THE BIG CLAIM-

[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.

[dolly]

Wow.

 

I wish you all the best, I really do.

[Anonymous]

Stephen, local hero?

 

Honey, if you manage this, you will be a NATIONAL hero!!!! Nay, SUPERhero!!!!!

 

All the very best, please please please let us know how things progress.

 

xxx

ML

[Guest stephen]

will do soon as I get back from the dentist,

[eeloojon]

All the best Stephen you have balls!!!

 

I'm tempted to do so myself and scarper with what settlements they throw at me lol :twisted: :twisted:

[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.

[Seminole]

What;s a part 8 claim? I get it is an attempt to establish some sort of general precedent?

[Seminole]

What;s a part 8 claim? I guess it is an attempt to establish some sort of general precedent?

[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.

[Seminole]

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!

[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

 

 

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

[Seminole]

I don;t know much about the law. Is there any danger that all of the individual cases that people are threatening/ bringing could be held up pending the outcome of this one?

[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

[eeloojon]

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.

[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.

[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.

[Falkirk1298]

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.

[sunseeker]

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)

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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

[Barrie Stir]

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.

[gothicf0rm]

shades of the mclibel thing here. good luck stephen but only one year for a judgement. lol. more like 12.

[Barrie Stir]

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]

[Barrie Stir]

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.

[BankFodder]

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