8 bank meetings now court

[love bug]

Better ring the court tomorrow, as no date for mediation yet.

Court date is set for the begining of next month, so surprised not heard anything yet. Just hope not anything wrong the other end

[love bug]

I rang the court who gave me the number of the mediation people. The head of mediation said they have not had a reply from the other side and was writing them a letter inviting them to mediation.

Surely this has to look bad on their part, if they wont even try mediation? What do you think?

[emandcole]

In the real world probably makes little difference but agree it should. If they are refusing and you were up for mediation certainly add it to your submissions to show you are a reasonable person

[love bug]

Just need to sort out my arguement, need to make sure all three main points come across:

1) the original mis-selling of the P.P.I

2) How it took 93 days for the S.A.R to give me all the info

3) Late payment markers on credit history, and the adverse affect therefore on my credit standing.

[love bug]

SCHEDULE OF COSTS FOR CLAIMANT:

 

Preparation: 10 hours

 

Research: 15 hours

 

Telephone calls, letters & hearing: 6 hours

x

Preparing application notice : 1 hour

 

 

Meetings with citizens advice bureau : 3hours

 

Meetings with branch manager

including traveling to and from work :25 hours

 

£9.25 per hour x 60 = £555.00

 

Disbursements-postage,carrier costs,printing,paper,ink,telephone calls photocopying,scanning,traveling to and from court : £150.00

 

VAT increase to 17.5 %: £321.25

 

Original van out of stock: £500.00

 

Mot and repair to old van to keep

in working order : £333.00

 

3 months,loss ad-fee on van : £ 300.00

 

Credit expert, scoring record check 6.99x10 £69.99

 

Credit expert subscription monthly 6.99x12 £85.88

 

total £2315.12

 

Any thoughts good/bad/ok ?????

Edited July 17, 2010 by love bug
lay out wrong, sorry

[emandcole]

SCHEDULE OF COSTS FOR CLAIMANT:

 

Preparation: 10 hours

 

Research: 15 hours

 

Telephone calls, letters & hearing: 6 hours

x

Preparing application notice : 1 hour

 

 

Meetings with citizens advice bureau : 3hours £9.25 per hour x 60 = £555.00

 

Whats this bit for?

 

Meetings with branch manager

including traveling to and from work :25 hours

 

Disbursements-postage,carrier costs,printing,paper,ink,telephone calls photocopying,scanning,traveling to and from court : £150.00

 

VAT increase to 17.5 %: £321.25

 

Original van out of stock: £500.00

 

Mot and repair to old van to keep

in working order : £333.00

 

3 months,loss ad-fee on van : £ 300.00

 

Credit expert, scoring record check 6.99x10 £69.99

 

Credit expert subscription monthly 6.99x12 £85.88

 

total £2315.12

 

Any thoughts good/bad/ok ?????

 

Just make sure everything you claim can be documented/evidenced and is wholly reasonable. If the judge thinks you're being greedy for even a second it will go against you

[love bug]

Hope that looks a little more clear now, sorry. Its not to you look back or someone points out these things you notice.

 

Thanks for your help.

 

I have to the 27th to send all the info to the court and pay the £150 court fee.

Whilst in the many meetings with the branch manager, i did on one occasion ask him if it would be possible for the bank to loan me the money required for the purchase of the van, as i had been declined because of the banks mistakes. I was told that the bank wouldn't consider me for a loan, as i had a bad credit history!!!! ( that of course was their fault!!) This is documented in the Subject Access Request info i have recieved.

[love bug]

I had a phone call from Natwest's solicitors yesterday, asking if i recieved their offer for £500. I had a recap of the situation with him, and told him that it is now twice that Natwest has not accepted mediation. I explained that from my perspective the offer was an insult, and he explained he would speak to his client ( Natwest) regarding the matter.

 

Today i recieved an email from the Chief Mediator, explaining that Natwests solicitors have stated, "...they are in disscusions with you regarding this matter and my ( mediator) services are probably no longer required. "

 

Does this mean that the one conversation i had with Natwest solicitor count as " disscusions" ? What if they don't get back in contact with me? Do you think i should still try for mediation? Ahhhggghhh!!!!!!!!

[emandcole]

I had a phone call from Natwest's solicitors yesterday, asking if i recieved their offer for £500. I had a recap of the situation with him, and told him that it is now twice that Natwest has not accepted mediation. I explained that from my perspective the offer was an insult, and he explained he would speak to his client ( Natwest) regarding the matter.

 

Today i recieved an email from the Chief Mediator, explaining that Natwests solicitors have stated, "...they are in disscusions with you regarding this matter and my ( mediator) services are probably no longer required. "

 

Does this mean that the one conversation i had with Natwest solicitor count as " disscusions" ? What if they don't get back in contact with me? Do you think i should still try for mediation? Ahhhggghhh!!!!!!!!

 

This is a two way street remember, just because the chief mediator emails with an assumption doesn't mean that's how it has to be. If you're still up fpr mediation email/phone back and state you still require their services.

 

As for 'Do you want mediation still?' if both sides are engaged in meaningful dialogue mediation is still worth a shot, an impending hearing date can quite often loosen the demands of one party, all the more so if one side are not so sure about their position.

 

You have to remember this is a bank, if they peed on you to put a fire out they'd sooner or later send you an invoice.

 

On a final note when you are talking with the other sides representatives be cautious about the words you use. Describing an offer as an insult may well have been uttered harmlessly at the time but taken out of context when the solicitor reports back to his client it suggests a level of hostility that they could well use against you when the judge starts questionning events to date.

[love bug]

This is it;

 

xxxxx,

We have today heard from cobbetts and they tell us they are in disscussions with you regarding settlement in this matter and my services are probably not required. If there is anything I can do to assist than let me know , otherwise i wish you every success with negotations.

HMCS small claims chief Mediator.

 

When i spoke to the mediator today, Natwest's soliciotrs sent the mediator a fax stating his services are not needed.

The mediator would not send me a copy of the letter inviting Natwest to mediation again.

I was a bit upset because it would of been another arrow as i would have proof of Natwest not being open to negotiation.

Just got to stay on track, just in case

[emandcole]

This is it;

 

xxxxx,

We have today heard from cobbetts and they tell us they are in disscussions with you regarding settlement in this matter and my services are probably not required. If there is anything I can do to assist than let me know , otherwise i wish you every success with negotations.

HMCS small claims chief Mediator.

 

When i spoke to the mediator today, Natwest's soliciotrs sent the mediator a fax stating his services are not needed.

The mediator would not send me a copy of the letter inviting Natwest to mediation again.

I was a bit upset because it would of been another arrow as i would have proof of Natwest not being open to negotiation.

Just got to stay on track, just in case

 

Thats fine then, if Natwest don't wanna talk just make sure the court is aware of that when the time comes, especially if you win and costs are being considered .

 

Concentrate now on your argument and do all you can to ensure you know it inside out and back to front, along with detailed knowledge of any case law you're relying on.

[patrickq1]

I had a phone call from Natwest's solicitors yesterday, asking if i recieved their offer for £500. I had a recap of the situation with him, and told him that it is now twice that Natwest has not accepted mediation. I explained that from my perspective the offer was an insult, and he explained he would speak to his client ( Natwest) regarding the matter.

 

Today i recieved an email from the Chief Mediator, explaining that Natwests solicitors have stated, "...they are in disscusions with you regarding this matter and my ( mediator) services are probably no longer required. "

 

Does this mean that the one conversation i had with Natwest solicitor count as " disscusions" ? What if they don't get back in contact with me? Do you think i should still try for mediation? Ahhhggghhh!!!!!!!!

 

you should also ring the mediation services and explain they are obviscating and stalling tactics,you had not been contacted by them except to say they would only reiterate what they had offered before and you feel they are trying to hoodwink the mediation service and use this as a excuse that if it goes to court it was you who cancelled the mediation

do not give an inch on this trickery is one method you should be aware of this is the lowest trick in the book DO NOT TRUST A SINGLE WORD THEY SAY WITHOUT THE MEDIATOR BEING PRESENT

[love bug]

Think you are right as i haven't heard from them yet! What a surprise.....

 

i have the case law which i am relying on, i have newspaper articles showing other Natwests customers problems in regard to customer service and feedback, which i feel strengthens my case.

 

I have quite a few pages of scripts relating to the meetings i had with the branch manager, all the notes that he put on the system, and also the notes made by the customer service team when i rang and spoke to them on several occasions.

 

I feel i should counteract what the defense has said, and using these scripts i can do that i think. Just need to be sure that what i write makes sense!!

I need to send my bundle in 14 days before the hearing! best get to work : )

[love bug]

Can you let me know how this sounds>....

 

Skeleton Argument for Hearing 10.08.2010

　

The Defendant, Natwest Bank , has so far to date, made no effort to discuss mediation with the Claimant.

This begs the question, when is it reasonable to refuse mediation, or in which cases is mediation inappropriate ? In, “Hasley” Lord Justice Dyson considered the approiatness of parties choosing to mediate in the context of whether a party behaved unreasonably by refusing to do so.

In July 2003 Mr Justice Lightman said in, “Hurst v Leeming [2003]” Lloyds rep37 : “Give mediation a chance . Give it a chance at the earliest opportunity” . In this case this has not happened.

Below are the reason’s why Mr Harris feels his claim against the Defendant are sound and worthy of the Courts time.

BACKGROUND

　

In the defence set out by Natwest, it is stated, “…the Defendant has admitted that in error it changed the dates of his ( “Claimant’s) Standing Order payments from the Current Account to pay the Loan Account, without the knowledge of the Claimant. As a result of the change in payment dates, payments into the Loan Account were late and the Defendant accordingly registered several late payment markers with the Credit Reference Agencies (“CRAs”).”

So clearly liability has been admitted. Why then, are Natwest stalling on paying Mr Harris the compensation he rightly deserves?

Mr Harris’s claim was struck out by the courts own initiative 8 April 2009. There was then a hearing to decide if the case had any merit on the 21 May 2010 . It was decided that the Claimant can show he has a real prospect of success and that he can show new evidence of recoverable losses sustained by the Banks error.

Mr Harris was in the process of finding finance for a new van for his self-employed work, when the Bank placed false late payment markers with the Credit Reference Agencies . This caused Mr Harris to be refused finance. This caused a lot of inconvenience to the Claimant. He had to discover why these late payment markers were there, have meetings with the bank manager to try and rectify the situation.( Please find enclosed copies of the notes made by the manager of Natwest in Ashford. ) These clearly show Mr Harris concern about not being able to obtain a new van on finance. This was brought into question by Natwest when they said in their defence that, “…he has provided no evidence that his requirement for further credit from a different lender for a new van was within reasonable contemplation of the parties as at the inception of the Loan Account in November 2007. Accordingly, any such loss would be too remote.”

This is unclear. Mr Harris took out the original Loan Account in November 2007, this loan was to purchase a car for his wife. This loan had no bearing on buying a van then, or indeed now. The issue in question is, and always will be, the Late Payment markers wrongly placed on the CRAs report, which affected Mr Harris ability to obtain future credit.

Mr Harris feels he has suffered loss and damage directly due to the defendants conduct of my credit agreement with them.

　

The Defendant states in their defence that, “..a lender may have manifold reasons for refusing credit” This, of course, is true in some regards. But Mr Harris has copies of his credit report that clearly show his other financial commitments were up to date and the only “blemish” on his otherwise very good credit report, were the false late payment markers placed by Natwest. Not only this, but as soon as the late payment markers were rightly removed, Mr Harris again applied for finance for a new van, and was accepted. Therefore, proving his credit standing was very good without the markers.

 

The effect of the entries could be almost automatic rejection of credit by the lender. It is inconceivable that these consequences would not be known to a commercial bank. Putting entries on the credit registers run by Experian and Equifax could have far reaching consequences on the ability of a person to obtain credit.

Mr Harris would have been able to buy the van and on balance of probabilities he would of bought it.

 

People made enquiry of the registers and became aware that there was a negative credit reference, or a reference which had the effect of cautioning prospective lenders, which were posted again against the pursuer.

Natwest also maintain that, “Even if he were turned down for credit as a result of the late payment markers, he has provided no evidence that any refusal of credit caused him any loss.”

On the issue of remoteness, the Judge in case “ King” stated, “…it was not necessary to foresee the precise chain of events, there was enough to establish that it was foreseeable that the pursuer would suffer an inability in obtaining credit. He submitted that the underlying reasoning in the case “King” was that there was an injury to credit whether or not there was an actual inability to get credit in any given circumstances.

CASE LAW:

As Judges in these cases have written:

 

“Had there been no finding of specific loss in this case, I would have had no hesitation in finding that an award of damages for mere injury to credit was appropriate.”

In modern society credit plays a very big part in conduct of daily lives of a significant portion of the population. The financial services Industry is constantly advertising loans, credit cards, store cards, mortgages, consolidation loans etc . To have one’s credit worthiness impugned, so that one is at risk of being unable to obtain credit on the grounds that he is not credit worthy is, if anything, a more significant matter for the individual than it would have been at the time of “ King”, over a hundred years ago.

 

Mr Beynon has submitted that a figure of £10.000 would be appropriate. The figure of £100 awarded by, “Sheriff “ and left standing by Inner House in, “ King v British” translates, according to National Statistics Publication, “ Focus on Consumer Price” indices 2008, table 5/3 to £9975 in the year 2008.

The figure of £5,500 awarded to an individual in, “ Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society” 1996 4AU ER119 was not interfered with by the Court of Appeal in 1996 and, in today’s figures, would be worth £8,215.”

　

Symons v British Steel 2004 Sc HL94 and in particular paragraph 60. Lord Roger sets out the lines to be taken into account in approaching any question of damage once liability has been established. The first of these, and Lord Rogers starting point, is that the defender is not liable for a consequence of a kind which is not reasonably foreseeable.

As a consequence of the defenders negligent misrepresentation that the pursuer was in default of his obligations to them, the pursuer sustained a general loss to his credit worthiness which is fairly stated at £2500.

Whether an individual was or was not meeting his obligations was ascertained by reference to the credit registries and in particular, Experian and Equifax.

　

　

[love bug]

Had all this time and now the last minute dash!!!!!

HELP!!!!

[emandcole]

Hi LB, thanks for the PM but I am by no means an expert, not on this stuff anyway

 

First off my comments would be that if you're submitting this as a skeleton then you need to remove the actual content of cases you refer to, just stick with listing the name of the case itself rather than the bits from the case.

 

I believe the skeleton merely directs the judge to case law you rely on and all of the actual detail you wish to direct him or her to can be contained in your full defence. The full defence holds all of the detail and can be as long and detailed as it needs to be.

 

I believe the skeleton should be as light as possible and give an overview of the points of your argument however you would be wise to perhaps google skeleton arguments and learn more on this as I'm not sufficiently knowledgeable to advise you definitively.

 

There are some grammatical issues here and there that need tidying up such as "Mr Harris would have been able to buy the van and on balance of probabilities he would of (have) bought it".

 

Little things I know but you need to get the judge on side and that requires attention to detail and well presented statements as a minimum.

 

The statement also needs numbering so it is easy for all involved to reference a particular argument or point. At the moment it would be difficult to quickly refer someone to an area of your statement without much pointing and time wasting, this wil hack the judge off pretty quickly.

 

Have you submitted your costs to the court and the other side as well? Best to do this sooner rather than later as failure to do so is likely to result in you not being able to benefit from relief when the time comes. Get them in 10 days or so before the hearing.

 

Finally be cautious about doing the judges job for them. Statements such as "So clearly liability has been admitted" may be certain in your mind but can be dangerous as it also risks leading you along a path that is free of objectivity.

 

You need at all times to remain emotionally detached and allow yourself to consider the argument the other side will present. You are more likely to then spot persuasive argument the other side are likely to present and as a result be more perceptive and prepared to deal with it.

 

There is nothing wrong with the statement as such if it really is the case, just word and present it differently. An example instead could be "The claimant is of the opinion that the admission of fault offered by the defendant in their letter of XXXX is contributory to issues of overall liability". You get the gist anyway.

 

Make sure as well that you take three copies with you of everything you have, just in case you get a difficult judge who decides to conveniently 'forget' the documents you already filed with the court. You also then have a spare for the defendant and can enusre you are not disadvantaged by some of the games that can be played at your expense.

 

Also, have noticed you make reference to other documents etc. Refer to them as exhibits and give each one a number or letter etc so you can then easilt find everything, same for the judge. You must remember this case is important to you but to the judge its just another dispute.

 

He or she will have little interest in accommodating you whilst you dig about for a letter you were sent a year ago and point across the table to a pile of photocopies as they try to keep up. Make it easy for them, think about how you will present your argument and do your best to present yourself in a good light.

 

Hope that's of some use but definitely check up on skeleton arguments etc.

 

 

[love bug]

Its taken all day.

Pages numbered.All pages in order. Cross fingers and wait.

Thanks again

[emandcole]

Thats ok, just hope it works out for you but stay open to any last minute offers from the other side...always better to walk away and avoid the risks of court if they come to you with a decent offer

[love bug]

Maybe there might be a last minute offer and yes I would like to just walk away from the whole thing.I just think that they wanted to see that bundle and what was in ti before they do.

Like you say testing you as a person and to see what you are made of. Just hope they enjoy it over a nice cuppa.

I do know if I put all the hours I have on this into working at my job I would be a lot richer.

[love bug]

Last time at the preliminary hearing, the other sides barrister send me a email of there defence the night before the hearing.The 14 days are up now before the hearing. I have not received anything from them.

Surely they cant do the same again before the main hearing, as this puts me at a disadvantage.

I have given the court and them my bundle. I thought everyone should have a level playing field.

Anyone know the rules on this one.

As I thought we both had upto 14 days

[emandcole]

Last time at the preliminary hearing, the other sides barrister send me a email of there defence the night before the hearing.The 14 days are up now before the hearing. I have not received anything from them.

Surely they cant do the same again before the main hearing, as this puts me at a disadvantage.

I have given the court and them my bundle. I thought everyone should have a level playing field.

Anyone know the rules on this one.

As I thought we both had upto 14 days

 

You should have their bits at least a week before the hearing I believe. Emailing it the night before is not on, I hope you made the judge aware of this last time?

 

Technically you would be within your rights to ask for an adjournment and costs on the day of the hearing as a result of the other side not getting info to you on time...there really is no excuse. Tiny amendments the judge may overlook but the whole thing? Not acceptable.

 

Perhaps pre-empt their shoddy behaviour by letting the court know you've still not had anything and as they emailed it to you last time with just hours to go you are concerned the other side is again planning to do the same. This way the court will have been made aware of your concerns nice and early. If on the day they've done the same thing you can use your prior warning to justify the request for the adjournment as you had done all you could to notify the court of this problem.

 

Would also write to the other side informing them that you will not be so tolerant of late submissions a second time and that you expect to have a copy of their defence at your door in good time. Warn them that late antics will result in an application for adjournment and remind them you will claim costs for this as well, should they choose to do the same again.

 

Finally, don't you have an order from the court setting out how each party is to prepare for the hearing? If the defence is not complying with the order make noise about it. All they are trying to do is throw you off and disadvantage you...do not let them.

[love bug]

Just had a look and it says

"Each party shall deliver to other party and court copies of all documents on which he intends to rely at the hearing no later than 14 days before the hearing

 

So should I write a letter to the court and send them a copy.

 

How to word it.

[emandcole]

Just had a look and it says

"Each party shall deliver to other party and court copies of all documents on which he intends to rely at the hearing no later than 14 days before the hearing

 

So should I write a letter to the court and send them a copy.

 

How to word it.

 

Perfect, just what we were after. If you do not have them in time notify the other side in writing/fax and copy the letter to the court manager. Remind them of their duties and state that if they are not able to comply with the order of the court that they should inform you and the court of this immediately. They really won't want to do this but as you've asked questions will be raised if they failed here as well.

 

It is not good enough for them to ignore these directions, if you don't let them get away with it you can rest asured it will come back to bite them at some point. Just keep the letter simple and factual, doesn't need to be complicated at all and just ensure the court is made aware of any develpoment that you feel is compromising your case.

[love bug]

Think it very important to make a point of last minute email.

will have a look at my emails to see a time and date

More facts the better.

 

Will sit down and think up a letter, Short and sweet I think would be best

 

Thanks again

[love bug]

To The Court Manager,

This letter is to let the court know I have still not had any documents from the Defence and as they emailed their Skeleton Defence the night before the preliminary hearing. I am concerned they are planning to do the same again.

In the courts order it states, “ Each party shall deliver to the other party and court, copies of all documents on which he intends to rely at the hearing no later than 14 days before the hearing”

The defence is not complying with this order, and this development, I feel is compromising my case and putting me at a disadvantage. I am worried the Defence is withholding documents and will produce them for the first time at the hearing, therefore, having the element of surprise.

If the Defence is unable to comply with the order of the court, they should inform the court and myself immediately.

Thank you for taking the time to read this letter.

　

　

　

Yours Faithfully,

 

AND THIS ONE FOR THEM

 

This letter is to let the defence know I have still not had any documents from you and as you emailed your Skeleton Defence the night before the preliminary hearing , I am concerned you are planning to do the same again.

In the courts order “ Each party shall deliver to the other party and court, copies of all documents on which he intends to rely at the hearing no later than 14 days before the hearing”

The defence is not complying with this order, and this development, I feel, is compromising my case and putting me at a disadvantage,(taken by surprise) and you are planning to do the same again.

This is a perverse interpretation of the direction, and which requires the documents to be sent before the court case started.

This letter is to remind you of your duties and state that if you are not able to comply with the order of the court, that you should inform myself and the court immediately .I warn you, that late antics will result in an application for adjournment and remind you I will claim costs for this, should you choose to do the same again. I will not be so tolerant of late submissions a second time and expect to have a copy of your defence in good time.

 

 

Yours Faithfully,

 

This letter is to let the defence know I have still not had any documents from you and as you emailed your Skeleton Defence the night before the preliminary hearing , I am concerned you are planning to do the same again.

In the courts order “ Each party shall deliver to the other party and court, copies of all documents on which he intends to rely at the hearing no later than 14 days before the hearing”

The defence is not complying with this order, and this development, I feel, is compromising my case and putting me at a disadvantage,(taken by surprise) and you are planning to do the same again.

This is a perverse interpretation of the direction, and which requires the documents to be sent before the court case started.

This letter is to remind you of your duties and state that if you are not able to comply with the order of the court, that you should inform myself and the court immediately .I warn you, that late antics will result in an application for adjournment and remind you I will claim costs for this, should you choose to do the same again. I will not be so tolerant of late submissions a second time and expect to have a copy of your defence in good time.

 

 

Yours Faithfully,

 

Any good ???