitted that the issue of a test case and the definitive settling of the banks’ penalty charging system is a matter to be borne by the OFT or some other public body who are tasked and resourced to deal with this matter. It is not a burden to be suffered by the private citizen and in particular by myself in the instant case.

 

In the alternative

If the court decides not to accede to my request to remove the stay I respectfully request that the court issues the following injunctions:

 

That the defendant bank is prevented from applying further penalty charges to my account until the final settlement of the matter.

That the defendant is prevented from applying interest charges to any outstanding amounts which are comprised of penalties until the settlement of the matter

That the defendant is prevented from closing my account

That the defendant is prevented from making any entry on its own systems or from communicating any similar information to any third party about any matter insofar as it relates to penalty charges until the final settlement of the matter.

That the defendant remove any derogatory entry on its own records insofar as it relates to penalty charges. (The Court has the power to do this under the Data Protection Act 199:cool:

That the defendant arranges the removal of entries from the records of any third parties to whom it has previously communicated information insofar as it relates to penalty charges. (The Court has the power to do this under the Data protection Act 1998.)

 

That these injunctions remain in place until the settlement of my claim

That should my claim proceed to a hearing that a decision should be made at the hearing as to whether these injunctions should be made permanent

That if the matter should not proceed to a hearing because the defendant decides to settle outside court, that these injunctions should become permanent.

 

 

Additional orders

If the court does accede to my request for a removal of stay then I respectfully request that the case be allocated to the small claims track but that the defendant be ordered to make standard disclosure.

It is submitted that an order for standard disclosure will assist greatly in bring these and other similar claims to a speedy and just conclusion.

The matter is suitable for the Small Claims Track as it involves no issue of law – the law is well established. It only involves questions of fact – in particular the true costs of the banks default charges system. The OFT has already formed its conclusion about this. Standard disclosure will put the matter beyond doubt. As I rely upon the bank as my fiduciary it is clear that they have a duty to act in utmost good faith in relation to their conduct of their contract with me. I submit that they do not act in good faith in relation to me or their other customers in the matter of penalty charges

bit long winded I know but I think it says it all..........

[jadest]

Great letter with great info... hope it gets results

Jules x

[caro]

If you haven't sent it yet freebird, leave out anything to do with the test case as that is not the reason for your stay. Don't worry if it has gone, as it won't hurt anything.

[freebird]

it's ok...I did leave that bit out...I must have read it 20 times as it's so good and I'm not capable of putting anything like that together myself...............

I just appreciate so much, all the work that the admins, mods, helpers and other posters have done by the way of research and gathering all the legal info together...........

I'd have still pursued my claim but it would have taken me so much longer to even get to this stage......

thanks everyone x

[freebird]

ps.....still no letter, let's hope Saturday is a lucky one !

[freebird]

and waiting !

[freebird]

ok..this time you've got to remember Tamla Motown...come on don't be shy, I know some of you know this song........( Diana Ross)

ready ?

 

I’m just a fool)

Don’t you know I’m Waiting

(I’m just a fool to keep waiting)

Ooh I’m waiting

(I’m just a fool)

For Love

(I’m just a fool)

For you

(Fool, I’m just a fool)

I Miss you

(I’m just a fool to keep waiting)

Ooh I’m Waiting

(I’m just a fool)

Come back boy

(I’m Just a Fool)

Come back come back

(I’m just a fool)

Come back Boy

(I’m just a fool to keep waiting)

Ooh I need ya

(I’m just a fool)

Ooh Ooh and I want you

(I’m just a fool)

That’s what I’m afraid to say

(Fool, I’m just a fool)

A fool

(I’m just a fool to keep waiting)

But I’m still waiting

(I’m just a fool)

For you

(I’m Just a Fool)

Come back boy

see I knew you'd remember............

I'm still bloody waiting !

[freebird]

I'm singing the chorus on me own ere......

 

oh well back to work !

 

here'es the list ( coutesy of Caro thanks x)

 

to save you all hunting it down

 

Lloyds TSB Bank Charge Claims Settled Before Court Hearing

 

6QZ02246

£3,709.00

22/02/2006

6QZ14997

£5,661.81

08/03/2006

6QZ16711

£535.00

14/03/2006

6QZ20434

£3,025.00

29/03/2006

6TF02015

£510.46

30/03/2006

6QZ13940

£2,318.75

03/04/2006

6QZ25163

£1,379.87

19/04/2006

6QZ25892

£4,885.00

03/05/2006

6UB01903

£3,778.00

11/05/2006

6QZ21371

£1,122.50

11/05/2006

6QZ30807

£3,749.62

14/05/2006

6QZ30806

£2,601.83

14/05/2006

6QZ30781

£4,356.34

19/05/2006

6LV21557

£324.34

15/07/2006

6QZ43768

£907.52

08/08/2006

6HG02754

£3,440.48

23/08/2006

6QZ30832

£4,072.99

11/09/2006

6HH01360

£2,524.87

22/09/2006

6QZ36557

£1,916.52

04/10/2006

SA287/06

£671.50

09/10/2006

6QZ35227

£1,639.32

09/10/2006

[jadest]

Hi Freebird, Still no letter?

Well I got one threatening court action if I didn't pay the £200 that I am overdrawn due to there unfiar charges. I have 7 days to pay up... funy thing is I still haven't heard anything even hinting on a negotiation for my money dispite it being well over 6 weeks ago since they ask for a month to settle... It's a joke the whole thing is a complete joke.

Jules x

[kano24]

Freebird, Im with you!

 

Just finished putting together a letter to send to the Court tomorrow (see my thread).:grin:

[sagaloo]

Freebird

I compared your list of claims with your link that you provided to the litigation section and found another 7 claims involving Lloyds. Is there any reason you didn't include them? I have also tried (where possible) to include issue date to see if there was any pattern between issue and settlement.

[mollymoo]

jadest,

 

tell them the letter is at your sorting centre going through your stringent security checks and you should receive it in a week or so.

well if its good enough for them??

[caro]

Freebird

I compared your list of claims with your link that you provided to the litigation section and found another 7 claims involving Lloyds. Is there any reason you didn't include them? I have also tried (where possible) to include issue date to see if there was any pattern between issue and settlement.

 

I haven't got my copy of the list to check, but thought I had them all. Despite most peoples opinion, am not perfect so if there are more, add them on by all means. Were all the cases you mention in Litigation Concluded or did they include some in Litigation in Progress, although I am sure there must be more than 7 In Progress against Lloyds. Maybe a few more have been settled since I put the list together at the weekend, or maybe I missed a few.

[GaryH]

Sorry FB, I was'nt ignoring you, I just have'nt been around much lately - had a few drama's last week (see my thread). Back to business as usual tomorrow though. Hows it going anyway, I take it your all sorted now and you've sent the letter, yes? As ever, stick with it - not long now!!!

[freebird]

I counted 22 claims but I might have mis counted.......

 

Jules fax them with notification that you';ll give them 7 days..too.......to offer you an unconditional settlement.......fax No. 01273 745356.......

 

I'm faxing them again on Friday............I am now presuming that they never sent me " the letter " ! I can't be bothered with their "sorting room" any more..just delays everything....surely a fax should go right in their hands ???????

[freebird]

enough of us on here to forma band ! what d'you want to sing.........do you want me to do lead or backing ?

[rivendale0506]

Hi Freebird - I have just spend 90 mins reading your thread - you are an absolute inspiration - If I had been you I would have been down to Brighton and dragged Mr T's sorry *ss across the desk by now.

 

Just to say I am on the same timeline as you with my brother's claim - have been given a court date of 4 Dec but they didn't ask for a stay with the claim as far as I can make out. To be honest I don't really understand what I am supposed to be doing at the moment!! LOL I got an Order from the Judge the other day (detailed on my thread) and have posted some queries, so just hoping someone can help.

 

Anyway, I am going to continue to watch your thread, keep your chin up - you are doing great!

 

Riv

[caro]

OK freebird you want a song how about this one. I'm sure you know this one.

 

When you walk through a storm hold your head up high

And don't be afraid of the dark.

At the end of a storm is a golden sky

And the sweet silver song of a lark.

Walk on through the wind,

Walk on through the rain,

 

Now all join in!