Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


Sign in to follow this  
Guest bong

NOT accepting offer - hearing date 17 Jan

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 4892 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Guest bong

probably going to get my wrists slapped for posting a link to my thread here but here goes anyway. I'm not accepting Barclaycards offer of settlement before the hearing set for 17 Jan, because I want to try for a judgement on the unlawfulness etc. (I know I'm risking it) and I wondered if I could have people's thoughts on the letter I am about to send them in response to their no admission of liability offer here http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/barclaycard/30300-bong-barclaycard-6.html#post465111

 

sorry for breaking the posting rules but I hope it will benefit others

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest bong

would be particularly grateful for a green or pink taking a look please

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest bong

bump

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Bong!

I can understand the sentiment behind this - we would all like our day in court (and I have no doubt that the courts would as well!). But if the bank makes a reasonable offer to you, and whilst you may not be obliged to accept, a judge may not look too kindly on you if you don't and you would land up with nothing.

The phrase "cut your nose off to spite your face" comes to mind - as unfair as it may seem.

SG ;)


:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest bong

thanks for sharing your opinion sg

 

at the moment I feel like the only person in the forum who believes that this is not just about getting our money back. Why does everyone think that the judge isn't there to consider the lawfulness of the contract aswell?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You may feel like that but you are wide of the mark - the vast majority feel like this and it's not a case of getting our money back. We are trying to get our cases heard in court but are being continually frustrated by the Banks' behaviour. We want to have our day in court even though some of us really need our money.

You are not alone in anyway shape or form regarding this and that is the beauty of this site.

SG x:)


:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest NATTIE

I think you could risk having two minutes in court, just about time for the judge to say you are wasting his time as settlement has been offered. I have seen the idea muted before and same things said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest NATTIE

Bong the reason for this is because you claimed a monetary amount and it was offered, the court cannot make any precedent setting judgement and the issue is on money as that is what you have claimed. I just caught a few responses to your other thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest bong

ok I don't think I am being unreasonable. I have a contract for my credit card which does not comply with the law so what do I do about it - why is it unreasonable to ask the court to decide whether it's unlawful?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest NATTIE

Because they offered the amount you are suing for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest bong
you claimed a monetary amount and it was offered, the court cannot make any precedent setting judgement and the issue is on money as that is what you have claimed.

 

hi natty, In addition to claiming my money back I also claimed that the charges were penalties etc. why do you say the court can't pass judgement on that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest NATTIE

You sued for a monetary amount, the offer was a full monetary amount. That is why there would be no case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest bong

I also sued to get a court's decision on the penalty issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Bong - The small claims track is used to deal with the less difficult cases (this is a simlification but bear with me).It may seem unfair, but when you are given a reasonable offer then essentially your case has been dealt with insofar as you have got back the money that you were making the claim for. Only if it got to court, would you be able to argue your case and it never gets that far (as of yet) because the banks pay up.

If a case is allocated to the fast track (as I hope mine will be) then the bank must comply with a disclosure order but again it's difficult in getting it to go that far.Also, greater costs are involved if you loose.

SG :)


:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest The Terminator
I also sued to get a court's decision on the penalty issue.

 

Bong the only way to get a decesion against the banks would be to go through the judicial process county court, Court of Appeal , Law lords in order to get a presedent set.Now if its against unfair charges there is no way you will get the banks going through that process. Anyway im pleased you've got a result

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...