POC - help needed please!

[landy_alert]

Hi everyone,

 

OH and I are about to fill out our N1 for bank charges against Lloyds TSB and need some help with the wording of our Particulars of Claim please!

 

I've had a search around the forums but cannot find what I'm looking for.

 

I have the N1 guide printed off from the templates etc section, but would welcome some further assistance.

 

I'm sure I've read that you have to be careful with the wording regarding penalties etc and that you have to use the term 'unfair' as in UTCCRs etc........but not sure how exactly it needs to be phrased. I don't want to get this wrong, so any advice would be most helpful, thank you.

 

Regards,

 

Landy x

[landy_alert]

Doh! It's ok I've found it!

Edited June 7, 2009 by landy_alert

[landy_alert]

Hi everyone,

 

I have another query I'm afraid -

 

I know you can't mention 'penalties' when filling out the POC on the N1 and that you have to refer to the charges being 'unfair' and 'invalid' within the meaning of the UTCCRs, but do I write all the rest of the POC the same, as per the template provided in the library, ie, that they are not a genuine pre-estimate of costs incurred etc?

 

Thanks for your help!

 

Regards,

 

Landy x

Edited June 9, 2009 by landy_alert
Took out superfluous info!

[landy_alert]

Bump.......

[landy_alert]

Hi everyone,

 

Mr Landy and I are about to go ahead and file at court against our bank for charges on a joint account, but I have acouple of questions please?

 

I've tried asking this in the legal section, but no-one is responding and the bank forum it relates to has been dead for the last day or two, so I thought I'd try here as I really want to get this sorted tomorrow.

 

Here goes -

 

1) If it's a joint account do both Mr Landy and I take the bank to court jointly or can it only be done by one of us?

 

2) I know that things have changed and you cannot use the word 'penalty' relating to the charges in your POC, but the guidance notes here in the templates section still have a reference to penalties. I am aware that I should state that the charges are 'unfair within the meaning of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 and therefore fully recoverable as they are invalid', but is this the only bit I need to change?

 

It's not very clear as the only place that states the need for this change to the wording of your POC is in the template for amending a claim already started - good job I found it really!

 

I don't want to get this wrong and particularly want to get this moving forward asap.

 

If anyone could advise me further with this please it would be most helpful!

 

Many thanks,

 

Landy x

[sea-sidelady]

If it is a joint account, then as long as either one of you have full access to the account, then either one of you can file the claim.

 

As for the POC, that will be getting checked asap. Some one will get back to you.

[landy_alert]

Hi sea-sidelady,

 

Many thanks for that - I will await a response about the POC before I go any further:)

 

Regards,

 

Landy x

[citizenB]

I think I might have given some incorrect information, so have edited out.

 

Apologies.

[landy_alert]

Hi CitB:)

 

Thank you - I've seen now where you have edited the info on the amendment to the POC letter template, but in the actual POC the wording still includes the term 'penalties'.

 

Apologies for the confusion, but as we are just about to file our claim at the court, not amend one that's already been submitted, I'm still unsure if I have to remove the term 'penalties' altogether from my POC and if otherwise the wording can remain the same as the template?

 

Very many thanks for your help!

 

Regards,

 

Landy x

Edited June 8, 2009 by landy_alert
added a bit!

[landy_alert]

Just to elaborate the wording I have used so far is as follows -

 

4. The Claimant contends that:

 

a) The charges are unfair within the meaning of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 and are therefore fully recoverable as they are invalid; the charges are not a genuine pre-estimate of cost incurred by the Defendant; the costs exceed any alleged actual loss to the Defendant in respect of any breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant; and they are extravagant and unconscionable in amount in comparison with the greatest loss that could conceivably be proved to have followed from the breach, but instead act in terrorem to ensure contractual compliance and to deter a breach on the part of the Claimant.

 

b) Insofar as they purport to be services provided by the Defendant, the High Court on the 24th April 2008 rejected the notion that the blocking of cheques, direct debits and so forth were services in the sense commonly understood. Furthermore, the High Court held that the Defendant's charges were subject to tests of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999.

 

Is this ok?

 

Many thanks,

 

Landy x

[landy_alert]

Just to elaborate the wording I have used so far is as follows -

 

4. The Claimant contends that:

 

a) The charges are unfair within the meaning of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 and are therefore fully recoverable as they are invalid; the charges are not a genuine pre-estimate of cost incurred by the Defendant; the costs exceed any alleged actual loss to the Defendant in respect of any breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant; and they are extravagant and unconscionable in amount in comparison with the greatest loss that could conceivably be proved to have followed from the breach, but instead act in terrorem to ensure contractual compliance and to deter a breach on the part of the Claimant.

 

b) Insofar as they purport to be services provided by the Defendant, the High Court on the 24th April 2008 rejected the notion that the blocking of cheques, direct debits and so forth were services in the sense commonly understood. Furthermore, the High Court held that the Defendant's charges were subject to tests of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999.

 

Is this ok?

 

Many thanks,

 

Landy x

 

Could someone please confirm that the wording above is correct please?

 

Thank you:-)

 

Regards,

 

Landy x

[landy_alert]

Just to elaborate the wording I have used so far is as follows -

 

4. The Claimant contends that:

 

a) The charges are unfair within the meaning of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 and are therefore fully recoverable as they are invalid; the charges are not a genuine pre-estimate of cost incurred by the Defendant; the costs exceed any alleged actual loss to the Defendant in respect of any breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant; and they are extravagant and unconscionable in amount in comparison with the greatest loss that could conceivably be proved to have followed from the breach, but instead act in terrorem to ensure contractual compliance and to deter a breach on the part of the Claimant.

 

b) Insofar as they purport to be services provided by the Defendant, the High Court on the 24th April 2008 rejected the notion that the blocking of cheques, direct debits and so forth were services in the sense commonly understood. Furthermore, the High Court held that the Defendant's charges were subject to tests of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999.

 

Is this ok?

 

Many thanks,

 

Landy x

 

I really want to get this in tomorrow, so could someone please confirm whether the above wording is ok or not?

 

Thank you,

 

Landy x

[landy_alert]

Hi everyone,

 

Just bumping this in the hope for some further advice please as I am intending to get this to the court tomorrow!

 

I am trying to confirm whether the following wording is ok to put on my POC for bank charges claim (it's just this part in particular I'm concerned about as the template refers to penalties at this point, which I understand you are no longer supposed to refer to) -

 

4. The Claimant contends that:

 

a) The charges are unfair within the meaning of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 and are therefore fully recoverable as they are invalid; the charges are not a genuine pre-estimate of costs incurred by the Defendant; they exceed any alleged actual loss to the Defendant in respect of any breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant; and they are extravagant and unconscionable in amount in comparison with the greatest loss that could conceivably be proved to have followed from the breach, but instead act in terrorem to ensure contractual compliance and to deter a breach on the part of the Claimant.

 

b) Insofar as they purport to be services provided by the Defendant, the High Court on the 24th April 2008 rejected the notion that the blocking of cheques, direct debits and so forth were services in the sense commonly understood. Furthermore, the High Court held that the Defendant's charges were subject to tests of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999.

 

I presume the rest of the POC in the template is still ok to use, but would appreciate confirmation of this please, as I don't want to do this incorrectly, having never done it before!

 

Very many thanks for your help and advice as always.

 

Regards,

 

Landy x

[landy_alert]

Just to elaborate the wording I have used so far is as follows -

 

4. The Claimant contends that:

 

a) The charges are unfair within the meaning of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 and are therefore fully recoverable as they are invalid; the charges are not a genuine pre-estimate of cost incurred by the Defendant; the costs exceed any alleged actual loss to the Defendant in respect of any breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant; and they are extravagant and unconscionable in amount in comparison with the greatest loss that could conceivably be proved to have followed from the breach, but instead act in terrorem to ensure contractual compliance and to deter a breach on the part of the Claimant.

 

b) Insofar as they purport to be services provided by the Defendant, the High Court on the 24th April 2008 rejected the notion that the blocking of cheques, direct debits and so forth were services in the sense commonly understood. Furthermore, the High Court held that the Defendant's charges were subject to tests of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999.

 

Is this ok?

 

Many thanks,

 

Landy x

 

Bump..............

[landy_alert]

Hi everyone,

 

Just bumping this in the hope for some further advice please as I am intending to get this to the court tomorrow!

 

I am trying to confirm whether the following wording is ok to put on my POC for bank charges claim (it's just this part in particular I'm concerned about as the template refers to penalties at this point, which I understand you are no longer supposed to refer to) -

 

4. The Claimant contends that:

 

a) The charges are unfair within the meaning of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 and are therefore fully recoverable as they are invalid; the charges are not a genuine pre-estimate of costs incurred by the Defendant; they exceed any alleged actual loss to the Defendant in respect of any breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant; and they are extravagant and unconscionable in amount in comparison with the greatest loss that could conceivably be proved to have followed from the breach, but instead act in terrorem to ensure contractual compliance and to deter a breach on the part of the Claimant.

 

b) Insofar as they purport to be services provided by the Defendant, the High Court on the 24th April 2008 rejected the notion that the blocking of cheques, direct debits and so forth were services in the sense commonly understood. Furthermore, the High Court held that the Defendant's charges were subject to tests of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999.

 

I presume the rest of the POC in the template is still ok to use, but would appreciate confirmation of this please, as I don't want to do this incorrectly, having never done it before!

 

Very many thanks for your help and advice as always.

 

Regards,

 

Landy x

 

Can anyone help me with this please?

 

Thank you,

 

Landy x

[empowered]

Hi Landy

I seem to remember that if you go into the section for your bank ie Lloyds, in the stickies are the exact POC to put for that particular bank - mind you it was 2 yrs ago we put ours in and is now on stay. Hope this helps.

[landy_alert]

Hi Landy

I seem to remember that if you go into the section for your bank ie Lloyds, in the stickies are the exact POC to put for that particular bank - mind you it was 2 yrs ago we put ours in and is now on stay. Hope this helps.

 

Hi empowered:)

 

Thanks for that - I've had a look there, but can't see anything though unfortunately.

 

I've got the general N1 particulars of claim notes from the bank templates library, but am still confused as to whether I can use the term 'penalties' at all?

 

If anyone else can help I would be most grateful, thank you.

 

Regards,

 

Landy x

[landy_alert]

Just to elaborate the wording I have used so far is as follows -

 

4. The Claimant contends that:

 

a) The charges are unfair within the meaning of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 and are therefore fully recoverable as they are invalid; the charges are not a genuine pre-estimate of cost incurred by the Defendant; the costs exceed any alleged actual loss to the Defendant in respect of any breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant; and they are extravagant and unconscionable in amount in comparison with the greatest loss that could conceivably be proved to have followed from the breach, but instead act in terrorem to ensure contractual compliance and to deter a breach on the part of the Claimant.

 

b) Insofar as they purport to be services provided by the Defendant, the High Court on the 24th April 2008 rejected the notion that the blocking of cheques, direct debits and so forth were services in the sense commonly understood. Furthermore, the High Court held that the Defendant's charges were subject to tests of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999.

 

Is this ok?

 

Many thanks,

 

Landy x

 

Sorry to keep bumping and sounding so desperate, but can anyone help me with this please???

 

Thank you,

 

Landy x

[Dinkjames]

Hi Landy

 

It may be an idea to post a link to this thread in the Legal Issues forums. I think the legal eagles spend more time in there.

 

Or hit the red triagle and ask a site member to assist.

[landy_alert]

Hi Dinkjames:)

 

Thanks for your reply - I do have a similar thread going in the legal forum, with a similar lack of response unfortunately!

 

I've always been a bit reluctant to make a nuisance of myself by hitting the red triangle, but this time I think I may have to do just that!

 

Regards,

 

Landy x

[landy_alert]

Hi everyone,

 

I'm just looking for someone to confirm that the wording I am using on my Particulars of Claim for bank charges is correct please...........

 

I understand that if you have an ongoing claim with the term 'penalties' in the wording this must be amended, so assume someone such as myself about to fill out an N1 cannot use this term, but has to refer to 'unfair' charges. Therefore in section 4 of the POC I have written the following -

 

''4. The claimant contends that:

 

a) The charges are unfair within the meaning of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 and are therefore fully recoverable as they are invalid; the charges are not a genuine pre-estimate of costs incurred by the Defendant; they exceed any alleged actual loss to the Defendant in respect of any breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant; and they are extravagant and unconscionable in amount in comparison with the greatest loss that could conceivably proved to have followed from the breach, but instead act in terrorem to ensure contractual compliance and to deter a breach on the part of the Claimant.

 

b) Insofar as they purport to be services provided by the Defendant, the High Court, on the 24th April 2008, rejected the notion that the blocking of cheques or direct debits and so forth were services in the sense commonly understood. Furthermore, the High Court held that the Defendant's charges were subject to tests of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999.''

 

Could someone please confirm whether this wording is ok to be used or not please:confused:

 

I presume the remainder of the template POC in the templates library is ok to use?

 

Vey many thanks.

 

Regards,

 

Landy x

[landy_alert]

Anyone please?????????

[landy_alert]

 

I've got the general N1 particulars of claim notes from the bank templates library, but am still confused as to whether I can use the term 'penalties' at all?

 

If anyone else can help I would be most grateful, thank you.

 

Regards,

 

Landy x

 

Can anyone confirm this for me please?

 

Thank you,

 

Landy x

[landy_alert]

Sorry to keep bumping and sounding so desperate, but can anyone help me with this please???

 

Thank you,

 

Landy x

 

 

Is there no-one who can help me with this please?

 

Thank you,

 

Landy x

[landy_alert]

Pretty please!!!!!!!!!!!