Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Here is my Defence: Defence - 1. The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had an agreement with Capital One but do not recognise this specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 78 request.. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am unaware of having been served with a Default Notice pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 Section 136(1) 5. The Defendant has sent a request by way of a section 78 pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, for a copy of the agreement, the Claimant has yet to comply and remains in default of said request. 6. A further request has been made via CPR 31.14 to the Claimants solicitor, requesting disclosure of documents on which the Claimant is basing their claim. The Claimant has not complied and to date nothing has been received. 7. It is therefore not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to: a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement and; b) show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed for and; c) show the nature of the breach and evidence by way of a Default Notice pursuant to sec 88 CCA1974 d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim 8. As per Civil Procedure 16.5 it is expected that the claimants prove the allegation that the money is owed 9. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of section 136 of the Law of Property Act and section 82A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 10. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.     Please note that I had to write a defence quite quickly as I hit the deadline. At the time of writing the defence, I hadn't been able to find correspondence from Capital One, but had since found default letter etc.
    • Which Court have you received the claim from ? Civil National Business CEntre       If possible please scan redact and upload a full page copy of page 1 of the claim form. (not the response page or AOS)     Name of the Claimant ? Lowell Portfolio i Ltd   How many defendant's  joint or self ? Self   Date of issue – top right hand corner of the claim form – this in order to establish the time line you need to adhere to. 15 Feb 2024     Particulars of Claim   What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim? Please type out their particulars of claim in full (verbatim) less any identifiable data and round the amounts up/down. state how many digits the account number has.. The claim is for the sum of £922 due by the Defendant under and agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit ACt 1974 for a CApital One account with an account reference of [number with 16 digits] The Defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a Default Notice was served under s.87(1) of the Consumer Credit ACt 1974 which has not been complied with. The debt was legally assigned to the claimant on 16-06-23, notice of which has been given to the defendant. The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of the issue of these proceedings in the sum of £49.15 The Claimant claims the sum of £972   What is the total value of the claim? £1112   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? I dont know the details of the PAPDC to know if it was pursuant to paragaph 3, but I did receive a Letter of Claim with a questionaire/form to fill.   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? N/A Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? no   Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online   Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes   Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Assigned/purchaser   Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? I was aware, I'm not certain I received a 'Notice of Assignment' from Capital One but may have been informed the account had been sold without such a title on the letter?   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Yes   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Not since the debt purchase, and not from Capital One.   Why did you cease payments? I can't remember - it was the tail end of the pandemic and I may not have had enough income to keep up payments - I am self-employed and work in the event industry - at that time. I also had a bank account that didn't allow direct debits and may have just forgotten payments and became annoyed at fines for late payments.   What was the date of your last payment? Appears to be 20/4/2022   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No
    • Atsushi Katsuki tells the BBC the firm sees the sober generation as both a risk and an opportunity.View the full article
    • Yes you should take this view, but this is nothing to worry about you will be fine. you have a very well edited WX im sure although I haven't actually looked at it because I can't seem to work out which one is the new one anymore, although I do remember something previously. however if i remember it right its just a lost parcel via packlink and no insurance which frankly is pretty straightforward and should be a copy of farooq v evri. Have I understood the case right? Please tell me if not as there is rather a lot on this forum
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Am I entitled to argue this penalty charge?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6163 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

I have gone overdrawn at my bank this weekend. I had £30 in my account when 3 switch transactions came through earlier than expected - 1 x £25 & 2 x £50. for this I have received 3 x £30 fines.

 

Although the situation is my fault, I feel it is unfair to get 3 fines rather than two. I believe the £30 could be allocated to pay for the £25 switch payment legitamately and then I just incur the two penalty fines.

 

FWIW, The I did actually make the £25 transaction before the two £50 transactions.

 

Can anyone advise me, if I am entitled to argue the third charge?

 

Thanks in advance to anyone who replies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 55
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I am amazed at this great news! Just looking through my online statements Ive been charged over £1k in the last 18 months alone.

 

What puzzles me however, is how come this isnt public knowledge? How can the banks continue to apply these charges if they have been deemed unlawful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes up to 6 yrs ago

 

Or possibly from when you opened your account if you made a mistake in that you thought the charges were lawful, or you believe the bank knew but concealed the nature of those charges.

 

HTH

 

Glenn

Kick the shAbbey Habit

 

Where were you? Next time please

 

 

Abbey 1st claim -Charges repaid, default removed, interest paid (8% apr) costs paid, Abbey peed off; priceless

Abbey 2nd claim, two Accs - claim issued 30-03-07

Barclaycard - Settled cheque received

Egg 2 accounts ID sent 29/07

Co-op Claim issued 30-03-07

GE Capital (Store Cards) ICO says theyve been naughty

MBNA - Settled in Full

GE Capital (1st National) Settled

Lombard Bank - SAR sent 16.02.07

MBNA are not your friends, they will settle but you need to make sure its on your terms -read here

Glenn Vs MBNA

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest littlesally

This is public knowledge! And has been for some time. It's been on TV a few times and radio 2 have it on quite a bit. Because it sounds unbelievable, some people dismiss it, or think it can't mean their charges!

 

Bank charges are legitimate, BUT banks are not allowed to profit from them. The Office of Fair Trading investigated credit card charges and said there is no way it costs £28 + for customers to go overdrawn.

Banks were asked how much it actually costs and to prove it, the banks refused.

 

They also refused to prove bank charges. Which is why we can claim.

So far, banks have paid out about £3 million in refunding charges, but are still getting £3 billion from them!

 

So it is not in their interest to be honest and say the real cost is £12, as they would lose £15 billion!

 

Which is why they always settle out of court. If they went to court they would have to prove it costs them £28+ everytime a customer goes over the agreed overdraft.

Sally x

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am amazed at this great news! Just looking through my online statements Ive been charged over £1k in the last 18 months alone.

 

What puzzles me however, is how come this isnt public knowledge? How can the banks continue to apply these charges if they have been deemed unlawful.

 

 

 

dont worry, its slowly creeping into the public psyche

post office WON 12/11/06

 

abbey.LBA sent 30/10/06.MCOL claim submitted 8/11/06.allocation questionnaire sent 16/12/06.schedule of charges sent 16/12/06.WON

 

2nd abbey claim SAR sent 3/1/07.WON.complaint letter sent 18/1/08

 

alliance and Leicester.WON

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your reply Sally. Its nice to have a little understanding as to why I am entitled to claim.

 

 

dont worry, its slowly creeping into the public psyche - a little bit more itsamamomentintime, as Ive told everyone I know!

 

Being Greedy now......any ideas if I can claim for an account that I closed in June?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Paddy, if you still have the statements, then it doesnt matter whether the account is open or closed, the same procedure applies, even if you havnt got the statements you can do a SAR (Take a look at the FAQ's and the Step by Step Process in my sig)

 

then find the appropriate bank thread and start a thread and there will always be someone around to help

 

So welcome and good luck

Lula

 

Lula v Abbey - Settled

Lula v Abbey (2) - Settled

Lula v Abbey (3) - Stayed

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So it is not in their interest to be honest and say the real cost is £12,

 

Also don't be fooled by the findings of the OFT - they said they would not take legal action against a credit card company if they charged more than £12 - they actually went on to say that even this amount would be the absolute MAXIMUM and that they would still have to be able to substantiate it, possibly in court.

 

Actually, much evidence exists to say that where a bank refuses a DD, for example, the actual cost to the bank amounts to a few pence. Even when they send a letter, the process is fully automated, and anything above £1 would be hard to believe.

 

Have a good read through the site - and prepare yourself fully with the legal arguments BEFORE you start the process. Also open a parachute account, as your bank MAY decide to close your account.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Alan and Lula for your responses.

 

Im just reading through as much info as I can get right now. Its all quite mind blowing really but Ive printed off the 'rules of engagement' sheet and am making my initial request for a list of charges.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to me that suing for the correct interest rate is even more important than getting the basic charge refunds.

 

For example, my unauthorised overdraft EAR is 28.9%

 

If, I use a hypothetical fine (though im sure one will exist!!) of £30 received 6 years ago, this would accrue £17.60 in interest @ 8%, however would accrue £107.60 @ 29.8% (are they really going to pay this??)

 

Maybe I have misunderstood something along the way......

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to me that suing for the correct interest rate is even more important than getting the basic charge refunds.

 

For example, my unauthorised overdraft EAR is 28.9%

 

If, I use a hypothetical fine (though im sure one will exist!!) of £30 received 6 years ago, this would accrue £17.60 in interest @ 8%, however would accrue £107.60 @ 29.8% (are they really going to pay this??)

 

Maybe I have misunderstood something along the way......

 

 

There are a few cases of people winning using contractual interest rate. It is still very much in the "test" phase.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So would the advice be (unofficially!) to sure for 8% and be sure to get it?

 

If I tried for 29.8 and lost, what would I still get 8% or would I lose the lot? (Ie interest and charges)

 

Thanks for your response.

 

In your POC you can ask for the greater amount and also say should you not agree to contractual amount i will accept the standard 8%.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Paddy, I have always used Mindzai's POC as it claims higher & lower contractual rates plus statutory in the alternative. Worth considering, I think.

 

XXXX COUNTY COURT

BETWEEN

MINDZAI AND LUCID CLAIMANTS

And

LLOYDS TSB PLC DEFENDANT

 

PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

1. The Claimants have a joint account XXXXXXXX ("the Account") with the Defendant which was opened on or around XXth XXXXXXX 2002.

2. During the period in which the Account has been operating the Defendant debited numerous charges to the Account in respect of purported breaches of contract on the part of the Claimants and also charged interest on the charges once applied. The Claimants understand that the Defendant contends that the charges were debited in accordance with the terms of the contract between itself and the Claimants.

3. A list of the charges applied is attached to these particulars of claim.

4. The Claimants contend that:

a) The charges debited to the Account, as outlined in the attached schedule, are punitive in nature; are not a genuine pre-estimate of cost incurred by the Defendant; exceed any alleged actual loss to the Defendant in respect of any breaches of contract on the part of the Claimants; and are not intended to represent or related to any alleged actual loss, but instead unduly enrich the Defendant which exercises the contractual term in respect of such charges with a view to profit. In the event that the charges are not a penalty, they are unreasonable under The Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 section 15. The Defendant has declined to justify the charges.

b) The contractual provision that permits the Defendant to levy such charges is unenforceable by virtue of The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations (1999) paragraph 8 and schedule 2(1)(e), The Unfair Contracts Terms Act 1977 section 4 and the common law.

5. Accordingly the Claimants claim:

a) the return of the amounts debited in respect of charges in the sum of £XXXX and interest charged thereon in the sum of £XXX.XX;

b) Court costs;

c) the additional costs incurred by the Claimants in the writing and sending of letters to the Defendant pursuant to this claim in the sum of £XX, as set out in the attached list of costs.

d) the Claimants claim contractual interest at a rate of 29.85%, from the date of each transaction to 7th September 2006 of £XXX, as set out in the attached list of charges. The claimant further claims interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment, at a daily rate of £X.XX per day.

The account’s Terms and Conditions specify the interest payable on unauthorised drawings from the account. We hold that this applies to unauthorised drawings by the Defendant as well as to unauthorised drawings by the Claimant. Should the court deem this incorrect, the Claimants claim the rate to be justified under the principle of mutuality and reciprocity, and is based on the Defendant’s unauthorised overdraft interest rate that would be applied under the terms of the above mentioned account.

Should the court find that this interest rate is not applicable, then in the alternative the Claimants claim contractual interest at a rate of 18.2%, from the date of each transaction to 7th September 2006 of £XXX.XX, as set out in the attached list of charges. The claimants further claims interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment, at a daily rate of £X.XX per day.

The account’s Terms and Conditions specify the interest payable on authorised drawings from the account. We hold that this applies to authorised drawings by the Defendant as well as to unauthorised drawings by the Claimant. Should the court deem this incorrect, the Claimants claim the rate to be justified under the principle of mutuality and reciprocity, and is based on the Defendant’s authorised overdraft interest rate that would be applied under the terms of the above mentioned account.

Should the court find that this interest rate is not applicable, then in the alternative the Claimants claim interest under Section 69 of the County Court Act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum calculated from 3rd November 2003 to 7th September 2006, which is £XX.XX and continuing until payment or the date of judgement at a daily rate of £X.XX.

 

I believe that the contents of these particulars of claim are true.

 

Signed:

 

Date:

 

__________________

Mindzai & Lucid vs Lloyds TSB

Going for contractural interest at unauthorised overdraft rate - 29.8%

Letter Before Action - Posted 24/8

Mindzai's Account - £472.32 (Charges + overdraft interest + contractural interest)

Joint Account - £1509.79 (Charges + overdraft interest + contractural interest)

Preliminary Letter - Posted 9/8

Mindzai's Account - £402.79 (Charges + overdraft interest)

Joint Account -£1253.09 (Charges + overdraft interest)

________________________________________

Spreadsheet for compound contractual interest and statutory (s69) interest:

Download [for later versions of Excel only at the moment]

PLEASE NOTE: You should fully research contractual interest before you use that functionality of this spreadsheet. If in any doubt please use it to calculate 8% interest under s69 County Courts Act 1984.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Last edited by Mindzai : 7th September 2006 at 00:23.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It depends! If you want to be a cantakerous old git like me! Then the Data protection Act makes no allowances for charges. Under the terms of the SAR that you send (if you follow this site) they should be providing you with ALL information held about you, electronically. That is - everything!! From dates of interviews, phone calls, absolutely everything that is held by means of an electronic storage/retreival system. needless to say they don't because they know what we want, and why!

I am having a nice sparring match at the moment to get them to uphold their obligations even after they paid me!!!

 

Told you I was a cantakerous git!

 

A D

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]"Another charge by the Bank?"

 

1st Claim (Current account)

30/11/06 WON! £3146.41

 

2nd Claim (Mortgage charges)

27/3/07 WON! - £277

 

3rd Claim (Credit card charges)

14/5/07 WON! £300

 

4th Claim (Old account 97-99 £444)

20/4/07 Prelim sent

9/5/07 LBA sent

Can't remember now but I WON!!!

My current thread - An A-Z - My previous saga

 

IF THIS HAS HELPED PLEASE CLICK THE SCALES - THANK YOU.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So would the advice be (unofficially!) to sue for 8% and be sure to get it?

 

There is no certainty that you will get any interest, its always at the courts discretion, whatever the rate.

 

If I tried for 29.8 and lost, what would I still get 8% or would I lose the lot? (Ie interest and charges)

 

What you 'win' in terms of interest is a matter of how good an argument you presented at court, presuming of course it got that far.

 

quote]

 

 

HTH

 

Glenn

Kick the shAbbey Habit

 

Where were you? Next time please

 

 

Abbey 1st claim -Charges repaid, default removed, interest paid (8% apr) costs paid, Abbey peed off; priceless

Abbey 2nd claim, two Accs - claim issued 30-03-07

Barclaycard - Settled cheque received

Egg 2 accounts ID sent 29/07

Co-op Claim issued 30-03-07

GE Capital (Store Cards) ICO says theyve been naughty

MBNA - Settled in Full

GE Capital (1st National) Settled

Lombard Bank - SAR sent 16.02.07

MBNA are not your friends, they will settle but you need to make sure its on your terms -read here

Glenn Vs MBNA

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...