I think 1st credit have got me!!!

[bluetack]

Oh dear, 1st credit have applied for a summary judgement, looks like I'm back in court again in march. They have provided statements in response to my SAR from 2001-2005 when the account was closed.

The bank charges amount to approx £1,500.

Does anyone know if I can counter claim at the hearing by putting in a defence for the charges or would I have to take them to court again after the summary judgement has been granted?

God, don't these things get complicated!!!

[rory32]

They have provided statements in response to my Subject Access Request from 2001-2005 when the account was closed.

The bank charges amount to approx £1,500.

i thought they had to supply statements for the whole of the accounts history. Has that changed?

 

Does anyone know if I can counter claim at the hearing by putting in a defence for the charges or would I have to take them to court again after the summary judgement has been granted?

You can certainly counterclaim for the charges on the account. At the moment the judge should just stay the claim.

[bluetack]

1st credit had to either provide 'all' the statements or proof of how the debt accumilated.

Their proof was that the account was in credit in 2001, the overdraft facility being used after this date, therefore the statements provided were enough proof of how the debt accumilated.

[bluetack]

Superb news Bluetack....i'm surprised you didn't photoshop some statements with 1st Credit's name on them !!

I was tempted 42man!

[bluetack]

Nice one Bluetack. I think you should report them for this.

What could I report them for mozza?

[blipvert]

What could I report them for mozza?

 

Harassing you for a 'debt' that doesn't exist.

[bluetack]

Harassing you for a 'debt' that doesn't exist.

I hadn't thought of that!

I'm worried though that when they go for summary judgement the court will say the bank could transfer the debt to their collections dept. and close the account with a zero balance.

[babybear39]

Subscribing...

[havinastella]

Rather than counterclaim, which will cost you, you may want to rely on the 'right to set off'

 

This info was from Nicklea.........

 

This is just a very small point but it will save you a bit of money upfront on court fees.

 

If you make a counter claim you also have to pay a court fee.

 

However, if you say that, as part of your defence, you have the right of equitable set-off of these charges against the amount claimed then you are counter-claiming the charges but you don't need to pay the fee

 

 

If anybody is interested here is a bot about the different types of set-off:-

 

The 1958 Court of Appeal decision in the case of Hanak -v- Green is regarded as one of the key decisions defining the modern law of set-off. It may now be said there are four forms in which a set-off can arise: 1) Mutual liquidated debts (sometimes called legal set-off). A cross claim can be set-off as a defence if the amount of the debt is known or can be readily and without difficulty ascertained. 2) Equitable set-off (sometimes called transaction set-off). The test as to whether a cross claim can be relied upon as an equitable set-off is whether it is so closely connected with the claim that it would be manifestly unjust to allow the claim without taking into account the cross claim. 3) Contractual set-off. The contract may dictate certain procedures that must be observed to preserve the right to apply a set-off 4) Statutory set-off. For example, under rule 4.90 of the Insolvency Rules 1986 an employer can set-off any claims it can prove against monies owing to an insolvent contractor.

 

 

JOgs

[bluetack]

Havinastella,

Fantastic advice, I will use this in my defence (have clicked scales)!!!

When calculating the charges do I add interest for use in the defence?

Would I still have to follow the normal route of writing to 1st credit asking for the charges to be refunded before the hearing in march?

Sorry to ask, but I have denied owing the money because of zero balance, how can I then say I want the charges back?

You've been a really great help thanks.

[bluetack]

The Excel spreadsheet doesn't work on my computer, it won't add up the amounts or do the 8%APR.

The charges amount to £1442.00 but I need to add the 8%.

Does anyone know how to do this manually please??

[havinastella]

Havinastella,

Fantastic advice, I will use this in my defence (have clicked scales)!!!

When calculating the charges do I add interest for use in the defence?Yes

Would I still have to follow the normal route of writing to 1st credit asking for the charges to be refunded before the hearing in march?NO

Sorry to ask, but I have denied owing the money because of zero balance, how can I then say I want the charges back?It's irrelevant

You've been a really great help thanks.

 

Did you use the simple sheet from here

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/145027-interest-tutorial.html

 

If you can't get it to open, PM me with your charges, dates and amounts and I'll work them out for you.

 

Jogs

[havinastella]

hope this helps

 

 

 

Jogs

[bluetack]

Wow, thanks very much for doing this, it works out to almost as much as they're chasing me for! If they had provided six years statements it would have been more. If I win this case:) it will be because of you.

[bluetack]

Well folks, today I went to court with first credit and in the end they won, they were claiming an original debt on a lloyds tsb overdraft of approx. £2,800.

I used the right to offset the claim with approx. £2,100 in unfair bank charges including interest.

The judge's ruling was that I would never be able to claim all of the bank charges back so he halved my claim, allowing only £1,100.

Meanwhile, first credit had added over £1,000 to their debt in interest charges which the stupid judge allowed.

So, as you can see by the figures, I still owe them nearly £3,000 which I have to pay within ten days.

I still have to make a claim through the courts for the bank charges though but the judge told me to wait until a ruling has been made.

First credit said I would still be liable to pay the whole debt eventually because by the time a ruling on bank charges had been made most of the charges I am claiming for would be statute barred.

I've had a hollow victory today and can't pay the £3,000 in ten days, the judge advised me to go bankrupt!!

Gosh, that'll help a lot won't it folks!

[babybear39]

So sorry to hear your news...Did you have a horrible judge?

[42man]

Sorry to hear this.....I would urge you to report them to the OFT...!!

[bluetack]

Yes babybear, the judge obviously thought the whole bank charges thing was a joke.

42man, I think I'm going to get a bank charges claim in very soon, surely if i get it in now 1st credit can't then say that they are statute barred.

[the_shadow]

Yes babybear, the judge obviously thought the whole bank charges thing was a joke.

42man, I think I'm going to get a bank charges claim in very soon, surely if i get it in now 1st credit can't then say that they are statute barred.

 

As i understand it once the claim is in the charges are frozen in time, they cant become statute barred.

 

Sorry to hear about the judgement

[mr.ton]

Well folks, today I went to court with first credit and in the end they won, they were claiming an original debt on a lloyds tsb overdraft of approx. £2,800.

I used the right to offset the claim with approx. £2,100 in unfair bank charges including interest.

The judge's ruling was that I would never be able to claim all of the bank charges back so he halved my claim, allowing only £1,100.

Meanwhile, first credit had added over £1,000 to their debt in interest charges which the stupid judge allowed.

So, as you can see by the figures, I still owe them nearly £3,000 which I have to pay within ten days.

I still have to make a claim through the courts for the bank charges though but the judge told me to wait until a ruling has been made.

First credit said I would still be liable to pay the whole debt eventually because by the time a ruling on bank charges had been made most of the charges I am claiming for would be statute barred.

I've had a hollow victory today and can't pay the £3,000 in ten days, the judge advised me to go bankrupt!!

Gosh, that'll help a lot won't it folks!

 

In my many years of being through the county court system....the judge makes the ruling, you go into a seperate room with some officials, sit round a table & go through all your essential outgoings before an amount is decided upon to repay each month - did that not happen here? - doesnt sound like it did?????

Was this judge a senile old fool by any chance?

No matter how much you are left owing, it can only be repaid at an amount agreed by yourself & the officials and that you are happy with etc...

If thats £1 per month for example, then thats what it will be.

[MARTIN3030]

No way can they say they will be Stat Barred-in any event you could use the limitation act and state that you only became aware in 2006 so it would run from there - to 2012

 

How can a Judge also presume that you would only recover 50% ?

The mind boggles.