Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Makers of insect-based animal feed hope to be able to compete with soybeans on price.View the full article
    • Thank you for posting up the results from the sar. The PCN is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. Under Section 9 [2][a] they are supposed to specify the parking time. the photographs show your car in motion both entering and leaving the car park thus not parking. If you have to do a Witness Statement later should they finally take you to Court you will have to continue to state that even though you stayed there for several hours in a small car park and the difference between the ANPR times and the actual parking period may only be a matter of a few minutes  nevertheless the CEL have failed to comply with the Act by failing to specify the parking period. However it looks as if your appeal revealed you were the driver the deficient PCN will not help you as the driver. I suspect that it may have been an appeal from the pub that meant that CEL offered you partly a way out  by allowing you to claim you had made an error in registering your vehicle reg. number . This enabled them to reduce the charge to £20 despite them acknowledging that you hadn't registered at all. We have not seen the signs in the car park yet so we do not what is said on them and all the signs say the same thing. It would be unusual for a pub to have  a Permit Holders Only sign which may discourage casual motorists from stopping there. But if that is the sign then as it prohibits any one who doesn't have a permit, then it cannot form a contract with motorists though it may depend on how the signs are worded.
    • Defence and Counterclaim Claim number XXX Claimant Civil Enforcement Limited Defendant XXXXXXXXXXXXX   How much of the claim do you dispute? I dispute the full amount claimed as shown on the claim form.   Do you dispute this claim because you have already paid it? No, for other reasons.   Defence 1. The Defendant is the recorded keeper of XXXXXXX  2. It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant. 3. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 4. In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant. 5. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 6. In a further abuse of the legal process the Claimant is claiming £50 legal representative's costs, even though they have no legal representative. 7. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all. Signed I am the Defendant - I believe that the facts stated in this form are true XXXXXXXXXXX 01/05/2024   Defendant's date of birth XXXXXXXXXX   Address to which notices about this claim can be sent to you  
    • pop up on the bulk court website detailed on the claimform. [if it is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] . When you select ‘Register’, you will be taken to a screen titled ‘Sign in using Government Gateway’.  Choose ‘Create sign in details’ to register for the first time.  You will be asked to provide your name, email address, set a password and a memorable recovery word. You will be emailed your Government Gateway 12-digit User ID.  You should make a note of your memorable word, or password as these are not included in the email.<<**IMPORTANT**  then log in to the bulk court Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform . defend all leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit the website .get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486334-CPR-31.14-Request-to-use-on-receipt-of-a-PPC-(-Private-Land-Parking-Court-Claim type your name ONLY no need to sign anything .you DO NOT await the return of paperwork. you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform.
    • well post it here as a text in a the msg reply half of it is blanked out. dx  
  • 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

RedDeath v LloydsTSB


RedDeath
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6213 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

  • Replies 210
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

lol still up this late? Yes bong, I am domiciled in Scotland. I think I may have the solution to my problem...

 

3. The claimant contends that this confers advantageous terms to the Defendant, as per Paragraph 1(q) of Schedule 2 of the 1999 Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulation 1999 (hereinafter referred to as the UTCCR).

 

1(q) excluding or hindering the consumer's right to take legal action or exercise any other legal remedy, particularly by requiring the consumer to take disputes exclusively to arbitration not covered by legal provisions, unduly restricting the evidence available to him or imposing on him a burden of proof which, according to the applicable law, should lie with another party to the contract.

 

 

I am interpreting "take disputes exclusively to arbitration". The options so far in scotland are through the FOS (they would never argue damages for me) or through a court of session for which I need to be repressented by a solicitor (again, judging be previous posts, no legal representative would take this case on)

 

4. The Claimant contends that such clause does not deal with exclusive jurisdiction and as per Section 4 Paragraph 8 (1) is allowed to bring court proceedings against the other party to a contract either in the courts of the part of the United Kingdom in which that party is domiciled, or in the courts of the part of the United Kingdom in which the consumer is domiciled.

 

 

For example, in the case of McGowan v. Summit at Lloyds 2002 SC 638, 2002 SLT 1258, an insurance policy contained a clause which said: 'this Document shall be governed by the laws of England, whose courts shall have jurisdiction in any dispute arising hereunder'. An action was raised in Scotland and Lloyds defence was the case was incompetent as the Scottish courts had no jurisdiction in light of the clause. However, the Inner House of the Court of Session (Scotland's highest court) held (applying the English case of S&W Berisford plc v. New Hampshire Insurance Co Ltd [1990] 2 QB 631) that the clause did not create exclusive jurisdiction in England, and only created concurrent jurisdiction i.e. proceedings could be raised in either Scotland or England in terms of the clause and the 1982 Act.

In the English High Court case of S&W Berisford plc (cited above) a clause in an insurance policy stated that 'This insurance is subject to English jurisdiction'. Justice Hobhouse (as he then was) held that those words 'were inept' to create an exclusive jurisdiction clause.

 

Part 3 seems to be a possible solution, though this may be contradicted by Terms to which these Regulations apply.

 

T&C do not clearly state exclusive jurisdiction.

 

I would be inclined to think that this should be ok as it stands. Should this then be argued by their defence I could go into the 2 cases that were presented, or do you think I am better detailing these as well in the poc?

 

Maybe I should enclose the part in red in my poc.

 

Anyway, getting late, thanks for the help so far. Much appreciated!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Could you not use an address in England, have you any family in England where you could state you are living and have the address at the Bank changed etc and all court/bank correspondence sent her and then forwarded on to you by family?

 

Just a thought and poss a non starter.

 

Tanz

Link to post
Share on other sites

FWIW

 

I think your on a loser with the UTCCR because the term you refer to doesn't infer an imbalance on the parties rights. Both parties are bound by Scots law.

 

Rea Arbitration i think has a special meaning and if the term you refer to meant, law as opposed to arbitration it would have said so.

 

The case law seems the strongest bet, especially if you can find something comparable based on a Scottish court ruling that something should be heard in an English court it would be an immense help.

 

JMHO

 

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

Red if I remember rightly this guy had a similar predicement, I haven't re read to check but might be worth a read:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/lloyds-bank/11139-o0oliambeeo0o-ltsb-scotland-plc.html

 

Thanks Tanz, but I doubt this would apply to me. The Scottish courts as they are at the moment have a small claims limit of £1500, over that and it goes to a court of session and a claim can be struck out there purely on the fact that I am acting in person. Just to complicate matters a little further.

 

Glenn...thanks

FWIW

 

I think your on a loser with the UTCCR because the term you refer to doesn't infer an imbalance on the parties rights. Both parties are bound by Scots law.

 

Could I argue that this means that under Scots Law I can only claim back 5 years of charges, as opposed to 6 in the English courts. As they have offices in both locations they chose the Law and hence put unfair terms on me.

 

Rea Arbitration i think has a special meaning and if the term you refer to meant, law as opposed to arbitration it would have said so.

 

The case law seems the strongest bet, especially if you can find something comparable based on a Scottish court ruling that something should be heard in an English court it would be an immense help.

 

http://www.murraystable.com/files/articles/central-law-training-seminar.pdf

page 54 Jurisdiction Clause 55]

Damn, pdf formats. can't copy and paste!!!

 

JMHO

 

Glenn

 

I am thinking that there are unfair terms in the contract as this means that I would need to employ a solictor for claims over £1500, while I can do this in an English Court.

 

Also, as per that case law. I could argue that the words "exclusive" jurisdiction are not included.

 

NOt sure what you are meaning by arbitration.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the trouble is, red, that if the t&cs are subject to Scottish law, the case can't really be tried in an English court, can it? thats what I would have thought anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks bong, that is what I don't seem to agree with.

 

I got the info from a Scottish Law centre, so I am giving it some validity.

Particularly the part that says that it does not give "exclusive" jurisdiction to Scottish Courts. Rather it should be co-jurisdiction and as such should allow me to chose my court. I think that per se is imposing unfair terms.

 

Also it seems to me that this hinders my consumer rights to take action as per the UTCCR.

 

I guess at this stage that this is the most info I can gather, I am just going to have to go through with this. Going through the Scottish courts is just not feasable for me, and I would have to get a solicitor as well.

 

Maybe if i detail the reasons that this is unfair for me then it would stand a better chance as opposed referencing individual law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Tanz, but I doubt this would apply to me. The Scottish courts as they are at the moment have a small claims limit of £1500, over that and it goes to a court of session and a claim can be struck out there purely on the fact that I am acting in person. Just to complicate matters a little further.

 

Glenn...thanks

 

 

I am thinking that there are unfair terms in the contract as this means that I would need to employ a solictor for claims over £1500, while I can do this in an English Court.

 

I disagree with your interpretation of what fair means. The term inmy view means something along the lines that the contract doesnt favour one side over the other for the same thing.

In this case if they want to take you to court for more than £1500 they would have to use a solicitor too. So I dont think you have a jope in hells chance based on the UTCCR and fairness because it says inthe scots court.

 

Also, as per that case law. I could argue that the words "exclusive" jurisdiction are not included.

 

I think that the case law you quote sounds the most favourable in concept, i havet read it through though to check it out.

NOt sure what you are meaning by arbitration.

 

WHat i mean is that the reference you qoute talks about arbritration, if it had mean to include claims in law it would have said so and it doesnt. i would have thought a term in law which intended to be inclusinve of exclusive of something as obvious as claims would have been inclued if thats what it meant.

 

So i dont think you can use the fact it states arbritration to imply it refers to claims.

 

I dont think the term i sunfiar saying that the contract is subjject to scottish law any more than my contract would be stating english law.

 

HOwever, whether there is precedent to allow you to bring claims in english courts when the contract states this i do not know not being 'interested' in claims for those with accounts in scotland.

 

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

i do not know not being 'interested' in claims for those with accounts in scotland.

 

Glenn

 

Glenn, thanks for the input so far despite the "interest" factor, I really do appreciate your comments. To be fair I am not really interested in the Scottish legal system either, unfortunately I have to be.

 

There are a couple of things that I have picked up so far and these are...

 

1. Scottish system is capped at up to £750 and then up to £1500. Everything over that and it means the need for a lawyer. Great!

2. Some people are splitting their claims in smaller chunks up to the limit. Unfortunately I see this as an enormous waste of resources, isn't really viable to me and the courts are starting to see this as well, declining multiple claims. So...people now go court hopping. Fantastic!

3. The scottish limitation is 5 years as opposed to 6 years in England.

 

 

Now from what I see the unfair terms lie in the fact that for disputes of over £1500 they are forcing me to get a lawyer, whereas the English law would allow me to go solo on this one.

Also in Scotland the only way that I can do this over £1500 is to go through the FOS (financial ombudsman services) and they would not argue damages for me. Hence being bound to scottish law is hindering my right to legal action. Had the same terms applied to English law fair enough, but as they have specified that I seek Scots Law they are in effect hindering my right to take legal remedy.

 

1(q) excluding or hindering the consumer's right to take legal action or exercise any other legal remedy, particularly by requiring the consumer to take disputes exclusively to arbitration not covered by legal provisions, unduly restricting the evidence available to him or imposing on him a burden of proof which, according to the applicable law, should lie with another party to the contract.

 

Also, should this not be enough then there is the wording of the T&C. The earlier cases were argued that as the jurisdiction is not labelled "exclusive" that this can only amount to co-jurisdiction and hence under the Jurisdiction act I can pursue the case in either courts.

 

My interpretation of this goes down the case of as I am resident in Scotland they can only bring me to court in Scotland, whereas for a law suit (are bank charges classed as a law suit? Silly question but really important for me) I can go for any court.

 

At the end of the day, I guess that I can only stick to my beliefs.

 

If jurisdiction is refused though, does that still leave me with all the costs???

Link to post
Share on other sites

[Michael Caine voice-over] Hold on, I've just had an idea.

 

Glenn, Bill, Bong and PM hope you don't mind a pm.

Link to post
Share on other sites

[Michael Caine voice-over] Hold on, I've just had an idea.

 

Glenn, Bill, Bong and PM hope you don't mind a pm.

 

please do. Some interesting things happening all round at moment.

All opinions and advice I offer are purely my own, and are offered without any liability. If unsure seek the help of a licensed professional

...just because something's in print doesn't mean its true.... just look at you Banks T&C's for example !

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some interesting things happening all round at moment.

 

Things are starting to move fast now, and in our favour for a change.

 

Sometimes we all miss the simplest things and over-complicate stuff for ourselves...

Link to post
Share on other sites

All opinions and advice I offer are purely my own, and are offered without any liability. If unsure seek the help of a licensed professional

...just because something's in print doesn't mean its true.... just look at you Banks T&C's for example !

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just the doors, though, eh, Red ?

 

Picture of exploding car was here - unfortunately, NOT from the film, and was deemed inappropriate. My apologies.

Please - just the {edit} doors !! :D

 

Inappropriate picture removed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What???? I like inappropriate pictures...oh well, guess I won't have something to cheer me up while these banks are getting me so so down, ehm, doubt the sympathy vote will work.

 

Judging by the timestamp I only just missed that picture by minutes, damn, must have been funny!

 

Bill, I'm liking the ostrich mate!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just subscribing to a very informative thread.... :D

 

Innocent

:D CLICK MY SCALES IF I HAVE BEEN USEFUL :D

*

BARCLAYCARD WON £307

*

CAPITAL ONE WON £2.1k

*

NATWEST WON £3.4k

*

LLOYDS TSB CURRENT

Start 26/4 LBA 7/6 conLBA 22/1 N1 12/3 AQ 3/5/07ONHOLD

MORE THAN/ LLOYDS MCARD

Start 2/11 CONTL LBA 15/1/07 NOW RE-RESEARCHING

MONUMENT VISA

Start 1/11 CONTL LBA 15/1/07 NOW RE-RESEARCHING

NATWEST BUSINESS

RESEARCHING

Link to post
Share on other sites

BBC NEWS | Business | Court adjourns bank charges case

Well, friday the 13th has come and gone and Tom Brennan's case has been post poned...the banks bought more time.

 

Seems to be raising all sorts of arguements...

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/80802-tom-brennan-natwest-could.html

 

Bank Fodder's thread was quite interesting as well...

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/lloyds-bank/81799-issues-raised-llloyds-bank.htm

 

I thought that the guy was claiming for damages, turns out it is tort. Nice!

When claiming exemplary damages I take it that these should be based on the principle that no one should profit from this situation.

 

So how would you go about quantifying it?

I thought every month when they took the charges get allocate the same value in shares at that time...then when claiming state xxx shares = £££££

 

Yes, I really do have ££££ in front of me.

 

I take it that Claims + CI + Damages + Exemplary Damages = BAD IDEA

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Red,

 

just dropping by on your thread, and please forgive me for jumping in half way through (and based on the fact i have only read page 10) but i noticed some comments on jurisdiction, of which i happen to know a little about. Firstly i dont know where you live but im making a big assumption that you live in England.

 

If a contract/agreement/Terms and conditions or anything at all binding written or verbal are written under scottish law, but the claimant lives in England, then almost always the contract/agreement thats being challenged can be heard in English courts (and it usually says this on the contract) If the contract is Scottish and the claimant lives in Scotland, then almost always the claimant will only have jurisdiction under Scottish law.

However if the company in question has premises outside Scotland, ie England then jurisdiction comes back into England.

 

your probably thinking yeah i know that and this was discussed on page 2, (and if so strike from the record :grin: )

 

anyway subscribing

Dont Rush - Take Your Time - Dont always take me seriously

:p

 

If you feel i have helped you then click

Here, if you feel i have not helped you then click Here, if you want to complain about this go Here, if you would like bank secrets then go Here.

 

MBNA - Case Charges+PPI+CI+LA+Damages+costs

RBS Credit Card - Case Charges+CI+LA+Costs

Barclays - Case Charges+CI+LA+Damages+costs

Halifax - Case Charges+CI+Damages+costs

Online Finance - Case Charge+CI+Damages+costs

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi progenic,

I actually live in scotland and am bound by scots law. (unfortunately).

Which leads me to the next point...after muchos tequila I have decided to go down the FOS route...so letter to TSB going out tomorrow morning with CI & damages and after 14 days I will deem their usual lack of reply as their final offer and go through the FOS.

 

This is not the course of action I was wanting, however, judging by the whole jurisdiction process I feel a little safer going through the "proper" route. Guess I will just have to wait and see what the FOS say.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi red, have just come across debt_mountain's thread against Clydesdale bank. He lives in Scotland but is using the English courts. It is a Scottish registered company but I don't know what their terms and conditions say on the matter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry to post again so soon but :rolleyes:

 

just read a few of the links to certain threads that seem to have taken up issue here.

 

Firstly as you know red i am also claiming damages....why ? becuase like tom brennan i am trying to use it as a tool of leverage against the banks, (i must also add that this action of my own has nothing to do with tom brennan and i decided this months ago)

 

Tort ! tort is basically a civil injustice, i do not mean to knock people on this forum higher up the command chain that i, but some people dont seem to have a full understanding of what tort is.

 

we all have the right to apply damages to our claims, whatever the basis of claim is, regardles of whether its criminal, contractual or tortious or a mixture of them all.

 

On the aspect of damages the judge will simply decide on whether he agrees with the fact the banks have done something worthy of damages, ie the bank being stripped of what they have taken from you and some more as a punishment for their wrong doing. I personally thought i might stand a better chance of getting them into the court room if i used damages on the claim aswell.

But dont think your doing anything wrong here, there seems to be alot of contrary arguments going around lately, and clearly alot of them are based on....well lets just say not fact anyways :rolleyes:

Dont Rush - Take Your Time - Dont always take me seriously

:p

 

If you feel i have helped you then click

Here, if you feel i have not helped you then click Here, if you want to complain about this go Here, if you would like bank secrets then go Here.

 

MBNA - Case Charges+PPI+CI+LA+Damages+costs

RBS Credit Card - Case Charges+CI+LA+Costs

Barclays - Case Charges+CI+LA+Damages+costs

Halifax - Case Charges+CI+Damages+costs

Online Finance - Case Charge+CI+Damages+costs

Link to post
Share on other sites

we all have the right to apply damages to our claims, whatever the basis of claim is, regardles of whether its criminal, contractual or tortious or a mixture of them all.

You can not bring a criminal action in the civil courts. Damages in contract are only available to compensate the claimant exemplary and aggravated damages are only available in tort law.

 

The basic claims are personal restitutionary actions for money had and received. They are not based on contract law although the contract terms will form the basis of the cause of actions. These actions are often referrred to as quasi contract.

 

There are no damages available in restitution its simply restoring the sums taken. If you went for a proprietary restitution claim then an account of profits is available as a remedy in addition to compound interest.

 

Alternatively you could claim in one of the established areas of tort law and claim exemplary and aggravated damages.

Link to post
Share on other sites

zoot,

 

thanks for that and for the record i fully understand that you cannot bring a criminal action via the civil court system :)

 

My point i was trying to get across was that, IMHO there is nothing wrong morally with applying a claim for damages to a bank fee case, as i seemed to have picked up from various places around the site. And the fact that a tort in simple terms anyway, is a civil injustice that may be awarded some form of compensation if it were bought before the court. And that a breach of contract is not a tort either,

 

what i was saying simply is this, i dont think we should feel bad about claiming damages.

 

How a claimant goes about that is another topic altogether.

Dont Rush - Take Your Time - Dont always take me seriously

:p

 

If you feel i have helped you then click

Here, if you feel i have not helped you then click Here, if you want to complain about this go Here, if you would like bank secrets then go Here.

 

MBNA - Case Charges+PPI+CI+LA+Damages+costs

RBS Credit Card - Case Charges+CI+LA+Costs

Barclays - Case Charges+CI+LA+Damages+costs

Halifax - Case Charges+CI+Damages+costs

Online Finance - Case Charge+CI+Damages+costs

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...