HPH2/Cohen claimform - old Abbey OD from 1992

[RMS]

Thanks - had you been active in using the account up until the time they called it in? Had you gone over the authorised limit at all?

 

The account was active and at the time of removal, it was running at 50% of authorised limit and was not going over the authorised limit.

[shamrocker]

What 'right' were they seeking to exercise when they 'called in' the overdraft? Has this point been clarified in the claimant's WS?

[RMS]

What 'right' were they seeking to exercise when they 'called in' the overdraft? Has this point been clarified in the claimant's WS?

 

 

None, I think it was back in the recession in 2009 and financial institutions withdrew a lot of 'load' facilities. WS does not refer to it. I am busy scanning WS now, it's a slow process but will be posted later. Meanwhile, I have one question about the outcome, that I would like to ask by PM, I do not want it on the forum. It anybody would be happy to try and help with that one, it would be much appreciated. It's a short question.

[shamrocker]

Feel free to PM me if you like. Can't guarantee that I'll have the answer though!

[RMS]

..

[RMS]

Feel free to PM me if you like. Can't guarantee that I'll have the answer though!

 

I sent you a PM, let me know if for any reason you don't get it. If answering my question, please do it by PM, not on the main board. I'm sure you'll understand why.

[dx100uk]

can you please put all of those images into a word doc and pdf it?

 

 

so much easier to see and zoom.

 

 

dx

[shamrocker]

I sent you a PM, let me know if for any reason you don't get it. If answering my question, please do it by PM, not on the main board. I'm sure you'll understand why.

 

PM received! Answering now.

[RMS]

can you please put all of those images into a word doc and pdf it?

 

 

so much easier to see and zoom.

 

I'm not so good with stuff like that. I had a stroke last year

 

 

dx

 

I'm not so good with stuff like that. I had a stroke last year and it isn't so easy any more. I bought a new printer scanner today, but it took over two hours to get going, and that wasn't just me, it was a nightmare. Anyway, it is tomorrow morning, so I presently am just try to make sure I have all my paperwork in place and then maybe concentrate on getting a good night's sleep.

 

Anything you can suggest from the muddle you see, or particular points that you think I should be raising, please free to add them. I'll look here again tonight and first thing morning (it will be early, as I will get a lift and the person starts work at 7:00am, so I have to fit in with them. Living in a village is a nightmare and I just couldn't rely on public transport to guarantee me arriving on time). And the last thing I want to do is give them a summary judgement.

[shamrocker]

Going through their WS...

 

Where's the default notice (template wording) they mention?

 

They refer to paragraph 12 with regards unauthorised fees and interest - do you have that document.

 

Do you have the overdraft extension application they refer to from 1998?

 

In one of my earlier posts, I asked if you had gone over the agreed limit, etc. You said no. What's the situation with all the charges they've applied?

 

I didn't realise your hearing was tomorrow! You probably don't want to hear negative stuff right now, but you could have fought this much better if we'd got onto it much sooner. Nevertheless, you will just need to go in with a plan and focus on whatever weaknesses you can and then hope for the best.

 

Sham

[RMS]

I went over the limit, because they removed the overdraft, thereby making it an unauthorised overdraft, rather than an authorised overdraft that was within limit.

 

Overdraft extension document is listed, post 80 number 6, top line, one on the right.

 

default notice

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]59589[/ATTACH]

[RMS]

I think the paragraph 12 you mean (there is more than one), refers to these.

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]59590[/ATTACH]

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]59591[/ATTACH]

[dx100uk]

We can't see the docs

Jpg pix are not handled well by this msg board software

 

Do you want an email to send them all too

And I'll put them up...

 

Dx

[shamrocker]

That's the Notice of Assignment - doesn't have anything to do with paragraph 12. It must be some terms and conditions document. It'll be exhibited as SLW7.

 

So, they just withdrew the overdraft facility?? The overdraft application was for a £2,000 credit limit - when were you given the higher limit? I'm not sure the limit matters actually, but it would be interesting to see any terms, particularly to find out if it contains anything with regards withdrawing the overdraft facility.

 

Do you have any correspondence to do with them withdrawing the overdraft?

[RMS]

We can't see the docs

Jpg pix are not handled well by this msg board software

 

Do you want an email to send them all too

And I'll put them up...

 

Dx

 

Yes please, do you need them all emailed, if not, let me know the ones you need.

[RMS]

That's the Notice of Assignment - doesn't have anything to do with paragraph 12. It must be some terms and conditions document. It'll be exhibited as SLW7.

 

So, they just withdrew the overdraft facility?? The overdraft application was for a £2,000 credit limit - when were you given the higher limit? I'm not sure the limit matters actually, but it would be interesting to see any terms, particularly to find out if it contains anything with regards withdrawing the overdraft facility.

 

Do you have any correspondence to do with them withdrawing the overdraft?

 

Post 86 is SLWY.

 

From memory (I'm pretty sure on this one), the original request for an overdraft was one or two years after opening the account, and it was for £1,000. There is no copy of that in the WS. The application for the £2,000 was the document you see, in 98, so about 5 years after the original overdraft.

 

There was no letter, about terminating the overdraft (or not that I got, otherwise I would have been straight on the phone), but apparently it was a standard one sent to most customers. It was nothing about how you had kept your account with in good standing. They went out about May 2009 apparently with one month's notice.

 

I should imagine the Santander still have a copy of it somewhere on file. Again, that is not included in the WS. Just a by the way, the solicitor sent their WS right at the last minute, it was dated the 14th, but there was no way it was sent that day, and impossible for it to arrive two weeks before the 23rd even if it was.

[RMS]

Yes please, do you need them all emailed, if not, let me know the ones you need.

 

Let me know the email address soon, because I have to be up by 5:30am.

[shamrocker]

Post 86 is SLWY.

 

From memory (I'm pretty sure on this one), the original request for an overdraft was one or two years after opening the account, and it was for £1,000. There is no copy of that in the WS. The application for the £2,000 was the document you see, in 98, so about 5 years after the original overdraft.

 

There was no letter, about terminating the overdraft (or not that I got, otherwise I would have been straight on the phone), but apparently it was a standard one sent to most customers. It was nothing about how you had kept your account with in good standing. They went out about May 2009 apparently with one month's notice.

 

I should imagine the Santander still have a copy of it somewhere on file. Again, that is not included in the WS. Just a by the way, the solicitor sent their WS right at the last minute, it was dated the 14th, but there was no way it was sent that day, and impossible for it to arrive two weeks before the 23rd even if it was.

 

Ok, thanks.

 

As things stand, do you have a plan in mind for how to contest this tomorrow?

[shamrocker]

Sorry, ref. Post 86 is the default notice template, not anything to do with terms of the account. The exhibit with the terms is actually SWL2 - do you have it?

[RMS]

Sorry, ref. Post 86 is the default notice template, not anything to do with terms of the account. The exhibit with the terms is actually SWL2 - do you have it?

 

It's a T&C booklet , pretty much standard from about 25 years ago, for current account, cheque guarantee card and Abbeylink card (cash card). The bit about overdrafts.

 

Not a good plan, I never expected them to have copies of original stuff from pre-computer days. I don't really know what to do, but if I don't turn up then it is a summary judgement, and that won't be any better.

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]59592[/ATTACH]

[shamrocker]

I'm drafting some points up for you now - will post them soon.

[shamrocker]

RMS - as it's getting late and we both need to be getting to bed, I'll give you my own personal view on what you need to challenge verbally tomorrow.

 

Please do mention your health situation and that you have had great difficulty in making proper sense of the whole situation with the claim. Make the judge aware that their WS and documents did not arrive until very recently so only then did you realise, after consulting with a friend for advice, that you needed to challenge certain particulars within their WS and claim as a whole. Consequently, you are not as prepared as you could have been, were it not for your own nativity with regards the process.

 

Points to raise:

- Claimant has not stipulated the reasons the account was placed in default.

- Overdraft facility was withdrawn without notice or consultation. My recollection was that the limit was significantly higher than that being claimed. I only discovered that overdraft facility was withdrawn when I went to make a withdrawal.

- Claimant contents that I would be charged fees in accordance with p12 of the terms. I only incurred fees because the overdraft facility was withdrawn. Once the overdraft facility is withdrawn, the agreement is ended and further fees and interest should not be applied. In any event, these charges are unfair penalties and should be refunded with interest.

- Before legal action is taken, a valid Default Notice should be served upon the debtor. I do not recall receiving one from the original creditor. The template provided does not fit the requirement of a valid Default Notice, nor does it act as confirmation that statutory requirements have been fulfilled. The claimant states that the reference made on the 'predecessor's system screen' indicates the issuing of a Default Notice. We have no means of confirming this to be true or factual. An invalid Default Notice is fatal to any claim as the agreement has been ended by the original creditor, thus an opportunity to remedy no longer exists as it must be issued as part of an agreement.

 

I would hope that a sympathetic judge may be swayed by the above - but please do act humble and do not try to overly challenge the opposition (or judge for that matter) - try to get him/her onside. Point out the obvious failing with regards the default notice and keep your fingers crossed that it gets some merit. It's a bit late in the day to be getting too detailed, so I'll leave it at that and wish you all the best.

 

If you do come off on the end of the decision, you may be best advised to take a different approach and then focus in on all the charges. Argue that, not only are they totally unfair, but some shouldn't have been applied after the agreement was ended by the original creditor. Say that you will accept that a balance is due, but you wish to challenge the charges. You might achieve some form of reduction.

 

Best of luck!

 

Sham

[dx100uk]

Yes please, do you need them all emailed, if not, let me know the ones you need.

 

 

send everything and anything else

i'll put it up

 

 

pm sent

 

 

dx

[shamrocker]

Any update RMS?

[RMS]

Sorry for not coming back yesterday, I was fairly fatigued, the stroke does that to you sometimes, both mentally and physically.

 

Just the very brief details tonight and then the in depth tomorrow, I'm still tired and thinking hurts.

 

Lost the claim, I'll go into detail tomorrow, they did offer me a Tomlin order beforehand at full money.

 

I got about £800 in charges knocked off, I had incorrectly estimated it a bit higher (some where just debits back from credits paid for DDs then cancelled).

 

Their lawyer tried to claim over £200 for his time for a time wasting case brought before the court, which was denied, as the judge said Mr.RMS put up a fairly robust defence on a very technical case.

 

I must have given them a run for the money, the whole case took 1:45 minutes. Which is a long time up against a lawyer when you're not used to or have any experience in the field.

 

As well as going through it in depth, I have a couple of questions about the case and also about my best course of action following on.

 

And Sham, thanks for your help at short notice.