KAZZAW v Lloyds Asset Card - EVERYONE READ post 15 & post 219 !!!!!!

[crusty git]

Thanks Admiral

Its on its way to Peterborough County Court

[GuidoT]

I feel compelled to add to this thread.

 

I am pleased for jodyperry and others that obtain a quicker settlement as a result of the abuse order, however I see a down side with what is happening (as I said on my own thread).

 

Lloyds (and other banks) will react to this and probably change their overall litigation strategy, I suspect. Just like they did when the courts saw through their delay tactics relating to the one month settlement and then they stopped ticking that box.

 

The bank should not be underestimated, there are some very big thinkers within it. However, it is difficult to predict what their change of strategy will be. More than ever, now we need to ensure that we pursing our claims properly, eventually it is inevitable that someone's claim will be properly defended.

 

To be honest I am more comfortable when we can predict what Lloyds will do. The unknown is not helpful. Do not get me wrong through, it is good that the banks are being discovered for what they are.

[crusty git]

bump

[Theadmiral]

Appreciate your confidence in my suggestion Crusty, but it's only an idea. I may very well send it myself if I don't get my settlement this week. Be nice to see what others think of it first. I have put it on my thread as well.

[krabople]

Nice one, just read this thread and it's given me hope for my case. I live in Lincoln and I've just received my AQ through today, then my case will be dealt with by Lincoln court. Hopefully in the same way as this one. I'll keep you updated with my progress

[Glenn UK]

Congrats on the Judgement Kazzaw. Trying to read your thread - posts being added faster than you can read!!!!!

 

Certainly good idea to bring details to attention of other Courts - Perhaps all of us going through the process should send a letter to their Court saying:

 

"In respect of my claim, I would just like to bring to the attention of the Court, details of Judgement recently made at Lincoln County Court which orders the following:

 

The Court of its own motion is considering striking the Defence out as an abuse of process on the basis that it has settled all previous claims of this nature. If the Defendant objects to this course of action it is to file at Court within 14 days, a Schedule setting out a list of all claims it has pursued to trial and all claims it has settled." (dated 28th December 2006)

 

There is now a wealth of evidence that the Banks are reluctant to pursue any defence of the claims of their clients against unfair bank charges, thus wasting valuable court time. Until they are in a position to reveal all to the courts, I would hope that the Honorable Judges at the Court would take note of this information in bringing a speedy conclusion to claims that they are dealing with.

 

(of course - copy to Bank's solicitors)

 

Just a thought - what do the Moderators think??

 

FWIW I think this will be the way to go intially, howeve, i understand that you cannot reference another action in your claim until it has been judged.

 

in other words you have to wait until the original claim is settled before you can use theinformation of the order in your claims.

 

 

HTH

 

Glenn

[uglynine]

If we cannot reference another action until judgement is concluded, maybe you should take a look at jodyperry's thread, judge striking out defence?, as well, where the judge made an identical order. It looks like Cobbett's are conceding defeat on that one pretty quickly (even if it hasn't quite concluded yet).....

 

What does this mean for us all?

[rbrears]

I see absolutley no problem with claimants now pointing out on their allocation questionnaires that this case management order is being made in other court(s) and respectfully requesting in the AQ that the court consider whether the defence is an abuse of process and asking the court to make a similar order at AQ stage.

 

This method should definitely be stickied by one of the mods.

[GaryH]

There is something being worked on, as far as I'm aware.

[kazzaw]

Bankfodder has a copy of my claim & I'm sure when he feels it is appropriate he will advise me to publicise the details.

 

Please give me a chance to get my claim settled!!

[Fullyskinted]

Karen,

Has anything like this occured in your claim?

 

I assume not?

[Glenn UK]

FWIW the claims isn't finished yet, the claimant wants all the charges back and has prepared a letter for the defendant to chew on.

 

Glenn

[Theadmiral]

Good point RBREARS, Perhaps best not to create too many waves at the moment until we see the outcome of the judgement. After all, they seem to be paying up eventually, albeit in an erratic fashion and at different stages - still waiting for mine!!!! I think enough has been done at present.

[chrismc]

What a great thread and decision from the Judge, has anyone come up with an affinitive answer on what now is the best thing to do,

 

re:

In respect of my claim, I would just like to bring to the attention of the Court, details of Judgement recently made at Lincoln County Court which orders the following:

 

The Court of its own motion is considering striking the Defence out as an abuse of process on the basis that it has settled all previous claims of this nature. If the Defendant objects to this course of action it is to file at Court within 14 days, a Schedule setting out a list of all claims it has pursued to trial and all claims it has settled." (dated 28th December 2006)

 

There is now a wealth of evidence that the Banks are reluctant to pursue any defence of the claims of their clients against unfair bank charges, thus wasting valuable court time. Until they are in a position to reveal all to the courts, I would hope that the Honorable Judges at the Court would take note of this information in bringing a speedy conclusion to claims that they are dealing with.

 

Thanks

Chris

[downsouth]

The 14 day deadline will be up on 18th January.

 

Any news yet kazzaw?

[kazzaw]

Any news yet kazzaw?

 

Can't say yet!

 

Hopefully I'll have something positive to report after the weekend.

[Destinyofsouls]

Hi there everyone. Nothing to say, just subscribing to get my e mail for updates

Good luck Kazzaw, hope we can get the full order to use ourselves.

[gburgess]

Any news?

[cantsay]

Just doing the same as destinyofsouls, this could be what weve all been waiting for.

[kazzaw]

Fame at last!! I've got a link in the CAG newsletter!!

 

Sorry folks, nothing I can report yet but the minute I have news I'll post.

[Virus]

Yes, I just read this whole thread after getting the newsletter. Very encouraging.

[tandlehill]

Well done Kazzaw!!!

I'm just about to complete my AQ for submission to the court so have read this thread with ALOT of interest!!! :o

I will wait until Friday morning to see if you get any result before submitting my AQ; just need to decide if it's worth pointing out with my AQ about this order from the judge at Lincoln??!!

 

Good Luck & keep us up to date!!!

[lsba02853]

Well done Kazzaw!!!

I'm just about to complete my AQ for submission to the court so have read this thread with ALOT of interest!!! :o

I will wait until Friday morning to see if you get any result before submitting my AQ; just need to decide if it's worth pointing out with my AQ about this order from the judge at Lincoln??!!

 

Good Luck & keep us up to date!!!

 

Ditto here.

Sent my LBA two weeks ago, so this friday is Lloyds deadline.

[Fullyskinted]

Ditto here.

Sent my LBA two weeks ago, so this friday is Lloyds deadline.

 

I mentioned it (not specifically Lincoln - just as 'Some other Courts' ) in my AQ submitted last week...

[martdj]

This is excellent news. I am fighting GMAC at the moment and they have requested judgement to be set aside. I wrote to the court to inform them that this is an abuse of process, lets see what happens.

Its about time the courts stopped these big institutions taking thep**s out of the court system. I wonder if the shareholders of these insitutions are aware that their dividends will be lower due to the amount of money that is being wasted by the banks etc in defending these claims. Surely they have a duty to be financially prudent!!