Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks guys. Updated witness statement accordingly with dx's post. I have a draft order. As follows, is this ok?   It is ordered that: 1. The default judgment dated 10 November 2021 be set aside. 2. The Claimant pays the Defendant’s costs of this application to the sum of £275. 3. The Claimant has permission to file and serve a reply if so required.   4. All enforcement be put on hold pending the outcome of the application.   So with the N244.. include the Witness statement, draft defence, and draft order? And include a copy of all evidence?   Thanks
    • we need the exact particulars of claim, not what you have put please.  
    • Thank you everyone for your quick responses I just wish I posted here in the first place    I probably shouldn't have filled in the claim form however on the letter it said I had limited time to do so and because I was dealing with CST law trying to come to an agreement with paying off the debt I didn't think it would get to this point and now I have probably made my situation worst. Of course, I would have posted here first before sending it off had I not been in communication with CST to set up an agreement.    I sent the letter back to the court as some point in early August, the issue date on the claim form is 28th July and the most recent letter I have received 'Notice of fast track' is dated 18th November    If I am honest I can't fully remember what I wrote word for word in my defence, it would have been along the lines of why I left, my reasons and the fact I returned to my old career in an office plus taking a pay cut to do so. There wasn't much room to write a long winded defence so I kept it relativity short.   The above document Andy has posted is the exact document I am now looking at very confused in what exactly I put where    I just want to re-iterate I never agreed with this money I owe due to the training bond but it has gone on for so long at this point I'm happy to set up a payment plan if the balance can get reduced or a small one off payment upfront and this is exactly what I was trying to do prior to receiving the most recent letter    I have had zero communication from CST law, Centrica advised me to deal with them directly and I was waiting for a response from CST with the offer we had put across to Centrica - I chased it multiple times the following weeks and they kept telling me they haven't had a response and when they do we'll contact you which they still have not   Ideally I would rather not give them any money however I feel like I am out of options at what I probably should have done years ago is attempt to get it reduced and set up a payment plan    Please let me know if I have missed any critical info out    Thanks again for everyones help    What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim? I left a British Gas apprenticeship within the first 12 months of starting and went back to my old career in an office , my reasons for leaving were down to the completely differant job role which I realised quikcly was not for me and it was impacting my mental health massively. The claim is for a training bond which was in a contract I signed based on a sliding scale Year 1 - £9,000 year 2 £6,000 year 3 £3,000     What is the total value of the claim? £13433    Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? Yes   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No  Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Training bond due to leaving an apprenticeship before 3 years    When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After   Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? They have sent me a virtually signed document with the contract   Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? No   Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Centrica are claimant, CST law are dealing and the court   Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? I believe so yes   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? I have had multiple letters like everyone else who has been on the forum over the years regarding this matter   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? I am unsure, but when I left I had contested the original claim as I was dealing directly with Centrica’s collection team and they never got back to me after the final email I had sent and didn’t hear anything until years down the line   Why did you cease payments? N/A   What was the date of your last payment? N/A   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? Correct I oringinally contested what was owed back in 2017 and gave my reasons for leaving and I assumed the matter was closed   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No  
    • OK thanks again Andy.   And understood 👍😉
    • Thank you for this. The first thing to be say is that this means that you are winning. It is pretty well unheard of in my experience for the bank to give way and finally return the money. The fact that they have done this under the threat of a judgement for breach of statutory duty indicates even more that they are worried about their position. Nowhere have they indicated that they have complied with the requirements of the Proceeds of Crime Act and informed the National crime agency. I don't believe they have and this is a very serious breach of statutory duty. Not only that it is a very serious breach of the FCA BCOBS regulations in that they are required to treat you fairly. Treating you fairly in this case means that they must comply with the rest of their statutory duties. It appears that they really haven't done this at all and that they have acted in an arbitrary way in disregard of the law and that they are hoping to get away with it. I find myself wondering how many other hundreds of people have been treated in exactly the same way – and you are probably the first ever to have stood up to them and to get them worried. I think I've already indicated that a press contact of mine in the Sunday Times would be very interested in this story. He has already run stories about the very poor standards applied by banks when deciding that their customers are involved in some fraudulent behaviour. The first thing to say about the letter which you have received is that they are trying to apply conditions to releasing your own money. It's your money and there should be no conditions and my suggestion is that you object to this. Secondly, not only are they threatening to continue to withhold your own money – but also they are saying that if they release it to you you will simply have the net figure without any kind of interest or compensation. It's clear that while they have had your money, they have invested it and earn money on it. They have probably been lending it out at between 16% and 20% and although the usual rate of interest is 8%, it seems to me that justice can only be served by repaying you your money plus the commercial rate of interest – at a compound rate. Normally the 8% is calculated at simple. Thirdly, they are not offering to pay you any compensation and clearly they are hoping to get away with it without any kind of sanction or not even a slap on the wrist.   Fourthly, they had the nerve to impose a seven day deadline. Don't worry about their deadline. It's a load of huff and puff. This is all part of their bluff game designed to intimidate you. At the end of seven days – what? Are they then going to insist on going to court?   If they really believe that they had done everything correctly and that the money was fraudulent, then they would not offer it to you back under any circumstances. It would be illegal for them to do so. You can be certain that these people do not want to go to court. In fact they probably wish they had never started.   Finally, they want the matter to be kept confidential – and I can't say I blame them. I would be ashamed if people knew that I had treated somebody else in this way and I'm sure they are worried about reputational damage. I'm also sure that there are extremely worried about what will happen if you get a judgement against them for breach of statutory duty. It will have to be reported to the FCA. It will have to be reported to the NCA. And of course it should be reported to the newspapers because people need to know what is going on. If you want, you can simply accept their proposal – get your money back, given confidentiality – and that's the end of the matter. However, you have no idea how this will impact on your record in the future. I imagine that they will bar you from ever opening an account with them again. – But at least you will have your money and you can get on with your life. However, if you want you can stand your ground and make it clear to them that you are going to be mucked around and treated like this and that you are prepared to go to court if they won't make a proper offer. I understand that you need to pay a court fee of about £350 in the next seven days. I expect that the bank is making this offer now hoping to dissuade you from spending any more money and hoping that you will back down. If you have the money to proceed then I would suggest very strongly that it will be a very serious sign of strength that you tell the bank that you're not interested in that you are paying the fee for the next stage of the court process. If the bank knows that you've called their bluff on this and that you have been prepared to invest further money in moving this legal action forward, then they will start to reflect and I can perfectly well imagine that they will make you another more interesting offer – once again on conditions of confidentiality. Without seeing any further offer, I'm already suggesting that you will probably be best off turning it down. In any event, I would remind you going back several months that I already predicted that the bank would make you confidential offer – and that has happened. I'm not saying that I'm always going to be right here – but I think that now basically the bank have pretty well admitted that they need to pay you your money, there is no chance of you losing it. You will get your money and it really is just a question of how much else you will get in addition. If you'd like to continue then let me know and I will suggest a draft response to them.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

Reply from Egg...


ccjjl82
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4478 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

My other half has sent a claim for charges, but just asked for the difference instead of whole charge.

They have replied and said basically the OFT said they can set the limit at £16:

'Following the conclusion of the investigation, the OFT indicated that it would not proceed further against Egg on the basis that Egg reduced its charges from £20 to £16. Accordingly without any admission of liability as to the previous level of charges, Egg reduced its charges to £16. The OFT has taken no further action against Egg.'

They are now offering £4!!

I was under the impression that all banks etc had to reduce their charges to no higher than the threshold of £12. Can anyone shed some light on this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

What the OFT said was that they wouldn't intervene if the charges where £12 or under

Any typos spelling mistakes are due to leprechauns in my keyboard they move the letters around sometimes (amended just for Bookie)

 

"How do I...?" A Dummies' Guide to this Forum

FAQ

Forum rules

Cag toolbar

 

 

Please Donate if you can - help CAG help others

 

I offer help and advice in good faith, based on my knowledge and experience. I am NOT a legal or financial expert. There are many CAG members and site team who are better qualified. Please do not make major decisions based on my advice alone.I do not give advice via P.M's. If anyone can correct my mistakes or improve on my advice, please do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

on 5th April 2006 the CEO of the OFT set a limit of £12 for credit card penalty charges. If the cards did not comply he "did not rule out taking legal action against them." He gave the cards an action deadline of 31st May 2006. However Egg being a cyber bank managed to persuade the OFT they were a special case in that fewer of their cardholders incurred Overlimit and Late Payment charges because they had a scheme of compulsory DDs for all their cardholders. The OFT gave Egg a special dispensation of £16 instead of £12.

 

The OFT at no stage said £12 or £16 charge was fair or lawful. For praqmatic reasons the OFT will not take action to lower the bar at this time, but in no way has the OFT ever ruled £12 or £16 as lawful. The Egg story is pure fantasy and misrepresentation. Repeatedly the OFT said the legality of charge level is to be determined by the law court.

 

Ignore Egg's template letter and reclaim the entire charge -- 105 cardholders did. In particular reply along the lines of CAG template letter by moc1982 dated 30 APR 2007. There will be a ritulised exchange of 2 or 3 letters. After which Egg are under instructions to refund -- or face impossible questions before a judge in court. Good luck.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/egg/53376-e-day-victory-over-5.html

  • Haha 1

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

ok, recieved a reply from them today says:

 

final review and decision.

we have completed a final review blah blah....

we included an offer to refund £4 in full and final settlement of your complaint. Please be aware that this is our final settlement offer....

 

Basically saying £4 is all we are offering.

 

Does anybody have any advice on what to reply? I did know that there would be 2/3 letters going between us after the letter sent above, but I am a bit stuck on what to reply to this one.

 

Thanks for your help

c

Link to post
Share on other sites

Egg have 2 million cards, and everythiing goes through automated routine from which junior staff dare not deviate.

 

If you ignore their automated computer-generated template reply, and re-send your letter, adding that you will see them in court and additionally claim legal charges. Nothing new here, just repetiation of known patterns to discourage the uninitiated.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Ok, recieved a reply from them, its exactly the same letter recieved for the past 2 times.

Would I be right in just sending them the same letter I did last time? Or do I need to add something?

Thanks

C

Link to post
Share on other sites

Egg are known to have a drill of sending out 2 or 3 letters blindfold, it is not particularly aimed at you. They probably do not even realise they are repeating themselves. On past form they will not repeat indefinitely.

 

If you reiterate you position in a crisp sharp actionpoint, i.e.

 

unless you receive a refund you will file the N1 within one week. They can pay you now, or pay you later and pay their barrister 20 times as much to lose to you in court. You may not have stomach for court, but they don't know that. They fancy a court appearance even less than you.

 

Good luck.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...