Glenn Vs Abbey

[bish]

Hi Glenn

 

I do not think people are getting the point, If the bank will not enter court then there is no argument over interest. If Abbey do not wish to enter the court to defend the penalty charges then they have to pay the interest, Whatever the rate may be. If you apply 8% or contractual interest at 28.7% is not the point, the point is the penalty charges. They can not enter court to defend the penalty charges so they can not dispute the interest applied to those charges. THEY HAVE TO SETTLE THE WHOLE CLAIM. They can not pick and choose what they will or will not settle unless they enter the court of law. If they settle out of court then no judge has any influence over the outcome. The only time it becomes an issue is when, as in Glenns case they seprate the charges from the interest. I am about to scream, can anyone better educated than me argue otherwise. I think you can add interest at any rate, and unless the defendant can defend the initial claim of PENALTY CHARGES in court then they will have to pay.

 

Regards bish.

[Mad Nick]

Bish,

If Abbey do not wish to enter the court to defend the penalty charges then they have to pay the interest, Whatever the rate may be.

That says it all (unfortunately). And I shall keep my other thoughts about it to myself. Regards, Mad Nick

[Glenn UK]

Bish

 

i do agree with your sentiments and thats why its critical to try to keep the claim 'intact'.

 

With regards to them not being able to settle portions of the claim, i agree in principle, however in practice, if claimants are not careful they will leave themselves in the position of having to enter court to argue about interest alone.

 

If they do this then the court will not need to hear evidence as to the unlawfulness of the charges but only the arguments about why the claimant should pay a specific rate of interest.

 

Personally I doubt that you will get much sympathy from the courts if they offer to pay interest, that doesn't mean its impossible, it only means you have to be very sure of your grounds for going forward on that basis.

 

This of course changes if you claim unjust enrichment/disgorgement or use a similar approach since then the cornerstone of the payments is the unlawfulness of the charges.

 

The problem i have with Nicks posts is that I am unclear about what he is claiming and as much as he may think I'm being an awkward bugger, it isn't clear to me what he is trying to do?

 

My overriding impression is that he is claiming interest he has paid rather than interest on top of everything else but he hasn't clarified that as far as I'm aware. If he cares to clarify that then it would help me at least understand?

 

Glenn

[TANZARELLI]

Hi Glenn,

 

I am just of to post a Barclays prelim for my second claim and am going for 27.5% contractual. How can we as claimants ensure our claim stays intact? Say for example with my claim, the charges total approx 1k but interest as of todays date is £12,600 ish. It is 1996-1999 also so this is why it is so much. If they say said we will pay the charges and paid it into my account how do I then stop them from stating it has been settled even if I have claimed cci from the outset. One way I have been pondering over is to in advance close my Barclays account so they could not pay the money in, this way they would have to send me a cheque, which as I did with my clapital one claim, I could send back and state I am not preparred to accept a monetary payment until they settle in full including the interest. I don't use this account anymore so could afford to do this.

 

Any thoughts?

[Glenn UK]

Tanz

 

There are now some letters in the template library i believe which allow you to 'accept' the offer in such a way that you will in effect reject it because the bank wont acknowledge that the payment is a partial payment against the full balance.

 

HTH

 

Glenn

[TANZARELLI]

Thanks Glenn,

 

Have seen them.

 

Tanz.

[pmahonc]

Hi Glenn

Been following your thread for a while now congrats on winning and on your new arrival.

 

just wondering if it might pay to try getting the defence struck out as a first step, been looking at penaltycharges site and see that they have a template for applying this along with stating a case to back it up, i believe it costs £65 payable to the court to do this. also as a second step perhaps going for multitrack instead of fasttrack from the start as they would have to disclose then. Might scare them a bit knowing they have to go to high court straight away to be able to argue the contractual interest.

or am i being nieve.

 

regards pmahonc

 

PS Karnevil have you received any pm's from me about my court case for the litigation section.

[Glenn UK]

Hi Glenn

Been following your thread for a while now congrats on winning and on your new arrival.

 

just wondering if it might pay to try getting the defence struck out as a first step, been looking at penaltycharges site and see that they have a template for applying this along with stating a case to back it up, i believe it costs £65 payable to the court to do this. You should consider what effect this would have on the claim. Even if you get the defence struck out its likley they will applt for a set aside onthe judgement, get it, submit a revised defence so its debateable whether long term it does you any good. Of course i could be wrong on this. also as a second step perhaps going for multitrack instead of fasttrack from the start as they would have to disclose then. Might scare them a bit knowing they have to go to high court straight away to be able to argue the contractual interest.

or am i being nieve.Naive? Maybe, i guess it depends on how deep your pockets are and whether you have anything of value to loose should the courts find for the banks.

I believe stanbdard disclousre is a feature of the fast track anyway so im not sure there is anyhitng to gain and lots potentially to loose.

 

regards pmahonc

 

PS Karnevil have you received any pm's from me about my court case for the litigation section.

 

JMHO

 

Glenn

[TANZARELLI]

Hi Glenn,

 

Was wondering if you would subscribe to my Barclays claim part 2 as will prob need some advice and encouragement along the way beings as its pre 6 years with contractual to boot.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/barclays-bank/44145-tanzarelli-barclays-1st-one.html

 

Tanz

[Glenn UK]

stage two begins

 

 

Request for repayment of charges

Dear Ms Kirkman,

ACCOUNT NUMBER: xxxxxxxxx

As you will know the current claim (Claim No 6SS 03187, Southend County Court) only represents a portion of the unlawful charges levied on this account.

Unfortunately Abbey National were unable to supply all of the data I requested under the Data Protection Act, hence the partial claim submitted. If they had complied with the Subject Access Request then this would have naturally been a single claim and would have been submitted as such.

I now have almost all of the data, although I am still pursuing Abbey National for the remainder, but I have sufficient information to pursue those charges and raised this issue with your Barrister at the Allocation Hearing on the 7th February.

It seemed sensible for me to approach you with respect to attempting to settle the whole claim rather than increase both our costs and waste the courts time with a further claim.

However, I understand from your Barrister that he had instructions not to enter into discussion to settle the whole claim but to instruct me to submit a further claim.

On this basis it seems to me that I should submit a further claim in court in 7 days time unless you wish to enter into sincere dialogue to settle the claim.

If I do not hear from you in a positive fashion within 7 days I will presume you wish me to submit a further claim and have no objection, or know of no reason why I should not proceed straight to court since this is a continuation of the original claim?

My request

I am writing to ask you to refund to me the charges which you have levied from my account over the period 15th May 1997 to February 2005.

I now understand that the regime of fees which you have been applying to my account in relation to direct debit refusals, exceeding overdraft limits and so forth are unlawful at Common Law, Statute and recent consumer regulations. If you say that they are not, then will you please demonstrate this by letting me have a full breakdown of the costs to which you have been put by as a result of my breaches, in order to reassure me that your penalties really do reflect your costs.

Additionally, it has now been confirmed that your particularly high level of penalties are considered to be unfair per se by the OFT who reported on the 5th April 2006 and are therefore presumed to be unlawful in the absence of specific proof to the contrary.

I would also point out that on the 7th February at Southend County Court, your Barrister, Mr Edwards I believe his name was, agreed a settlement in respect for unlawful charges levied on this account for other periods.

Your responsibilities

I would draw your attention to the terms of the contract which you agreed to at the time that I opened my account. It is an implied term of that contract that you would conduct yourselves lawfully and in a manner which complies with UK law.

I am frankly shocked that you have operated my account in this way as I had always reposed confidence in your integrity and expertise as my fiduciary.

I consider that your repeated representations that your charges are fair and reasonable are deceptive and that they have deceived me into agreeing to pay them.

Your concealment of the true nature of your charges has prevented me from asserting my right until now.

What I require

You have unlawfully taken £ xxxxxx plus £xxxx which you have charged me in overdraft interest for the sum which you have taken, total £xxxxxx

In addition I claim contractual interest at the unauthorised overdraft rate of 28.7% per annum on the total claim. Currently the interest claimed at this stage is £xxxxxx in addition to the charges and interest already paid.

I enclose a schedule of the charges which I am claiming with this letter. There are three estimated charges, I have written to you several times requesting that the relevant data is provided and you have refused to comply in line with your responsibilities under Section 7 of the Data Protection Act 1998. If you wish to provide the outstanding data for the periods outstanding then I will amend the schedule of charges accordingly.

If you fail to provide the relevant data then I will also file a claim for non-compliance with Section 7 of the Data Protection Act 1998.

Additionally I believe you have entered a default notice against my credit record. This default occurred merely in respect of unlawful charges levied by you or was the result of impecuniosity caused directly by the taking by you of penalty charges which you had applied unlawfully to my account. Should you remove this before I submit my claim I will of course revise my claim.

In addition to full payment of the sum mentioned above, I require that you remove the default entry from the register. Please note that mere correction or amendment to the entry will not be acceptable. Incidentally, your Barristers instructions were that default removal was impossible due to some ‘difficulties’ on the part of Abbey.

You will know both my thoughts and those of the court on that matter, but it has come to my attention that you have been able to settle other claims and remove defaults for other claimants. I will lay before the court this information for their consideration if the need should arise.

My targets to resolve this matter

I hope that you will enter into a sincere dialogue with me about this matter and I am writing this letter to you on the assumption that you will prefer to do this than merely respond with standard letters and leaflets.

Since you have already settled the monetary portion of my first claim, it would be sensible to settle this claim without the need for the additional effort and costs on both our parts bought about by me issuing a claim in court against you. Should you feel it in your interest to increase both our costs and drag this process out needlessly, I will bring this to the courts attention when costs are assessed.

I will give you 7 days to reply to me accepting, unconditionally, my request in principle and letting me know a date by which I will receive payment.

If you do not respond, or you do not respond positively, there will be no further communication from me and I shall issue a claim at the expiry of the seven day deadline.

 

Faxed to tonight

[elizabeth1]

stage two begins

 

 

 

Faxed to tonight

 

 

Good luck Glenn - that sure should brighten Monday for them!!

They may surprise you and actually work to resove it as they know you'll carry on with your claim etc.. so they may see things your way hopefully?

[TANZARELLI]

Good luck Glenn, nice one.

[kippy2]

great letter best of luck

[Cooz1968]

Hi Genn

Have been reading your thread with great interest, congrats so far. I'm about to start my own claim against Abbey back to 1994 with contractual interest. I have started my own thread, but unsure how to put a link in, everytime I try, my message gets wiped.

My thread is Cooz1968 v Abbey, any help/advice greatly appreciated.

 

Cooz1968

[Cooz1968]

Hi Glenn

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=69563&referrerid=129641

 

I hope this is the link to my thread, new to all this!!!

 

Thanks Cooz1968

[Glenn UK]

anything significant missing all?

 

Sheet 1/4

case/claim No: xxxxxxxxxx

In the Southend County Court

 

Glenn Lewis Horton

CLAIMANT

-AND-

Abbey National PLC

DEFENDANT

DISCLOSURE BY LIST

OF Glenn Lewis Horton CLAIMANT

 

I, Glenn Lewis Horton of xxxxxxxxxxx Essex Intend to rely on the following documents in court –

Correspondences

• Abbey National Statements Acc. No. xxxxxxxx 3rd Feb 1997 – 1st Feb 1999
  
• Abbey National Statements Acc. No. xxxxxxxx 3rd Mar 1999 – 31st Mar 1999
  
• Abbey National Statements Acc. No. xxxxxxxx 5th Apr 2000 – 3rd Jul 2000
  
• Abbey National Statements Acc. No. xxxxxxxx 3rd Oct 2000 – 1st mar 2001
  
• Abbey National Statements Acc. No. xxxxxxxx 3rd May 2005 – 3rd March 2006
  
• Abbey National Statement Acc. No. xxxxxxxx 3rd August 2004
  
• Abbey National Statement Acc. No. xxxxxxxx 3rd October 2004
  
• Abbey National Microfiche printout Acc. No. xxxxxxxx 25th Feb – 29th Apr 2005
  
• Abbey National Screen dumps Acc. No. xxxxxxxx 29th Apr – 9th May 2005.
  
• Abbey National Microfiche printouts Acc. No. xxxxxxxx 12th May – 3rd Dec 2000
  
• Abbey National Microfiche printouts Acc. No. xxxxxxxx 26th Dec – 27th Jan 2001
  
• Abbey National Microfiche printouts Acc. No. xxxxxxxx 15th Mar 2001 – 25th Jun 2005.
  
• Abbey National Microfiche printouts Acc. No. xxxxxxxx 1st Feb – 4th Mar 2001.
  
• Credit Agreements between Claimant and Defendant, customer copy dated 6th February 1997
  
• 20 No. Charges letters from Abbey National issued between 3rd September 1997 – 13th January 1998.
  
• Abbey National letter confirming overdraft dated 31st October 1997.
  
• Abbey National letter re incorrect charges dated 3rd November 1997.
  
• Claimants Subject Access Request dated 22nd July 2006 plus proof of delivery.
  
• Abbey National acknowledgement for item 10 above plus microfiche argument. dated 28th July 2006.
  
• Claimants letter to Abbey National refuting microfiche argument, dated 31st July 2006 plus proof of delivery.
  
• Claimants request for refund dated 4th Aug 2006 plus proof of delivery.

Sheet 2/4

• Abbey National letter re ‘complaint’ dated 7th August 2006.
  
• Claimants letter re expiry of SAR period dated 20th Aug 2006 plus proof of delivery.
  
• Claimants letter before action, dated 24th Aug 2006 plus proof of delivery.
  
• Abbey National letter re ‘complaint’ dated 25th August 2006.
  
• Claimants letter before action amendment, dated 26th August 2006 plus proof of delivery.
  
• Abbey National letter re ‘complaint’ dated 30th August 2006.
  
• Claimants letter before action re Section 7 non-compliance dated 5th September 2006.
  
• Copy of N1 dated Undated
  
• Notice of Issue of Claim dated 15th September 2006.
  
• Abbey National letter refusal to refund or remove default dated 18th September 2006.
  
• Abbey National letter re microfiche dated 20th September 2006.
  
• Claimants response to item 24 above dated 29th September 2006 plus proof of delivery.
  
• Notice that acknowledgement has been filed dated 29th September 2006.
  
• Abbey National letter re fiche records dated 2nd October 2006.
  
• Abbey National letter re ‘complaint’ dated 3rd October 2006
  
• Claimants CPR 18 request dated 15th October 2006 plus proof of delivery.
  
• Notice that defence has been filed dated 18th October 2006
  
• Blank AQ received from court dated 6th November 2006
  
• Claimants completed AQ dated 6th November 2006 plus proof of delivery.
  
• Copy of Defence from DLA Piper dated 12th October 2006
  
• Claimants letter to DLA Piper inviting settlement dated 9th November 2006 plus proof of delivery.
  
• Claimants letter to court requesting defence struck out dated 13th November 2006.
  
• Copy of item 35 above faxed to Court.
  
• General form of judgement dated 24th November 2006
  
• Claimants reminder to DLA Piper re CPR 18 request dated 27th November 2006.
  
• Copy of defence dated 28th November 2006.
  
• Abbey letter re threatening the Claimant with costs dated 29th November 2006
  
• Claimants letter to DLA Piper re clarification of whose representing Abbey dated 30th November 2006.
  
• Claimants response to item 40 above dated 1st December 2006
  
• DLA Pipers response to item 41 above dated 4th December 2006.
  
• Claimants request to strike the defence out dated 18th December 2006.
  
• Notice of Allocation dated 29th December 2006
  
• Notice of Hearing of Application dated 11th January 2007.
  
• Claimants letter to Defendant informing them of hearing date, dated January 2007
  
• Claimants correction of item 44 above dated 16th January 2007
  
• Abbey letter re application to strike dated 26th January 2007.

Sheet 3/4

• Claimants letter to Abbey re withdrawing application to strike, dated 28th January 2007.
  
• Claimants letter to court withdrawing application to strike dated 28th January 2007.
  
• General Form of judgement dated 31st January 2007.
  
• Revised defence dated 2nd February 2007.
  
• Claimants letter requesting clarification of revised defence dated 3rd February 2007 plus proof of delivery.
  
• Notice of Allocation dated 13th February 2007.
  
• Claimants letter to Abbey requesting remainder of charges on account dated 24th February 2007.
  
• Abbey Current Account tariff of charges dated September 2005
  
• The Abbey Account: terms and conditions, dated March 2006
  
• The Abbey current account The Facts dated July 2005
  
• Claimants Experian Credit Report dated 14th August 2006.
  
• Copy Experian ‘Your credit report explained’
  
• Competition In UK Banking, Don Cruickshank, 2000
  
• Abbey National PLC, Response to Competition Commission enquiry into Personal Current Account Banking in Northern Ireland, 8 August 05
  
• The Banking Code, British bankers Association, March 2005.
  
• Market investigation into Personal Current Account Banking Services in Northern Ireland, Competition Commissioner, 2005
  
• “Banks are 'mugging' customers”, James Chapman, Daily Mail, 17 January 2007.

75. “Banks making illegal charges will pay the price in court”, Thousands of bank customers are winning their fight for compensation, reports David Prosse Published: The Independent, 2 December 2006

 

76. OFT Press release, Following success on credit card default charges - OFT turns attention to bank current accounts 130/06 7 September 2006

 

77. Calculating fair default charges in credit card contracts, A statement of the OFT's position, April 2006

Sheet 4/4

The Claimant will also make reference to the following case laws;

• Murray v Leisureplay [2005] EWCA Civ 963
  
• Wilson v Love [1898]
  
• Lordsvale Finance PLC v Bank of Zambia (1996) QB 752
  
• Bridge v Campbell Discount Co. Ltd. (1962)
  
• Lord Elphinstone v. Monkland Iron and Coal Co [1886]
  
• Castaneda and Others v. Clydebank Engineering and Shipbuilding Co., Ltd. [1904]
  
• Commissioner of Public Works v Hills [1906] AC 368
  
• Philips v The Attorney General of Hong Kong [1993] 61 BLR 41
  
• First Commercial Bank and Others v. the Owners of "Mandarin Container", "Kingdom Container" and "Liberty Container" (2004),
  
• Alfred McAlpine Capital Projects Limited v Tilebox Limited [2005],
  
• Default Banking Charges, Early Day Motion No 2227, Julia Golsworthy, MP, 22nd May 2006.
  
• Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co. Ltd. v. New Garage and Motor Co. Ltd.

[1915] A.C. 79

The Claimant will also make reference to the following legislation;

I. The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999

II. Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977

III. Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982

Mcnamara transcript will be added too

Thanks

glenn

[bish]

Looks OK to me Glenn, good luck with it.

 

Regards bish.

[TANZARELLI]

Bang on mate at a glance.

[Glenn UK]

Right all little update, stil reveiwing all my docs, checked out this laptop, my pc and the workstation in the office, check thourgh it tonight and then send it off by fax along with covering letter and CPR 18 request.

 

Im going to send them a CPR 18 request their defence never explained what their defence was to the removal of the default.

 

Glenn

[Glenn UK]

Tis done

 

faxed off my disclosure by list, cpr 18 request and n265, copy to the court, see what happens now.

 

Any bets on whether abbey provide their list or not?

 

Glenn

[Armsoft]

Tis done

 

Any bets on whether abbey provide their list or not?

 

Glenn

 

Glen,

My money`s on Not! and at the moment I`ve go a lot of money thanks to the Abbey:lol:

 

Resolved within 10 days is my guess with this.

[Glenn UK]

You could be right Armsoft,

 

Funny thing is at the AQ hearing the judge gave their barrister a second go at convincing abbey to remove the default, they refused I was going to say it would be daft for them to remove it now, but then again if i have learnt anyhitng about these claims is that common sense has no place here.

 

Glenn

[Armsoft]

You could be right Armsoft,

 

Funny thing is at the AQ hearing the judge gave their barrister a second go at convincing abbey to remove the default, they refused I was going to say it would be daft for them to remove it now, but then again if i have learnt anyhitng about these claims is that common sense has no place here.

 

Glenn

 

Glen,

I thought that the Default Removal was going to be the hardest thing for me to achieve within my claim, but in the end it was the easiest.

They didn`t even bother to tell me they`d had it removed, I just found out when I was doing a routine check online at Experien, and there it was Gone:o

Might be worth keeping an eye on your credit report over the next few days (if your not already doing)

[TANZARELLI]

Hi Glenn,

 

Any ideas where I can lay my hands on a LBA for pre 6years and CI claim?

 

Prelim deadlines up today. Just need to have a view of one so can adapt to suit my claim.

 

Thanks

[Glenn UK]

There one in this thread i think somewhere and in my barclaycard thread too.

 

If you can find it let me know ill see if i can dig it out of my files at home

 

glenn