NN v Abbey - *settled in full* at last WON WON WON

[Robertxc]

You should be aware that we pass information on to credit reference agencies

They should be aware that they are not allowed to trash your credit rating if the amount owed is in dispute. See the Banking Code for more on this.

[Robertxc]

If it were me, I would go straight to court.

[Robertxc]

I would ignore it. They'll get the message loud and clear when the summons arrives.

[Robertxc]

Judgement was issued yesterday to Abbey so I presume they will be aware of it today.

 

Is it going to be another set aside application?

 

This will be interesting after the experiences of Whizzkid001 and NeilP.;-)

If judgement was only issued yesterday it will take a while for Abbey to be notified. The legal system is reasonably good, but it's not that fast.

 

Expect them to have it set aside, and then come back to settle properly.

[Robertxc]

Probably, but I doubt they use it. This claim is very persoanl to you, but for whoever is handling it at their end, it's just another legal thing to be dealt with. It won't even register on their radar until they get the judgement through from the court, and then it will get added to someone's in-tray to be dealt with.

[Robertxc]

Judges always prefer cases to be settled on thier merits, rather than by default. This means that they will almost always grant a set aside motion. The bank will have it set aside so that they can then come back and settle in an orderly fashion. If they let the default ruling stand, then there is a precedent, however small, that shows a case where they 'lost' and had a ruling on bank charges against them.

[Robertxc]

It looks very much like the previous posts are correct. The judge doesn't want to give Abbey until October, he wants the matter dealt with quickly. All he's done is stayed the order for a couple of weeks, during which nnelson can't enforce it. Abbey have until the 16th of August to put in a full application to have it set aside. I'm not sure you can expect them to settle before that, because nnelson has already won her case, so there's nothing to settle. It'll be fascinating to see what happens next. Abbey may be on a sticky wicket if they come to court on the 16th and say that they intend to defend, when there have been dozens, if not hundreds, of instances where they haven't defended. I wonder how the judge will view it? I think this is positive for nnelson.

[Robertxc]

I know. It's like a never ending story.

 

In the meantime I came home to the following letter:

 

7 September 2006

Re Notice pursuant to s10 of the Data Protection Act

 

Dear Mr & Mrs XXXXXX

 

 

I write further to the above notice that you have served.

 

When you opened your bank account, you were advised that details about the

conduct of your account would be passed to credit reference agencies as part of the operation of your bank account. The processing is therefore necessary for the

performance of a contract to which you are a party and, in the circumstances, slO of the Data Protection Act does not apply to this processing. I confirm therefore thatAbbey will not comply with your request.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

David Humphreys

Data Protection Consultant

Data Protection Compliance Team

 

 

I have phoned his direct dial number (01908 344104 for anyone who might need it) but it's on voicemail.

 

Any ideas what he's on about? Anybody?

Is this account still open? If not, then I suggest you read this thread: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legalities/24962-about-experian-about-information.html

[Robertxc]

Well, if you settle this action and end up with an account at £0, then you can close the account and force them to remove the historical data from the CRAs. It may take a while, and you may have to take them back to court, but it may well be worth it. If it were me I would be asking the court to amend my action to include the removal of the default. That way, if they want to settle, they'll have to do it. Since you've been buggered about by them so much, it shouldn't be a problem.

[Robertxc]

If you do it quickly you should manage it no bother. Abbey can hardly object since it's them who recalled it. There's no actual difficulty in them removing a Default, since they have computerised access to your credit file anyway.

[Robertxc]

I'm not sure it's a good idea to try to deal directly with the other side at this point. Presumably they've been given their instructions by the judge, so the rest is up to them. If they miss deadlines it's their problem, not yours.

 

If you need to add anything to your claim, such as default removal, I suggest you do it through the court, rather than with the lawyer directly. They'll just write back and tell you that they're required to record your borrowing habits 'accurately', so they can't remove the default. A load of nonsense of course, but that's what they'll say.

[Robertxc]

Love God in Leeds - Paul Denham

Shouldn't that be "Lurve God In Leeds"?