bailiffs at barclays canary wharf

[iklt]

Three years ago it all went wrong work dried up i defaulted on personal loans, credit cards, overdraft, the options where bankruptcy or dmp as i am a home owner i went for the dmp option with no fees playplan plus i make monthly payments from my now reduced wages.

 

roughly it is 60k to about six creditors the biggest being hfc and barclays.at the rate i pay after essentials it will be cleared in 2045 if i dont croak i will be 81

 

i have had great success claiming ppi with the help of the template letters on cag (MBNA being the most difficult with there you ticked the box so it was non advised basis waiting for court date for that one)sent sar to barclays and got big envelope back had ppi on current account and claimed back £3500 of which £1950 they offset.

 

reading through the sar the account was changed to a additions plus account in 2006 but in 2000 to 2002 i had twenty pound charges totaling £780.00 pounds this got to me as the ppi was added to the account without my knowledge i might not have incurred these charges i knew they would be classed as statute barred because of the time but i wrote claiming financial hardship asking for a refund.

 

they replied saying sorry for inconvenience but the charges are statute barred and the charges where fair and where added because i could not manage my account properly.end off.

 

i left it for a couple of weeks and after a couple of sleepless nights thinking i was hard done too i thought i don't have much to loose so i put a claim in with MCOL after fourteen days no acknowledgment so i entered judgement three weeks later i had first letter from barclays special investigations team telling me i was relying on legal arguments which have been considered and rejected by the high court and the supreme court and not to try and execute a warrant and withdraw this claim as they seek to have the claim struck out and i would have to pay there legal costs.

 

Two more letters followed as the hearing got closer they did ask for it to be heard without a hearing but a date of 24/09/2012 was set at my local county court wrexham. rather than shake in my boots i thought give it a shot take all my dmp stuff and as far as the statute barred went would try and go with section 32 c of the limitations act(the period of limitation shall not begin to run until the plaintiff has discovered the fraud concealment or mistake(as the case may be) or could with reasonable diligence have discovered it).in that respect i paid the charges mistakenly thinking they where lawful and the bank concealed there true nature.(ie they where unfair and disproportionate).

 

any way day comes and they send young lady who tells me on the way in she is the barrister for barclays and gives me a look as if i am something she had stood in.

 

I was expecting it to be struck out and award them costs but he was not impressed with the legal team at barclays and he could not see a defence and was annoyed they had not acknowledged the judgement (at which i piped up there was a communication problem at barclays HQ as reported in the press last week bailiffs had been there to remove computers and art work

 

she lost her way at this and implied i was out of my depth which made him more mad and she quoted OFT V Abbey National supreme court 2009 decision which she had no case law with her.And then asked for case to be struck out and them to be awarded costs at this point he asked if i had incurred any costs for attending as i am self employed i said loss of earnings

 

i thought for a moment he was going to give me judgement and we could all go home but he criticised barclays legal team and sympathised with her for not being sent with a propper defence and expecting him to throw the case out

 

he has given them 28 days to get things together and send a copy to me.he told me to write a list of my expenses and for the next hearing i left feeling bewilderd but not really knowing what my next move is or if i can get a result any help and thoughts would be helpful thanks in advance ian

Edited September 26, 2012 by slick132
put in paragraphs to make it more readable

[MARTIN3030]

Hello these forums are littered with stories of Barclays contempt not only for its customers,but in some cases legal process.Your story is not too surprising therefore,it just goes to show that nothing much has changed.

Is there anything specifically that you need help with-or questions you want answering ?

[iklt]

Hello these forums are littered with stories of Barclays contempt not only for its customers,but in some cases legal process.Your story is not too surprising therefore,it just goes to show that nothing much has changed.

Is there anything specifically that you need help with-or questions you want answering ?

hi martin yes do you think i should ask them to give me a breakdown of the twenty pound charge even though the oft considerd it unfair is this my strongest point as i gather no bank has explained there pre 2006 charges regards ian

[MARTIN3030]

Hello Ian.

So can you confirm that this was a current account/savings account /loan or what ?

 

I had a claim for pre 2000 charges in the middle of the OFT v Abbey case.

Barclays applied for a stay pending the Supreme Court ruling.

My arguement was that Judge Smith in the OFT v Abbey case had not looked at any historical terms and conditions.

Indeed Smith did say that whilst he was confident to rule on those conditions he had inspected,it was not to say that other terms and conditions could not be viewed as penalty charges or unfair.This would be a matter for Courts to decide.

I know of one case where one building society did pay up rather than face this arguement after it was pointed out to them that none of their terms and conditions was looked at by Smith in the OFT v Abbey case.

Barclays defended the historical claims on 2 points.

1.That the Supreme Court and Smith summaries deemed their charges were not penalties.

 

2.They maintained that their historical terms and conditions were materially the same as their later ones,and so would have the same effect in consideration of Smiths findings for those Barclays ones he did look at.

 

Remarkably,Barclays were unable to supply actual terms and conditions for their historical accounts,and made a sworn statement that a full search had failed to retrieve them from their archives.

In the end they produced Tariff sheets from around 2000.

Despite a very big internet appeal,I was unable to find any one holding these terms and conditions from circa 1999/2000 but dont for one minute believe that Barclays do not hold them.

I found something on one of their websites which boasted of archive material going back to the early 1900s.

In fact it mentioned a warehouse on the outskirts of Manchester which held documents in an area comprising of 2 miles of shelving space !!

I pointed this out to the Judge and the Barrister was not to quick to comment. Ha Ha.

 

Anyway back to your case.

What have you used in your Particulars of Claim ?

What are you relying on insofar as case law/statute ?

 

The limitation aspect is easily got round using s32c (I used this myself and it was accepted by the Court despite a fight from Barclays )

 

Given that you had requested the charges to be refunded based on hardship,there may be a case to use BCOBS.

Whilst the FOS will say that there is no obligations for banks to deal with issues more than 6 years old,there have been some cases.The FSA handbook says they consider 3 years after discovery to be acceptable.

 

Barclays will of course come at you with all guns blazing,and their favourite tac is to say if you withdraw the claim they will not seek costs,but if you dont,they will make the Court aware etc etc.

3 times I have has costs schedules sent to me at 7am in the morning by SD on the day of Court appearances.

It is essential that you are well prepared to take them on.

Please can you answer the questions posed above ?

[iklt]

hi martin sorry for late reply the account first started out as a normal current account with overdraft that is when the charges where added

and then in 2005 it was changed to a additions current account then in 2007 it was changed to a additions plus where you pay a monthly fee for overdraft, breakdown cover,mobile phone insurance ect thanks for your reply i will do plenty of reading you have given me some great inspiration thanks ian