Jump to content


phil-99 vs Barclays


phil-99
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5531 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi All,

 

I started action against Barclays on the 20th October 2006, after writing 3 times over a month and a half only to be ignored each time. I'm claiming the relatively small sum of £300. I haven't taken up the option of interest as I decided working it out wouldn't be worth the minimal amount I'd see on top.

 

Barclays acknowledged the claim on the 14th day, and entered a defence on the 27th day. I am sat with my N149 in front of me, wondering if there's anything obvious I need to be doing. I've got until the 9th Dec to return it, but obviously the sooner the better...

 

The defence they've entered appears to be the standard stuff - going by other threads I've read.

 

Updates to come, hopefully.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Phil and welcome. The part of the AQ which some Claimants get stuck on is Section G. Here's what I put:

"I am respectfully requesting my claim be heard via the small claims

track. This issue is not a complicated one; it is an issue of fact and

not of law. The issue is only whether the money levied by the

defendant in respect of its customer’s contractual breaches exceed

or even reflect their actual costs incurred. I am happy to pay their

actual costs and I am surprised the defendant did not counterclaim

for these, as I would have paid them without argument. However,

the continuing problem is (in common with the hundreds of other

cases currently being brought by other bank customers) that the

banks are refusing to reveal the details of their penalty-charging

regime, and that the charges they apply to accounts for exceeding

overdraft limits and so on are entirely disproportionate to the

actual costs the banks incur. As the banks have a fiduciary duty

towards their customers, they have a duty to deal straightforwardly

and in utmost good faith. Accordingly, I would respectfully ask that

the court in this case, not withstanding allocations to the small

claims track, order standard disclosure. I understand that it is in

the courts discretion to do so. I believe this would bring a rapid

end to this litigation. I have attached the schedule of the charges

I am claiming for to this allocation questionnaire to show a

breakdown of the amounts for the courts perusal.

I believe the case will take no longer than 1 hour".

 

Good Luck

To follow my case progress, click here to see where I'm at right now.

 

Welshman

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Well the AQ's well on it's way back to the local court, I've checked and there appears to be a variety of lengths of time that people wait - anyone have any reasons why this might be?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...