jonni2bad v Halifax - Got the money but no default removal

[neilstapley350]

I have found that its farquicker to request statements for the period that you want to claim, You have to sort through the statements yourself but its far quicker than waiting for the bank to drag their heels especially if they think you are trying to make a claim against them. I requested statements that covered the whole period of when the account had been opened, these arrived withing 6 days and now I am in a position to start the proceedings to claim back the charges.

[Stopthethieves]

Can you please get it televised?, I'd love to watch them squirm!

 

Do you honestly think that are going to defend themselves in court?

 

Are you protected from costs?

 

Regards

[jonni2bad]

Do you honestly think that are going to defend themselves in court?

 

Are you protected from costs?......

 

1. It's really hard to judge them, but looking at their document exchange, where they didn't reference anything and indeed only really sent me 2 photocopies of leaflets from their display racks, I would have to guess no.

 

On the other hand, their incompetence so far might suggest that they really do believe they have a case. I am most looking forward to hearing them explain to a Judge why they lied to the court about me offering to extend the deadline for entering their defence, so for that alone I pray they do.......

 

2. Yes - the track has been given as small claims so, unless the Judge believes that I had absolutely no basis for ever starting my action, there would be no reason why I should ever pay any costs - and if my case really was that bad I'm quite sure we'd have been called to a prelim hearing some time ago.

[kydcarmen]

WOW, I have just read your thread from beginning to end and i am fasicinated, just hope i don't have to go through the same thing to get my default notice removed....lol.....i'm not sure i would know what i was doing.

 

Can't wait for the next episode jonni2bad

[david.m]

I thought I'd give their legal team something to read, since the Halifax don't seem unable to supply anything.

 

The Claimant will also make reference to the following case laws;

1. Murray v Leisureplay [2005] EWCA Civ 963

2. Wilson v Love [1898]

3. Lordsvale Finance PLC v Bank of Zambia (1996) QB 752

4. Bridge v Campbell Discount Co. Ltd. (1962)

 

 

A grand total of 318 pages weighing in at just under 2kg

 

 

ROTFL.......

 

thats a neat trick, bang in as much case law as you can find so their legal team have to do their homework and hence massively increase the cost to the banks in their fees LOL

 

perhaps you should also ask for another £2500+ for costs with all that paper,ink, and valuble time you have had to make for your case , god knows how much Halifax will be charged by their own legal team, you should be able to also claim that fair and reasonable rate too 8)

[david.m]

:o OMG.. I can't believe that your case is still ongoing!

 

I'd love to be a fly on the wall when you finally get them pinned down in a court .

 

I can't believe how voraciously they've defended the Default notice, They clearly mean a lot and you get the feeling we must be missing something that matters a great deal to them when they are happy to pay out these sums of money but not complete an admin task to end a court case!

 

Good Luck and I can't wait to read the next updates!

 

well i dont know about being a fly, but its an open court so anyone can sit in there i assume?, how large is this court and would they restrict the public interested in this case getting in.

 

remember aardvark, the courts are open to the public, remember the school trip to the court house to see how our justice system works?, then going back to school and having to writeup the essay 8P

 

perhaps jonni2bad could sell jonni2bad teeshirts 8)

 

it does seem that there might be an interest from the papers that a massive bank submits almost nothing

in their bundle, were as an ordinary (not really hes a star) person can offer up such an impressive bundle

to fight his corner, there must be some interest there for the media.

 

yes , it would seem the default is a very large thing indeed, can anyone shed some light here please, what is it about this that seems to scare them?, and how would every single person reading, use this new information to our advantage, i assume its something as regards damages but cant work out what or how it might esculate?.

[jonni2bad]

well i dont know about being a fly, but its an open court so anyone can sit in there i assume?, how large is this court and would they restrict the public interested in this case getting in?...

 

It will be at the Mansfield County Courts (North part of Nottinghamshire) and is of course open to the public. I would imagine that if there are no 'visitors' then it would actually be heard in the Judge's chambers.

 

it does seem that there might be an interest from the papers that a massive bank submits almost nothing

in their bundle, were as an ordinary (not really hes a star) person can offer up such an impressive bundle

to fight his corner, there must be some interest there for the media.

I don't think they'd be very interested if I lost and I don't count chickens bla bla bla so the media can wait until there's an outcome....

 

yes , it would seem the default is a very large thing indeed, can anyone shed some light here please, what is it about this that seems to scare them?...

Damages. If you can show that you have been unfairly defaulted, then it stands to reason that your credit worthiness would have been impacted and, each time your files are searched, creditors would obviously assume that you were a bad risk. This, in effect, is a slur on your good name or, more to the point, a Defamation of Character.

 

BIG BIG issue. So big, in fact, that it would put our money claims in the shade by a considerable margin.

[radiodan]

wow that was quite a erad from start to finish.

I will be watching this to see how this ends (quite comically if what we've seen so far is anything to go by), and I wish you all the best with this.

If I lived any closer I would totally come up for this and buy you a beer once you'd finished tearing them up into tiny pieces in court.

[livelylobster]

Go get em jonny.

[lelole]

Hi Jonni

 

Can I ask where you got a copy of the supply of goods and services act, I can't find it on the net? The only thing I can find if the 1994 version, I assume that won't do?

 

Also the case law references you mention - is there somewhere I can get my grubby little paws on those too?

 

I need to get my case together for upcoming court date, and I'm having trouble finding what I need (your list of evidence has been really helpful!)

 

Thanks

 

lelole

[jonni2bad]

Here with links.....!

 

I need to look up more for the case law references - I will try to post links for those too.

 

2. Authorities

 

 

...........Description .................................................. .............No. of pages

(AA) -- Copy of bank statements supplied by HBOS following (A) - 91

(BB) -- Copy of spreadsheet supplied with claim detailing specific dates

and amounts as requested for refund - 1

(CC) -- Data Protection Act (1998.) - 53

(DD) -- Data Protection Act (1998.) Schedules - 53

(EE) -- Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations (1999) - 10

(FF) -- The Supply of Goods and Services Act (1982) - 13

(GG) -- Unfair Contract Terms Act (1977) - 9

(HH) -- Office of Fair Trading Report April 2006 (OFT842) - 35

( II) -- House of Commons Early Day Motion (EDM 2227) - 1

(JJ) -- House of Commons Select Committee on Treasury

Second Report: ‘Transparency in charging’ - 10

(KK) -- Report by Kendall Freeman on Liquidated Damages (May 2005) - 3

(LL) -- Case Law Reference: Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd

v New Garage & Motor Co Ltd [1915] AC 79 - 2

(MM) -- Case Law Reference: Alfred McAlpine Capital Projects Ltd

v Tilebox Ltd [2005] EWHC 281 (TCC) - 2

[aardvark the lecturer]

Thanks for the links jonni, they could come in really usefull for any cases that end up going to court. They will really help those of us who are up to speed on the arguments and reasons but need to do a bit more reading before actually landing in a courtroom!

 

Cheers.

[lelole]

That's brilliant am feeling much better prepared now!

 

Thanks

lelole

[cankster]

It's looking like I will be in court soon. This thread is so so helpful.

 

Thanks mate your an urban warrior

[M the Merciless]

Wilson v Love [1898]

 

I thought Wilson v Love was 1896 ?

 

And Murray v Leisureplay was 2004, the appeal was 2005. Although the appeal reverted the 2004 decision, it did confirm the penalty charges principles.

[jonni2bad]

I could just be my typo - but thanks anyway.

[pugsley]

wow what a read, good luck and have a nice holiday

[jonni2bad]

I thought Wilson v Love was 1896 ?

 

And Murray v Leisureplay was 2004, the appeal was 2005. Although the appeal reverted the 2004 decision, it did confirm the penalty charges principles.

 

Just to point out for other viewers - There was a typo earlier in my thread, and the above are the correct dates.

 

Many thanks

[M the Merciless]

Just to point out for other viewers - There was a typo earlier in my thread, and the above are the correct dates.

 

Many thanks

 

That's ok, feel free to click on the scales ;-)

[Its WAR]

Great read....biting my nails!!!!!!

Halifax removed their default notice £4500 on my account immediatly I sent the Statutory and Formal notice. They had sold the debt to Hillco. Hillco refuse to remove their default £2300 of the same debt. Both defaults were listed in my report for four years, so it looked like I had two defaults to two companie at different values. I am still arguing with Hillco to remove the default. But this thread seems to suggest I might have a further claim for dames. I dont know but what do you suggest?

[caro]

Claiming dames is a new one on me. Don't tell Jonni's wife about it!

[jonni2bad]

If I had known I could claim for dames I might even have gone for 2....

 

OK, so I presume it's damages, yeah?

 

In which case, yes (but with conditions).

 

It would certainly be easier to include damages with a claim for the removal, which ideally goes with the claim for a refund - i.e. all 3 in one. This is not an absolute requirement though, of course.

 

Damages would have to be either (a) substantiated if they are for actual losses or (b) for something along the lines of defamation of character.

 

(a) must be water-tight. It needs to show that the result of the default caused event 'x' which resulted in an increased cost for product 'y' which subsequently has cost you £xxxx over the period since. That type of thing...

 

It needs to be very clear that the Judge can see the path and no ambiguity in the route. Typically speaking (but not a fixed rule) is that if you had other defaults at the time, you would be hard pressed to show it was only their fault.

 

(b) would be great if the 'no other default rule' also applied - a claim of this sort, if decided in the courts with a jury of your fellow citizens could well produce a very, very large payment.

 

There's the basics for you..........

[ffocus]

Great read....biting my nails!!!!!!

Halifax removed their default notice £4500 on my account immediatly I sent the Statutory and Formal notice. They had sold the debt to Hillco. Hillco refuse to remove their default £2300 of the same debt. Both defaults were listed in my report for four years, so it looked like I had two defaults to two companie at different values. I am still arguing with Hillco to remove the default. But this thread seems to suggest I might have a further claim for dames. I dont know but what do you suggest?

 

My two cents worth

 

I don't know if you have seen my thread relating to a default Vodafone placed on my credit file 3 years ago. I threatened to take them to court for distress claims and financial compensation and won. They offered £1000 in compensation + court costs + removal of the default. Result.

 

I would add though that my claim could have been done a lot better if I had planned it more. You may learn a little from reading my thread. HERE

 

Cheers

[jas 4]

If I had known I could claim for dames I might even have gone for 2....

 

OK, so I presume it's damages, yeah?

 

In which case, yes (but with conditions).

 

It would certainly be easier to include damages with a claim for the removal, which ideally goes with the claim for a refund - i.e. all 3 in one. This is not an absolute requirement though, of course.

 

Damages would have to be either (a) substantiated if they are for actual losses or (b) for something along the lines of defamation of character.

 

(a) must be water-tight. It needs to show that the result of the default caused event 'x' which resulted in an increased cost for product 'y' which subsequently has cost you £xxxx over the period since. That type of thing...

 

It needs to be very clear that the Judge can see the path and no ambiguity in the route. Typically speaking (but not a fixed rule) is that if you had other defaults at the time, you would be hard pressed to show it was only their fault.

 

(b) would be great if the 'no other default rule' also applied - a claim of this sort, if decided in the courts with a jury of your fellow citizens could well produce a very, very large payment.

 

There's the basics for you..........

 

I would like to congratulate you on a very interesting case.... you certainly seem to know what you are talking about and well done on getting the default removed. Do you have more cases to get your teeth into or are you calling it a day now????

I am at the court stage with Barclays and until I read your thread I was almost on the verge of giving up. I don't profess to know anything about courts or case law but I will read your court bundle documents which you kindly provide links to in your thread with great interest and trepidation and hopefully it will all become clear to me as to which to include in my case and which to not...

 

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ALL THE INFO YOU HAVE SUPPLIED AND WELL DONE!!

[jonni2bad]

....well done on getting the default removed....

 

I hope you have a crystal ball. My court case is November, it's not removed yet!

 

I have had all of the money returned though.

 

....I don't profess to know anything about courts or case law....

 

I don't either! In fact, 6 months ago I knew nothing about the laws involved in bank charge reclaims. Anything I do know is purely from being here - I'm a big fan of CAG, can you tell?