Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • you IGNORE THEM. stop being had blind nothing anyone can do to you. dx  
    • Which Court have you received the claim from ? Name County Court   MCOL Northampton N1 ?yes Manual Claim CCMCC (Salford) ? New beta WWW.MONEYCLAIMS.SERVICE.GOV.UK ? Yes If possible please scan redact and upload a full page copy of page 1 of the claim form. (not the response page or AOS)     Name of the Claimant ? Give answer here Lowell How many defendant's  joint or self ? Give answer here Self 1 Date of issue – top right hand corner of the claim form – this in order to establish the time line you need to adhere to. Give answer here 08 may  ^^^^^ NOTE : WHEN CALCULATING THE TIMELINE - PLEASE REMEMBER THAT THE DATE ON THE CLAIMFORM IS ONE IN THE COUNT [example: Issue date 01.03.2014 + 19 days (5 days for service + 14 days to acknowledge) = 19.03.2014 + 14 days to submit defence = 02.04.2014] = 33 days in total   Date of issue XX + 19 days ( 5 day for service + 14 days to acknowledge) = XX + 14 days to submit defence = XX (33 days in total)  if your defence filing date falls on a W/End, you must file by friday @4PM     Particulars of Claim   What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim? Please type out their particulars of claim in full (verbatim) less any identifiable data and round the amounts up/down. state how many digits the account number has.. Give answer here  the claim is for sum of 1650£ due by the defendant under an agreement regulated by the consumer credit act 1974 for capital one account with an account reference of xxxx tge dependent failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a default notice was served under s87(1) of the consumer credit act 1973 which has not been complied with the debt was legally assigned to the claimant on 18/03-21 notice of which has been given to defendant  the claim incudes statutory interest under s69 of the county court act 184 at a rate of 8%per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of 132£ the claimant claims the sum of 1782£   What is the total value of the claim? Give answer here 1977£ Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? Give answer here Not sure  received a letter on 24 march stating Letter of claim- you have 30 days to prevent legal action Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? Give answer here No Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? Give answer here Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Give answer here Credit card When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? Give answer here After Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Give answer here Online Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Give answer here Yes 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. Give answer here Debt purchaser Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Give answer here Unsure Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Give answer here Unsure Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Give answer here Not that he recalls Why did you cease payments? Give answer here Lost job What was the date of your last payment? Give answer here Feb 2023 Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? Give answer here No Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? Give answer here No What you need to do now.    Answer the questions above   If you have not already done so – send a CCA request to the claimant for a copy of your agreement (If Applicable) (except for Overdraft/ Mobile/Telephone accounts)   Send a CPR31.14 request to the solicitor named on the claim form for copies of documents mentioned/implied within the claim form. There are two different versions - one for Loans/Credit cards the other for Current accounts   Request 1 - Loans/Credit Cards     Request 2 - Current Accounts     You may use a CPR part 18 request for any other information (not request documents) that you might require in order to defend yourself. Please note that CPR 18 is specifically for Fast Track claims and although technically the claim has yet to be allocated to a track the claimant may refuse to comply for this reason.   If you require CPR Part 18 - this will need to be drafted specifically.   If you are not planning on defending for one reason or another – then you will need to complete an Income and Expenditure form and contact the Solicitor with your proposal. The N9a is already enclosed in the claim pack for Admittance which should be sent to the solicitor named on the claim form   If you are considering making a partial admittance N9b must be completed and returned to the court. Please note in most cases a partial admittance will result in an automatic CCJ for the amount admitted.   You have received a Claim - What you need to do.pdf1.33 MB · 241 downloads     Before Printing the PDF TIP   If you DO NOT wish to print Page 1 (Cover Page) of the PDF, please ensure to do the following:   Ensure you go to your Printer Settings and set it to 'Print from Page 2' (this way Page 1 (Cover Page) should not print out).   Note: This will save you Ink & Paper    
    • 3 threads merged for complete history of your debts. i suggest you re read from post 1 again. what are you doing still blindly paying a DCA on a historic debt?  
    • Hi, I have an old outstanding debt from 1994 due to MBNA for £20,000. The debt has been passed to various DCAs and is currently with PRA Group.  I sent them a CCA letter in January 2024. They acknowledged this letter and stated they would come back when they had more information, however the information did not arrive within the 12 working day scenario.. I have just received a copy of the agreement which goes back to 1994 from them. In their response letter they have stated " Please find enclosed documentation received to date: we are waiting further documents in order to complete your request. We have currently deemed this debt as unenforceable which means we are not able to take court or further action against you to recover the outstanding balance". They then go on to state "we are still legally entitled to:  1.Contact you to ask and repay what you owe 2.Pass your details onto a third party collection agency 3. Continue to report your account with the credit reference bureaux (as appropriate)". I'm at a loss as to what I should do next and would appreciate any guidance on this matter. I am currently paying £5.00 pcm. TIA      
    • A sinister tactic known as shoulder surfing is on the rise in the UK. Fraudsters are watching unwitting people log in to their mobile banking apps over their shoulder.View the full article
  • 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

Sheriff puts Bank of Scotland to proof on bank charges


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4109 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 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Just goes to show that this site not only brings you the latest news as soon as it appears but reports it accurately 8)

  • Haha 1

srfrench :eek:

 

Fight incompetance, stupidity, greed and unfairness......There's no excuse and no place for it in society, unless they really are! :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Meaning they are playing for time :rolleyes:

Can they do this if the other side do not consent?

 

Who is the Claimant in this case? Is it the bank or the borrower?

The matrix is intrinsically flawed. Within it is the program for it's own destruction. If you are reading this, you are in the matrix and it's days are numbered...so watch out! :eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you know that this is typical of the bank to try and win in a non-meritous way insofar as flexing their financial muscles to threaten bankruptcy on an entity that's lawfully challenging it's legality.

 

You would think it would be easy to defend a fairness issue if the the issue is fair and you would think that the bank would expend a couple of grand of their own (sic) money to settle the matter finally at an eventual saving of millions to them. Maybe they already know the fairness issue is indefensible and will abuse and frustrate justice!

srfrench :eek:

 

Fight incompetance, stupidity, greed and unfairness......There's no excuse and no place for it in society, unless they really are! :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps they want it in Small claims because if they lose, then it would not set any precedents and not binding on other courts.

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps they want it in Small claims because if they lose, then it would not set any precedents and not binding on other courts.

But the quote says they DON'T want it in SCC? :-?

 

If this is true, and it's precious little info here, then I can see why they would do it that way: As I said before, the odds are only 1 in 3 in their favour, either an outright loss or an attempt to settle out of court will give us the checkered flag to start the process again. The bank HAS to win, and they are going to throw EVERYTHING they can to try and make sure this happens, and when it does, they want to make sure it is precedent setting to close the door on us plebs once and for all. I don't know how much the case is for, but I am pretty sure the banks will be spending thousands times more to try and ensure victory.

 

Of course, if they DO lose, then they'll appeal etc, etc... hoping the other side eventually runs ouf of money before it gets to the ECJ. :rolleyes:

 

Cynical, moi? :razz:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. The above post said the opposite - The Bank wants a "non small claims" case. Surely if it falls within the limit as a single case then that is where it should be heard? Precedents shouldn't matter to us too much since if they lose this one I'm sure they'll go back to "ex gratia" payments rather than face losing loads of identical cases.

 

BD

Link to post
Share on other sites

Instead of speculating, why don't we wait to find out exactly what's happened, if at all we can? Are they taking it out of Small Claims or not? How much time have they asked for to file their further defence? On what basis did they ask etc?

 

Let's wait for more facts....;)

The matrix is intrinsically flawed. Within it is the program for it's own destruction. If you are reading this, you are in the matrix and it's days are numbered...so watch out! :eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Instead of speculating, why don't we wait to find out exactly what's happened, if at all we can? Are they taking it out of Small Claims or not? How much time have they asked for to file their further defence? On what basis did they ask etc?

 

Let's wait for more facts....;)

 

If you promise to get the facts tomorrow - we'll do the waiting.:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

This Glasgow case was first heard in Feb 2010 and set for June 11. Why does it take 4 months to add up costs to £35? Have they not got Excel?

 

Anyway surely they must have had the figures already to know that charging us £35 in the first place was what they needed to do to "cover their costs" - as their letters used to say.

 

Surely no one suspects they have been profiteering in this?

 

BD

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

This is ridiculous, what the hell has been going on? Its now been almost 7 months since the Supreme Court judgement explicitly stated that consumers may still be able to challenge unauthorised overdraft charges under S.5 of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations. In all this time I have heard not one case progressing to trial in any English and Welsh court to determine this new legal argument. There must now be countless bank charge claims that have been struck out of the system which just simply haven't been reported. We are all now waiting for one Scottish case to be heard which has absolutely no binding authority on courts in England and Wales and will at best perhaps, if its the right decision, be of minor persuasive authority. There surely must be more, as a collective action, that we can do to kick start these claims in the right direction as oppose to hanging our hopes (or moreover dashing our hopes) on this one case in Scotland.

 

CAG Team, any help or ideas appreciated.

 

TheyrCriminals

Link to post
Share on other sites

Meaning?

 

They're trying to find a way to wriggle out of it.:rolleyes:

 

By keeping it out of SC the claimant could be liable for costs which must be quite intimidating. I hope GLCs client doesn't agree to a settlement without going to court.:-|

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They're trying to find a way to wriggle out of it.:rolleyes:

 

By keeping it out of SC the claimant could be liable for costs which must be quite intimidating. I hope GLCs client doesn't agree to a settlement without going to court.:-|

 

In order to provide justice & irrespective of track & if asked a court can protect an ordinary claimant against costs particularly where it can be argued there is a public interest

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the Govan case has been put back a bit as the banks wanted to make it a non small claims case.

 

 

Perhaps they want it in Small claims because if they lose, then it would not set any precedents and not binding on other courts.

 

But the quote says they DON'T want it in SCC? :-?

 

If this is true, and it's precious little info here, then I can see why they would do it that way: As I said before, the odds are only 1 in 3 in their favour, either an outright loss or an attempt to settle out of court will give us the checkered flag to start the process again. The bank HAS to win, and they are going to throw EVERYTHING they can to try and make sure this happens, and when it does, they want to make sure it is precedent setting to close the door on us plebs once and for all. I don't know how much the case is for, but I am pretty sure the banks will be spending thousands times more to try and ensure victory.

 

Of course, if they DO lose, then they'll appeal etc, etc... hoping the other side eventually runs ouf of money before it gets to the ECJ. :rolleyes:

 

Cynical, moi? :razz:

 

Oops.. I should have gone to specsavers. :rolleyes: I missed the "non" Thanks Bookie :D

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait we must...:)

 

TheyrCriminals' post #395 makes some interesting points. A multipronged approach, even if based on the same legal arguments may be better. i.e. where a claim is brought not only in Scotland but in one or more courts in England and Wales as well, preferably against different banking institutions.

 

Perhaps CAG could coordinate this behind the scenes with one or two willing members?

The matrix is intrinsically flawed. Within it is the program for it's own destruction. If you are reading this, you are in the matrix and it's days are numbered...so watch out! :eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Patience guys .... we've come this far , let's stick with it .......

 

I am also of the belief that there is a CAG members case going forward(in England ) as we speak , but I'm saying no more about that at the moment .....

 

I'm also of the opinion(maybe mistaken ) that the Glasgow case is being brought under Consumer Laws , which are UK wide , therefore the fact that it's in Scotland shouldn't bar it from being a precedent UK wide ... although the banks barristers will try desperately to argue this ......

Nemo me impune lacessit

 

 

Advice & opinions given by johnnymitch are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

 

If you think I've helped you please feel free to tickle my star :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...