BARCLAYCARD Round 2 ***WON***

[skintboy69]

Ha! These judges are a law unto themselves. :rolleyes:

 

I've had a bit of a re-think on this one. My bundle is, if you'll pardon the expression, pretty much together. I'm going to try to meet the Wednesday deadline. It might 'wrongfoot' the opposition.

 

More questions though:

 

The Directions say witness evidence must be exchanged by 23rd May. Now, I assume that means my witness statement (please confirm that I'm right on that one) so that means my witness statement doesn't accompany my court bundle?????

 

With reference to my claim for interest in restitution, I was going to add details of 'Sempra' to the bundle. Should I send the whole thing (which ammounts to about 95 pages)?? You know what they say - if you can't convince 'em, confuse 'em.:lol:

 

Apart from that and the things listed in the template, is there anything else I need to include?

 

Cheers, T.

Edited May 10, 2009 by skintboy69

[slick132]

Hi Skinty,

 

Can you post here the other relevant Directions made by the court apart from points 2 and 4 which you posted above.

 

I think I'll ask Steven4064 to comment about the Sempra evidence.

[steven4064]

You could put the whole Sempra judgement in but I found a good summary on the web somewhere - I'll see if I can find it. You sgould certainly put in some of the main points though - I think there is a good summary of some of the main arguments a couple of pages from the end - I think this is it Sempra Metals Limited (formerly Metallgesellschaft Limited) (Respondents) v. Her Majesty's Commissioners of Inland Revenue and another (Appellants), House of Lords [2007] UKHL 34 (paras 112-113). Lord Nichols of Birkenhead in said

 

“If the House takes this opportunity I venture to repeat there can only be one answer on this important question of law. Nobody has suggested a good reason why, in a case like the present, an award of compound interest should be denied to a claimant. An award of compound interest is necessary to achieve full restitution and, hence, a just result. I would hold that, in the exercise of its common law restitutionary jurisdiction, the court has power to make such an award. I agree with the thrust of Mummery LJ's observations on this point in NEC Semi-Conductors Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners [2006] STC 606, 642-643, paras 172-175. To that extent I would depart from the decision on the Westdeutsche appeal.

 

“If this approach is adopted the unfortunate decision in the London, Chatham and Dover Railway case will be effectually buried in relation to the payment of interest for non-payment of a debt and in relation to the payment of interest for having the use of money in personal restitution cases. The law will achieve a principled measure of consistency between contractual obligations and restitutionary obligations. The common law in Australia has developed in this way. The common law in England should do likewise.”

[skintboy69]

OK Slick. Here we go:

 

1) This claim is allocated to the Small Claims Track and parties are refered to Part 27 of the Civil Procedures Rules and the Practice Direction of that Part for guidence on how the hearing of the claim will be conducted.

 

3) The original documents must be brought to the hearing.

 

5) The judge may refuse to consider a document or take it into account if a copy of it has not been sent to all parties as required by this Order.

 

6) The parties shall exchange witness evidence including their own evidence by 4.00 pm on Wednesday 27th May 2009.

 

7) List for a preliminary hearing before DJ ***** on the first available date after 5th June with an estimated length of hearing of 30 minutes.

 

8. Because this Order has been made by the court without considering representations fro the parties, the parties have the right to apply to have the order set aside, varied or stayed. A party wishing to make an application must send or deliver the application to the court (together with any appropriate fee) to arrive within 7 days of service of this order.

 

That's the lot. The order was made 8th April and posted out 6th May.

 

 

Cheers, T.

Edited May 10, 2009 by slick132
8 followed by ) always shows as a Cool Smiley. It's a brackety thing !!

[skintboy69]

The smiley on the previous post should be 8) For some reason I can't edit it out.

 

Spooky or what??

 

I'll try again. the smiley in the previous post should be a number eight. For some reason I can't edit either out.

 

The site seemqa a bit twichy tonight. Or else my computer is about to self destruct!!.

 

T.

Edited May 10, 2009 by skintboy69

[skintboy69]

Thanks for that Steven. I think I'll hedge my bets on this. I'll send the full judgement but attach your summary as a quick reference point.

 

I really appreciate the rapid response.

 

Cheers, T.

[slick132]

Use a number followed by a stop to avoid the problem. If you use the bracket after an 8, it shows as 8) !!

 

My take re the Directions is you have to File and Serve your court bundles by 13th May and F & S your Witness Statement by 27th May.

[skintboy69]

Hi Slick.

 

Yes, that was my opinion too. If the big printer in work doesn't run out of ink I should be able to get the bundles in the post on Tuesday.

 

I'll send them RMSD so they will definitely be delivered (and signed for) on Wednesday. I wonder if BC will do as well??

 

Thanks again Slick, and you too Steven. I wouldn't get through this stuff without your help.

 

Cheers, T.

[slick132]

I'll send them RMSD so they will definitely be delivered (and signed for) on Wednesday. I wonder if BC will do as well??

I'll bet you a pizza that they don't.

[skintboy69]

Double Peperonni??

[the_shadow]

In Barclays case its got to be "Spicy Chicken" flavour:D:D

 

Can someone point me to the template detailing bundles please

 

S.

[skintboy69]

Hi Shadow. This is a bit convoluted, but I can't do links.

 

If you go to post 67 on this thread and click on either of Slick's links, it will take you to the template library. The court bundle is there as a zip file.

 

Best of luck.

 

T.

[the_shadow]

Hi Shadow. This is a bit convoluted, but I can't do links.

 

If you go to post 67 on this thread and click on either of Slick's links, it will take you to the template library. The court bundle is there as a zip file.

 

Best of luck.

 

T.

 

Cheers... prob a daft question but difference between basic and advanced? I think I used basic in my HSBC current account case.

 

S.

[skintboy69]

Hi Shadow. If you open them and see what's involved it's fairly obvious.

 

I think (but I don't know ) that the advanced bundle is more suited to bank account claims rather than credit card. I looked into the advanced one and was glad to get out alive .

 

I'm using the basic bundle for my efforts against B.C. so watch this space.

 

Cheers, T. 8)

[skintboy69]

I could do with a quick answer on this one.

 

The bundles are pretty well finished. I really just have to number the pages and stick them in files......BUT......in the correspondence section, should I also include copies of the various court papers and BC's defence?? Both the court and BC already have them.

 

Cheers, T.

[slick132]

No, you don't need to include items which the court and bank should have already.

[skintboy69]

Thanks Slick. I can get the pages numbered and into the files for posting tomorrow.

 

What do I do when Barclaycard's bundle doesn't arrive on my doorstep on Wednesday?

 

Cheers. T.

[skintboy69]

Here's one last 'brain dead' question.

 

I suppose I send BC's copy to:

 

Barclays Legal & Compliance

Grcb Legal-Litigation

Level 29

One Churchill Place

London

E14 5HP

 

Can anyone confirm??

 

Cheers, T.

[slick132]

Yep,

 

Address the bundle to them as above, but you can take it to your local branch for onward transmission if you want to save on postage.

 

Take them a letter to sign as a receipt for the package though.

 

If you want to do it properly, send the bundle to Churchill Place by RM Spcl Del'y.

 

Re earlier Q, here's the court bundle link - http://www.consumerforums.com/resources/templates-library/48-bank-templates/119-basic-court-bundle.html

[slick132]

What do I do when Barclaycard's bundle doesn't arrive on my doorstep on Wednesday?

I'd suggest you do NOTHING, for now.

 

Bear in mind that BC tend to act at, or even past, deadlines. But wait and see what happens just now.

[the_shadow]

 

Re earlier Q, here's the court bundle link - http://www.consumerforums.com/resources/templates-library/48-bank-templates/119-basic-court-bundle.html

 

Thanks Slick, found it.

 

S.

[skintboy69]

Bombs Away. :lol:

[skintboy69]

I received a letter from BC yesterday, delivered by RMSD.

 

To cut a long story short, it was an offer to settle. The amount was nowhere near my claim and, as usual, said they did not accept my (our) interpretation of the law and were offering a gesture of goodwill to save both parties additional expense.

 

They offer interest at 8% apr and say I have no chance of CCI as the principal has already been 'discussed by the courts'.

 

They cite the case of Halliday v HBoS (2007) in which the court rejected the claim at 28.8%. However, this was a Bank Charge case and had nothing to do with credit cards where the case is completely different.

 

It was interesting to note that the letter was marked 'Without Prejudice' but also says that if I reject the offer they will disclose it in court on the subject of costs.

 

I do hope that isn't a threat.

 

I will consider my position for a couple of days and then send my considered response.

 

Keep the faith.

 

T.

[slick132]

Hi Skint,

 

I'd suggest you reject their offer outright, saying the case they refer to has no relevance to your own claim. Tell them, in the circumstances you are happy for the matter to be resolved by the court in due course.

 

You should be aware that if, for any reason, the court disagrees with your claim and feels BC's offer IS fair, you could end up saddled with BC's costs.

[skintboy69]

Hi Slick.

 

In the words of the song, 'whatever happens is whatever happens'.

 

I'm not sure how that works though. I have always thought that costs aren't recoverable in small claims.

 

I believe that I can only recover court fees - not costs. Surely the same would apply to them?

 

Cheers, T.