Are Capital 1 contacting customers? ***WON***

[millymollymoo]

Good luck

[gregorious77]

I have made up the draft directions and section F Directions request (attached)

I am happy with them.

Do I now fill out the form as directed, copy it twice (one for me and one for defendant) then send the N150, and both letters to the court and the defendant or do I have to try and agree the directions with them first or just tick No?

 

Which is for Section D Applications?

Have you made any applications in this claim? if so what for? For hearing on?

 

I have applied for Default judgment which was granted then taken back!

 

Greg

Edited November 3, 2011 by gregorious77

[gezwee]

Evening Greg

 

Yep, file and serve mate....... 1 for them [rec del], 1 for the court to seal and 1 to hang on to for your bundle if needed at a future date.

 

In all honesty you'll probably get a bog standard N24 stay of 1 month in response from the court but it puts the onus on the defendant to enter into negotiation for consent.

 

Not much else you can do at the mo, the other side will probably be sending out hundreds of aq's every month and won't be in any rush to talk until they [and you] receive orders/directions.

 

Sorry, missed the Section D question, tick no to applications........ wait for order then make a decision re app to strike out and/or SJ. Depending on order a consent may be slightly more favourable for you.

 

Gez

Edited November 2, 2011 by gezwee

[gregorious77]

Do I need to give brief reasons why I chose Fast track?

Should I put anything in the space for other info in I (like see attached draft directions)?

[gregorious77]

Just been looking at fees and if it goes to trial on fast track itll cost me £220!!! I dont have £220 so what is the advantage to this choice instead of small claims?

[gezwee]

Evening Greg

 

If funds are limited amend to small claims in your aq, fast track would allow you to recover costs as an LiP....... your case is borderline [value and/or complexity] so could be argued either way.

 

Its up to the dj then to decide which is the most appropriate track for allocation.

 

Are you in receipt of benefits that would offer you remission from fee?

 

Gez

[gregorious77]

Ok I will amend to small claims and send it all off tomorrow or sat latest.

I think it is a simple case i.e. they have no evidence of the phone call and I DO have evidence of the PPI box being ticked NO on my application form and them admitting this.

[gezwee]

Should be straightforward, your word against someone who mistakenly checked a field on their operating system........... bet they'll argue it all the way to the court steps though

 

See how things progress in the next couple of weeks, you can of course speak to their sols at any time to discuss a possible consent [make sure they know its off the record ie without prejudice save costs]. Would you be confident enough to hold your own in a chat with them?

 

Gez

[gregorious77]

Not sure what I would say really? I guess they would come out with legal jargon and we would go in circles!

[gezwee]

Morning Greg

 

You simply state the facts ............ You did not at any time request the product. Don't get drawn into a long conversation [cos they will try], focus on the one single point that will bear the greatest weight at a hearing.

 

Oh and........ copied up to date practice directions below re: track allocation for reference

 

http://www.justice.gov.uk/guidance/courts-and-tribunals/courts/procedure-rules/civil/contents/practice_directions/pd_part26.htm

 

 

The small claims track – allocation and case management

 

8.1

 

Allocation

 

(1)

(a) The small claims track is intended to provide a proportionate procedure by which most straightforward claims with a financial value of not more than £5,000 can be decided, without the need for substantial pre-hearing preparation and the formalities of a traditional trial, and without incurring large legal costs. (Rule 26.6 provides for a lower financial value in certain types of case.)

 

(b) The procedure laid down in Part 27 for the preparation of the case and the conduct of the hearing are designed to make it possible for a litigant to conduct his own case without legal representation if he wishes.

 

© Cases generally suitable for the small claims track will include consumer disputes, accident claims, disputes about the ownership of goods and most disputes between a landlord and tenant other than opposed claims under Part 56, disputed claims for possession under Part 55 and demotion claims whether in the alternative to possession claims or under Part 65.

 

(d) A case involving a disputed allegation of dishonesty will not usually be suitable for the small claims track.

 

 

(2) Rule 26.7(3) and rule 27.14(5)

(a) These rules allow the parties to consent to the allocation to the small claims track of a claim the value of which is above the limits mentioned in rule 26.6(2) and, in that event, the rules make provision about costs.

 

(b) The court will not allocate such a claim to the small claims track, notwithstanding that the parties have consented to the allocation, unless it is satisfied that it is suitable for that track.

 

© The court will not normally allow more than one day for the hearing of such a claim.

 

(d) The court will give case management directions to ensure that the case is dealt with in as short a time as possible. These may include directions of a kind that are not usually given in small claim cases, for example, for Scott Schedules.

[gregorious77]

all filled out and sent off today!

[gezwee]

Evening Greg

 

Assume you remembered a copy to them as well?

 

Not much else you can do at the mo, wait a few days until they've read their copy and see if they want to talk. Don't be surprised if they try to contact you..... some will, some won't - if you're not comfortable with it just suggest they e-mail so you have time to digest what they are saying.

 

Gez

[gregorious77]

Yes sent to them too (recorded).

[gregorious77]

Update,

Got their AQ today they have also attached draft directions.

They have ticked settle the claim before hearing yes, no to 1 month stay and yes to mediation.

They have also suggested fast track due to the allegations of unfair relationship and sale process requiring specific witness(es) costs order will be sought by the Defendant.

Witness name TBA for sales process of PPI and general management of account.

Costs so far £850

Estimated total costs £12,000

 

Draft directions read:

 

Allocation

1. Should be allocated to fast track

 

Disclosure of documents

2. each party shall give the other standard disclosure of documents by serving copies of their lists of documents by 4pm on 16 Dec 2011.

 

3. each party shall serve its written notice to inspect any of the documents contained with the other parties list by no later than 4 pm on 16 Dec 2011

 

Witnesses of fact

4. each party shall serve on the other party the witness statements of all witnesses of fact on whom he intends to rely. There shall be simultaneous exchange of such statements by no later than 4pm on 27 Jan 2012.

 

Expert evidence

 

5. No expert evidence being necessary, no party has permission to call or rely on expert evidence.

 

Dates for pre-trial checklists

6. Each party must file a pre-trial checklist no later than 4pm on 9 March 2012.

 

Trial and trial bundle

7.The trial of this case will take place on the first available date from 13 Apr 2012 and shall be listed for 1 day.

 

8. The claimant shall lodge an indexed bundle of docs in a ring binder with each page clearly numbered at the court not more than 7 days and not less than 3 days before the trial.

 

9. a case summary (not exceeding 250 words) outlining the matters still in issue, and referring where appropriate to relevant docs to assist the judge in reading papers before trial.

 

10.the parties shall seek to agree the contents of the bundle and case summary.

 

11. each party must inform court immediately if case settles.

[gregorious77]

A lot of their directions are just protocol?!?!

12,000 costs!

[AndyOrch]

A lot of their directions are just protocol?!?!

12,000 costs!

 

Yes but it looks impressive to any LiP and scary, particularly the Costs estimate:madgrin:

[gregorious77]

Doesnt look impressive to me I find it a bit patronising TBH.

I guess its up to the court to decide what happens next then.

They say they want to settle but also said in their defence I am entitled to nothing!

I take it their settlement preference is for me to drop it LOL not going to happen.

Also as for costs I do not have £12K so even if I did loose and they got costs awarded they cant have what I dont have!

[gezwee]

Morning Greg

 

Me thinks you should prepare yourself for this to come back on a N24 1 month stay, the courts are rammed out at the mo and any party indicating they would like to settle/mediate pre hearing will probably tick the right boxes with the dj [even if it was filed out of time, lol]

 

As Andy says....... the rest of their aq draft directions - scare tactics

 

Gez

[gregorious77]

Their AQ was most likely out of time as well BTW, the covering letter is dated 11/11/11 and the due date for AQ was 11/11/11. unless they are having these papers delivered by hand which I doubt!

Another point is I have free legal cover through the union I am in, do you guys think it would be worth asking if they would represent me? not 100% sure if they would in the CC but I have received advice from them before on a civil matter.

[citizenB]

Their AQ was most likely out of time as well BTW, the covering letter is dated 11/11/11 and the due date for AQ was 11/11/11. unless they are having these papers delivered by hand which I doubt!

Another point is I have free legal cover through the union I am in, do you guys think it would be worth asking if they would represent me? not 100% sure if they would in the CC but I have received advice from them before on a civil matter.

 

No harm in asking, if you dont, you will never know. The worst that can happen is they say, sorry.. no can do!

[gezwee]

Greg

 

Stay proactive on this, have you e-mailed them to offer the opportunity to settle pre-allocation? Conduct will play a part at later stage.

 

Gez

[gregorious77]

Greg

 

Stay proactive on this, have you e-mailed them to offer the opportunity to settle pre-allocation? Conduct will play a part at later stage.

 

Gez

 

I have not contacted them at all.

Do you think I should send an email saying I would like to settle?

Their idea of settling is saying no though, they have never offered anything only refusal.

How would I go about changing their minds?

I do not know the protocol for contacting them and dont want them to use anything I say against me in court!

[gezwee]

Hi Greg

 

All down to personal choice really, no duty upon you to do anything but follows the courts direction........... however, if you show the other side the opportunity to discuss without risk of disclosure pre-hearing it may work in your favour.

 

You could drop them a short e-mail indicating that you are prepared to enter into 'Without prejudice save as to costs' correspondence. I assume the sols gave you a direct line number and e-mail address for point of contact?

 

Remind them that it would seem prudent and in keeping with the overriding objectives to narrow the issues prior to allocation.

 

If you get stuck just shout and I'll help you draft a couple of lines to send them.

 

Gez

[gregorious77]

I would honestly not even know where to start?

Without prejudice save as to costs. give me the money you owe me and stop making up lies!

about the best I can think of really.

I have already asked them for evidence of the phone call and they have confirmed they do not have any records due to it being in too old.

Maybe

Without prejudice save as to costs.as you do not have any transcript or recording of the alleged telephone conversation which you say during which I purchased the PPI I suggest you admit this did not happen and you should pay up and stop wasting time and money on this hopeless defence.

 

As you can see I have no idea how to approach this without just having a pop at them.

[gezwee]

Lol.......... trust me, there's plenty of us on here who've come close to biting the end of our tongue off when corresponding with sols.

 

Try the following [assuming you have an e-mail address for them]

 

You v them and claim number in the subject line

 

Dear sir/madam

 

With reference to the above case, and in the interests of assisting the court in furthering the overriding objective;

 

Clearly there are issues which remain in dispute between the parties, in order to afford your client the opportunity to narrow those issues I am prepared to enter into 'without prejudice save as to costs' correspondence.

 

You will appreciate [whilst I cannot pre-empt the courts case management directions in this matter], that your clients apparent preference to mediation would likely result in directions requiring co-operation between parties.

 

I trust the above will allow for the opportunity to enter into meaningful discussion and look forward to hearing from you.

 

Yours........