Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Same as Barclays one I have just updated on. PRA group have written back and told me they intend to proceed with claim, have also sent another stack of documents, similar to last time round. I did fill in an online income breakdown etc on their website  offering to pay them x amount of money back each month,  a couple of weeks back, they haven't acknowledged that ?  
    • Hello, I wasn't able to update the defence, so they got the daft one.  Pra Group have responded dated 25th April saying they intend to proceed with claim. I have also received a stack of documents, similar to last time - print outs of old statements, but this time around they have send me a copy of the Barclay Card Conditions. Unsigned and dated. The address is an old address.  A consumer credit agreement with current address. Pages of it and no signature. I have uploaded onto a PDF what I have. The CCA agreement looks like a generic print out, I5 pages + long, I've included the 1st page that had my details on (redacted) don't know if its necessary to upload all of it.  Barclays 26042024.pdf
    • I suggested consideration of bankruptcy some years ago. It was not well received.
    • That is a superb WS. However, I have a few tweaks to suggest. In (2) "indicating" not "indication". I think to be consistent with your numbering, in (6) the Beavis case should be EXHIBIT 2. Do you really need to include over 100 pages of Beavis?  I think that would be likely to annoy the judge.  Just try and find the bit where they decide it was not a penalty due to having an interest in limiting the time that vehicles can stay. I'll have a look myself for this bit later as it's highly likely to be in WSs from PPCs who think that that paragraph means all their charges are valid always on every occasion. After your current (7) add this.  It's always useful to refer to a judgment when making a legal point - 8.  In the case PCM vs Bull, Claim No. B4GF26K6, where the Defendant was issued parking tickets for parking on private roads with signage stating “No parking at any time”, District Judge Glen in his final statement mentioned that: “the notice was prohibitive and didn’t communicate any offer of parking and that landowners may have claim in trespass, but that was not under consideration”.   In (14) if my maths are right the CPR request should be "EXHIBIT 3".  it is missing from your list of exhibits. In (16) the two figures should be £100 and £170.  They are entitled to increase fro,m £60 to £100, they are not entitled to increase to £170.  To make it clear for the judge I would write - 16. The Claimant has artificially inflated their claim for a £100 invoice to £170. This is simply a poor attempt to circumvent the legal costs cap at small claims. 17. The Claimant has also invented a second fictitious charge, for legal representative's costs, when they have no legal representative. You also need ot number your exhibits. The rest is excellent - well done.
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

THE BIG CLAIM-


Guest stephen
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6638 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

Guest stephen

Well to day, I have done it. I have issued a claim against every one of the big banks,

 

There will be no out of court settlement, so the end is near for excessive penalty charges.

 

Unless the banks can finally prove that, there charges are fare, but to do that, they have to explain a £3 billion profit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 51
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Wow. :shock:

 

I wish you all the best, I really do.

Please note that I am not a legal expert and all advice given is without prejudice and is purely my opinion only.

 

** Nationwide - £1821.15-PAID IN FULL - Aug 06 **

** Halifax Mortgage -£390 - PAID IN FULL - Nov 06 **

Lloyds TSB - MCOL issued 09/03/07 - £2953 + costs - ON HOLD....

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest stephen

There will not be any settlements, as I not seeking to claim back any money

 

I have put in a part 8 claim.

 

It is against

HSBC Bank plc,

HALIFAX PLC,

Barclays Bank PLC,

LLOYDS TSB BANKPLC,

NATWEST BANK LTD,

The Co-operative Bank,

Nationwide Building Society,

Alliance & Leicester plc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest stephen

No I cannot do abbey but once i win against these banks abbey will just have to follow suit or lose hundreds of customers.

 

Yeah only problem with a part 8 claim it not a small track claim so you not protected form costs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know that you have the law on your side but surely the risk here is that this is one fight that the banks can't afford to lose and if they chuck their full resources into it, they may have a chance of winning. I'm not doubting your ability but I do have some reservations about the British judcial system.

 

The stakes seem very high on this one. If you win then the banks may have refund everyone. If the case is lost it could affect peoples' ability to claim.

 

Let's hope you win!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest stephen

I just mad, if I lose this case, I reckon costs will be close to a million

 

So any donations would be great

:lol::lol::lol:

 

 

But when I win the Banks Lose 3 billion a year and could be faced with paying back everyones charges for 6 years

 

so 6 X 3 billion is a total of 18 billion. which is a little more than I would have to pay if i lose

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest stephen

Yes dave but i need the help of everyone here

 

If any one has letters from there banks when they asked for there charges back and could spare me a copy, it would be great

 

For example, where your bank refuses to break down there cost, or say their in-line with other banks. I need this, etc

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes dave but i need the help of everyone here

 

If any one has letters from there banks when they asked for there charges back and could spare me a copy, it would be great

 

For example, where your bank refuses to break down there cost, or say their in-line with other banks. I need this, etc

 

You can quote mine stephen its in other insitutions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest stephen
Nah - this is a seperate case.

 

Incidentily - if (WHEN!) you win Stephen - it might be called 'The Valentines Day Massacre'.

 

yeah it probably take a year to because of all the courts

 

it be funny if it ended the same day next year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest stephen

i cant take abbey because in the settlemnet I agreed that i would not take them to court. again about this issue,

 

yes that forum would be helpfull, whenback.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i cant take abbey because in the settlemnet I agreed that i would not take them to court. again about this issue,

 

yes that forum would be helpfull, when back.

 

Isn't that in itself a breach of the law by trying to limit your right to seek redress at law? It's certainly against the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regs, under Schedule 2

 

(q) excluding or hindering the consumer's right to take legal action or exercise any other legal remedy, particularly by requiring the consumer to take disputes exclusively to arbitration not covered by legal provisions, unduly restricting the evidence available to him or imposing on him a burden of proof which, according to the applicable law, should lie with another party to the contract.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Make sure key assets are in your partners/wife/relations name incase the worst comes to the worst.

 

I went bankrupt in 1993 for £13,000 (to HM Customs and Excise). Have only just received costs, etc from Trustee and face paying out £53,000 from re-mortgage. Lukily have enough equity and can afford the new payments but bit of a b**ger as was never informed by original trustee of right to purchase interest if -ve equity in property (which there was in 1994) :evil:

Smile: £2,522 full payment received,

Citi Cards: £693.71 balance written off. Full value of Court claim,

West Brom Building Society: DPA request sent 15.05.06,

Capital 1: £220 claimed LBA sent 15.05.06.

Barclaycard: DPA request sent 16.05.06

Link to post
Share on other sites

no falkirk. they did not, i was an open agreement that I signed and was okayed by the court. if i breach the agreemnet they could sue me.

 

but it does not matter for once the case is proven in court abbey would follow suit anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

no falkirk. they did not, i was an open agreement that I signed and was okayed by the court. if i breach the agreemnet they could sue me.

 

but it does not matter for once the case is proven in court abbey would follow suit anyway.

 

They would indeed.

 

Best of luck, it will certainly be interesting!

 

John

Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgive what might appear to be a naiive enquiry - but as you have issued a Part 8 (I believe 'money only') Claim against this list of banks, surely you must have a personal cause of action against them, to bring such an action - rather than seeking a declaration on behalf of the consumer in general ? Perhaps you could clarify please ? Many thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

About ten days or so ago, I heard reference to The Bank Action Group late one night on Radio 5 Live. On the programme, I believe that there was someone either from the site or a supporter of the site, who was a solicitor, possibly named Dave or Derek - as it was quite late I was already half asleep and may be wrong - and it was suggested that, as yet, there was no judicial ruling on penalties per se.

 

In fact this is not the case, as there is a recognised legal authority on this.

 

Charges which constitute a penalty because they are not a genuine pre-estimate of loss were dealt with in a little know House of Lords ruling in Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Company v New Garage & Motor Company [1915] 1AC 79 ! This authority is binding on all Courts.

 

Hope this helps.[/b]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently, it is in the interests of the public and as a member of the public he is entitled to bring action against those in breach of certain legal acts. [unquote]

 

I understand the interpretation, however I would respectfully suggest that the claim will be struck out as there is no direct cause of action.

Link to post
Share on other sites

About ten days or so ago, I heard reference to The Bank Action Group late one night on Radio 5 Live. On the programme, I believe that there was someone either from the site or a supporter of the site, who was a solicitor, possibly named Dave or Derek - as it was quite late I was already half asleep and may be wrong - and it was suggested that, as yet, there was no judicial ruling on penalties per se.

 

In fact this is not the case, as there is a recognised legal authority on this....

 

Hope this helps.[/b]

 

Thanks for the heads up. As it happens, your recollection of the interview is incorrect. There is a full recording of it available in the Library on this forum

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6638 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...