Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • So I just found a couple abandoned traffic cones locally by some bins.   A bit squished but free!  So have placed them on the land.  Will wait to see if the cones get moved and signs ignored again this week before I consider rocks/ boulders.
    • The DVLA keeps two records of you. One as a driver and one for your car. If they differ you might find out in around a month when they will send you a reminder as well as to your other half for their car. If you receive nothing then you can be fairly sure that you were tailgating though wouldn't explain why they didn't pick up your car on one of drive past their cameras. However even if you do get a PCN later the your situation will not change. The current PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 which is the main law that covers private parking. It doesn't comply for two reasons. 1. Section 9 [2][a] states  (2)The notice must— (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates; The PCN states 47 minutes which are the arrival and departure times not the time you were actually parked. So if you subtract the time you took to drive from the entrance. look for a parking place and park in it perhaps having to manoeuvre a couple of times to fit within the lines and then unload the children followed by reloading the children getting seat belts on etc before driving to the exit stopping for cars, pedestrians on the way you may well find that the actual time you were parked was quite likely to be around ten minutes over the required time.  Motorists are allowed a MINIMUM of ten minutes Grace period [something that the rogues in the parking industry conveniently forget-the word minimum] . So it could be that you did not overstay. 2] Sectio9 [2][f]  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN does not include the words in brackets and in 2a the Act included the word "must". Another fail. What those failures mean is that MET cannot transfer the liability to pay the charge from the driver to the keeper. Only the driver is now liable which is why we recommend our members not to appeal. It is so easy to reveal who was driving by saying "when I parked the car" than "when the driver parked the car".  As long as they don't know who was driving they have little chance of winning in court. This is partly because Courts do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person. And because anyone with a valid motor insurance policy is able to drive your cars. It is a shame that you are too far away to get photos of the car park signage. It is often poor and quite often the parking rogues lose in Court on their poor signage alone. I hope hat you can now relax and not panic about the PCN. You will receive many letters from Met, their unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors threatening you with ever higher amounts of money. The poor dears have never read the Act which states quite clearly that the maximum sum that can be charged is the amount on the signs. The Act has only been in force for 12 years so it may take a  few more years for the penny to drop.  You can safely ignore everything they send you unless or until they send you a Letter of Claim. Just come back to us if they do send one of those love letters to you and we will advise on a snotty letter to send them. In the meantime go on and enjoy your life. Continue reading other threads and if you do get any worrying letters let us know. 
    • Hopefully the ANPR cameras didn't pick up the two vehicles, but I don't think you're out of the woods just yet. MET's "work" consists of sending out hundreds of these invoices every week so yours might be a few days behind your partner's. There is also the matter of Royal Mail.  I once sold two second-hand books to someone on eBay.  Weirdly the cost of sending them separately was less than the cost of sending them in one parcel.  So to save a few bob I sent them seperately.  One turned up the next day.  One arrived after four days.  They were  sent from the same post office at the same time! But let's hope I'm being too pessimistic. Please update us of any developments.
    • New version after LFI's superb analysis of the contract. Sorry, but you need to redo the numbering of the paras and of the exhibits in the right order after all the damage I've caused! Defendant's WS - version 4.pdf
    • Hi  no nothing yet. Hope it stays that way 😬
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Glenn Vs Abbey


Glenn UK
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5543 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

Please

Start your own new thread

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

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 411
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Current account interest rates and charges from Alliance &amp Leicester

 

Interest payable on Current Account overdrawn balances

 

Per MonthPer AnnumEffective Annual RateAuthorised and Unauthorised overdrafts 1.33% 15.87% 17.08%

 

Previous interest rates on overdrawn balances from 2 December 2002 to 13 January 2005

Per MonthPer Annum Effective Annual RateAuthorised and Unauthorised overdrafts 1.25%15.00%16.08%

 

 

 

Current account interest rates and charges from Alliance &amp Leicester

 

Premier Current Account interest rates & fees

Interest or fees you pay us

 

Per month

(variable)Per annum

(variable)Effective Annual Rate

(variable)Authorised overdrafts for the first 12 months from account opening, up to £2,500 0%0%0.0%Authorised overdrafts

0.64%7.63%7.9%Unauthorised overdrafts 0.64%7.63%7.9%

 

hope this helps link to home page Current Accounts at Alliance & Leicester plc select account type fees listed under the account

MY CASE

 

Newbody Vs Abbey

 

NB: Please read the FAQs & step-by-step instructions thoroughly & completely before commencing any action

 

the following is a link to a web archive of abbey websites over the time click on month under year to access Abbey's site for that time period to get what the terms and conditions were for when you opened your account Internet Archive Wayback Machine hope it helps or here for where i have started to pull them out to http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/abbey-bank/91707-archives-abbeys-web-pages.html

 

Advice & opinions given by me are my views or how i would respond, and are not endorsed by the Consumer Action Group & are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions & actions are your own - if in any doubt, seek the opinion of a qualified professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Glenn,

 

Abbey settled on the morning of the hearing, still went to the hearing but just formality. Thanks again for your help much appreciated, Hope yours gets resolved completly soon and if I can help in any way just shout. Will be keeping an eye on your thread anyway. Good luck and best wishes.

 

Regards bish.

Abbey : £8070.41*PAID IN FULL*14/02/07:D

Capital one : LBA sent 17/09/06 £1,087.22

Marbles : LBA sent 17/09/06 £720.00 ; £720 offer accepted:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bish

 

I hope you got what you wanted

 

Glenn

  • Haha 1

Kick the shAbbey Habit

 

Where were you? Next time please

 

 

Abbey 1st claim -Charges repaid, default removed, interest paid (8% apr) costs paid, Abbey peed off; priceless

Abbey 2nd claim, two Accs - claim issued 30-03-07

Barclaycard - Settled cheque received

Egg 2 accounts ID sent 29/07

Co-op Claim issued 30-03-07

GE Capital (Store Cards) ICO says theyve been naughty

MBNA - Settled in Full

GE Capital (1st National) Settled

Lombard Bank - SAR sent 16.02.07

MBNA are not your friends, they will settle but you need to make sure its on your terms -read here

Glenn Vs MBNA

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Glenn

 

Yes got the full charges plus interest and 8% and costs, so well happy.Can pay a lot of outstanding debts and arrears that mounted up due to these bank charges. Most of my charges occured in the last three years, due to my wife falling ill and having to stop work. Takes alot of pressure off. Again I hope yours gets resolved soon.

 

Regards bish:)

Abbey : £8070.41*PAID IN FULL*14/02/07:D

Capital one : LBA sent 17/09/06 £1,087.22

Marbles : LBA sent 17/09/06 £720.00 ; £720 offer accepted:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Glenn

 

Just posted on here kimmy v abbey NO ****2**** see what you think, it rang a bell with your allocation hearing and mine. I was expecting a barrister like you had, but they settled, and kept wondering why. The only reason is the interest and the defaults, got the mind going, have a look and see what you think.

 

Regards bish.:D

Abbey : £8070.41*PAID IN FULL*14/02/07:D

Capital one : LBA sent 17/09/06 £1,087.22

Marbles : LBA sent 17/09/06 £720.00 ; £720 offer accepted:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

RIght i received the order from the court today, basically it confrims the settlement of the charges and lists the removal of the default in the fast track and orders standard disclosure by list.

 

So i need to get my list drawn up to send to Abbey for their information.

 

THe brief on the day was quite keen that standard disclosure shold only apply to this portion of the claim.

 

However, what he either didnt know or forgot was that in my POC I related the default directly to the unlawful charges :D

 

Seems to me that irrespective of the charges being settled that standard disclosure is still on the cards here.

 

I wonder if it will actually get into court ?

 

Glenn

Kick the shAbbey Habit

 

Where were you? Next time please

 

 

Abbey 1st claim -Charges repaid, default removed, interest paid (8% apr) costs paid, Abbey peed off; priceless

Abbey 2nd claim, two Accs - claim issued 30-03-07

Barclaycard - Settled cheque received

Egg 2 accounts ID sent 29/07

Co-op Claim issued 30-03-07

GE Capital (Store Cards) ICO says theyve been naughty

MBNA - Settled in Full

GE Capital (1st National) Settled

Lombard Bank - SAR sent 16.02.07

MBNA are not your friends, they will settle but you need to make sure its on your terms -read here

Glenn Vs MBNA

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if it will actually get into court ?

 

 

Mmmm .... :rolleyes: Watching with interest Gary! :D

links to my current claims ...

My claim - Yorkshire Bank Visa

chezt V RBS Mastercard

Chezt v RBS Joint Account

chezt v Abbey Credit Card

 

Settled ...

chezt V Duet Card/Creation Finance

chezt v's Studio Cards

chezt v's Littlewoods Catalogue

 

Next ...

Abbey Joint a/c & Single a/c

Barclaycard (Mine & Hubby's)

Anyone else I can think of ...! :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Glenn

 

This was the bit I was unsure of, like you I am not a barrister or have to much knowledge of the law. If they have to enter court to defend the charges then they will not enter court to defend the interest. Bugger they have settled my claim. But that will not stop me encouraging others to go for contrctual interest. Well done mate, good job. I was sure he was trying to seperate the charges from the interest in your case.

 

Regards bish.

Abbey : £8070.41*PAID IN FULL*14/02/07:D

Capital one : LBA sent 17/09/06 £1,087.22

Marbles : LBA sent 17/09/06 £720.00 ; £720 offer accepted:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Glenn

 

Do you think they will go into court, they can't disclose so how will they get into court to defend the interest and defaults. You have put a lot of time and effort into this and I realy hope that it pays of for you, you deserve it.

 

Regards bish.

Abbey : £8070.41*PAID IN FULL*14/02/07:D

Capital one : LBA sent 17/09/06 £1,087.22

Marbles : LBA sent 17/09/06 £720.00 ; £720 offer accepted:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bish

 

I have always maintained that there are certain issues that the banks would be keen to retain.

 

The charges funnily enough are not one of them, depending on what the oft says will depend to a large extent what happens long term in respect of these claims IMHO.

 

However, claims for contractual interest on top of the money they have taken and defaults were always issues that i thought would make a difference to the banks.

 

Interest because of the possible implications and defaults because its their ultimate weapon.

 

I know they can take you to court and get money back if you have it, but without the default system they cannot stop you moving to the bank next door and doing it all again. Of course every bank is also the bank next door so its in their interests ti fight hard for this matter.

 

SO i think they may well try to fight disclosure of charges details, their barrister was quite keen to ask if this was in relation to the whole claim or just the default removal. However, as i have previously posted, the PoC specifically relates the default to the unlawful charges.

 

Glenn

Kick the shAbbey Habit

 

Where were you? Next time please

 

 

Abbey 1st claim -Charges repaid, default removed, interest paid (8% apr) costs paid, Abbey peed off; priceless

Abbey 2nd claim, two Accs - claim issued 30-03-07

Barclaycard - Settled cheque received

Egg 2 accounts ID sent 29/07

Co-op Claim issued 30-03-07

GE Capital (Store Cards) ICO says theyve been naughty

MBNA - Settled in Full

GE Capital (1st National) Settled

Lombard Bank - SAR sent 16.02.07

MBNA are not your friends, they will settle but you need to make sure its on your terms -read here

Glenn Vs MBNA

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Glenn

 

I think you are correct in what you say, but the angle I am coming from is that if you apply contractual interest to your claim, and avoid the pitfall that you encountered then they must pay you the contractual interest, they have no choice other than to enter court and defend the charges, which they will not. I am thinking of other claimants and possibly getting them to actualy defend a case. My charges were £6600, if I had had the bottle like you to apply contractual interest, then the interest alone would have taken the claim to well over £10k. Can they afford to start paying claims with contractual interest, as they can not enter court to defend the charges, they have to settle.

 

I still have one claim against a credit card, and am going to go for contractual interest, what I am trying to do is encourage others to follow your lead, If nothing else it will cause them pain and money, which hurts them.

 

Regards bish:D

 

PS It may not have been the default he was worried about.

Abbey : £8070.41*PAID IN FULL*14/02/07:D

Capital one : LBA sent 17/09/06 £1,087.22

Marbles : LBA sent 17/09/06 £720.00 ; £720 offer accepted:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bish

 

I agree with your thoughts entirely and if only i had said 'im happy to discuss the case on a WOP basis only' then i would still have a chance of getting CI on this claim.

 

Glenn

Kick the shAbbey Habit

 

Where were you? Next time please

 

 

Abbey 1st claim -Charges repaid, default removed, interest paid (8% apr) costs paid, Abbey peed off; priceless

Abbey 2nd claim, two Accs - claim issued 30-03-07

Barclaycard - Settled cheque received

Egg 2 accounts ID sent 29/07

Co-op Claim issued 30-03-07

GE Capital (Store Cards) ICO says theyve been naughty

MBNA - Settled in Full

GE Capital (1st National) Settled

Lombard Bank - SAR sent 16.02.07

MBNA are not your friends, they will settle but you need to make sure its on your terms -read here

Glenn Vs MBNA

Link to post
Share on other sites

Glenn,

 

Do you think that as Banks seem to be offering to settle at charges plus 8%, which is often claimed in the second or third alternative, that it is better to not even claim this and just use the unauthorised or the authorised rate? This would not give them the option to offer this. Yes it would mean risking the possibility of not getting any interest at all if it went to court, but wouldn't it be a risk worth taking?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Glenn

Do you think they will go into court, they can't disclose so how will they get into court to defend the interest and defaults. You have put a lot of time and effort into this and I realy hope that it pays of for you, you deserve it.

 

Regards bish.

 

My thoughts exactly, Glenn!!!!! Keep at 'em!!!!!

Phil:)

This is only my personal, honest opinion!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tanz

 

It makes no difference imho, unless you only claim one rate and dont leave the courts any room to use a lower rate.

 

just be cause you claim it doesnt mean the defendant has to use your figures.they are using the 8% because they know thats the max a cout would generally award.

 

Glenn

Kick the shAbbey Habit

 

Where were you? Next time please

 

 

Abbey 1st claim -Charges repaid, default removed, interest paid (8% apr) costs paid, Abbey peed off; priceless

Abbey 2nd claim, two Accs - claim issued 30-03-07

Barclaycard - Settled cheque received

Egg 2 accounts ID sent 29/07

Co-op Claim issued 30-03-07

GE Capital (Store Cards) ICO says theyve been naughty

MBNA - Settled in Full

GE Capital (1st National) Settled

Lombard Bank - SAR sent 16.02.07

MBNA are not your friends, they will settle but you need to make sure its on your terms -read here

Glenn Vs MBNA

Link to post
Share on other sites

Glenn,

If you need case law to claim back contractual interest on top of what you have paid out then it isn't coming across in your posts.
Don't you worry about my claim - as you say, I've got a sound legal basis for it. I'm just dying to see what Case Law you've found for yours. Good luck with it.

 

Regards, Mad Nick

Abbey £8370 settled 17 Apr 07

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, but some of them aren't Glenn. I have seen a defence which stated that they had paid the 8% as requested by the Claimant and now considered the claim fully settled.

 

The trouble is Sarah unless we can see the whole claim laid out then its difficult to know what to say.

 

Personally I cant see that what we put in our claim can seriouelsy influnce the banks views if they choose to offer 8% since its the statutory rate and unless the claimant wins their argument in court of contractual interest then thats what a court would award.

 

The real issue is whether the claimant decides to accept that offer or not, and to be certain of the hows and whys of rejecting that offer, or indeed accepting it but not being constrained by that decision.

 

JMHO

 

Glenn

Kick the shAbbey Habit

 

Where were you? Next time please

 

 

Abbey 1st claim -Charges repaid, default removed, interest paid (8% apr) costs paid, Abbey peed off; priceless

Abbey 2nd claim, two Accs - claim issued 30-03-07

Barclaycard - Settled cheque received

Egg 2 accounts ID sent 29/07

Co-op Claim issued 30-03-07

GE Capital (Store Cards) ICO says theyve been naughty

MBNA - Settled in Full

GE Capital (1st National) Settled

Lombard Bank - SAR sent 16.02.07

MBNA are not your friends, they will settle but you need to make sure its on your terms -read here

Glenn Vs MBNA

Link to post
Share on other sites

Glenn, Don't you worry about my claim - as you say, I've got a sound legal basis for it. I'm just dying to see what Case Law you've found for yours. Good luck with it.

 

Regards, Mad Nick

 

Nick

 

I didn't need any case law to claim back the interest id paid, this is contractual interest but not the one i was bothered about.

 

The contractual interest i was bothered about was the money i wanted to charges them on top of all that, I didn't have any case law specifically about that and you know the score with respect to the unjust enrichment/disgorgement scenario.

 

Finally its irrelevant for this claim since the monetary side of things has been settled.

 

Glenn

Kick the shAbbey Habit

 

Where were you? Next time please

 

 

Abbey 1st claim -Charges repaid, default removed, interest paid (8% apr) costs paid, Abbey peed off; priceless

Abbey 2nd claim, two Accs - claim issued 30-03-07

Barclaycard - Settled cheque received

Egg 2 accounts ID sent 29/07

Co-op Claim issued 30-03-07

GE Capital (Store Cards) ICO says theyve been naughty

MBNA - Settled in Full

GE Capital (1st National) Settled

Lombard Bank - SAR sent 16.02.07

MBNA are not your friends, they will settle but you need to make sure its on your terms -read here

Glenn Vs MBNA

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...