Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • "We suffer more in imagination than in reality" - really pleased this all happened. Settled by TO, full amount save as to costs and without interest claimed. I consider this a success but feel free to move this thread to wherever it's appropriate. I say it's a success because when I started this journey I was in a position of looking to pay interest on all these accounts, allowing them to default stopped that and so even though I am paying the full amount, it is without a doubt reduced from my position 3 years ago and I feel knowing this outcome was possible, happy to gotten this far, defended myself in person and left with a loan with terms I could only dream of, written into law as interest free! I will make better decisions in the future on other accounts, knowing key stages of this whole process. We had the opportunity to speak in court, Judge (feels like just before a ruling) was clear in such that he 'had all the relevant paperwork to make a judgement'. He wasn't pleased I hadn't settled before Court.. but then stated due to WS and verbal arguments on why I haven't settled, from my WS conclusion as follows: "11. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. "  He offered to stand down the case to give us chance to settle and that that was for my benefit specifically - their Sols didn't want to, he asked me whether I wanted to proceed to judgement or be given the opportunity to settle. Naturally, I snapped his hand off and we entered negotiations (took about 45 minutes). He added I should get legal advice for matters such as these. They were unwilling to agree to a TO unless it was full amount claimed, plus costs, plus interest. Which I rejected as I felt that was unfair in light of the circumstances and the judges comments, I then countered with full amount minus all costs and interest over 84 months. They accepted that. I believe the Judge wouldn't have been happy if they didn't accept a payment plan for the full amount, at this late stage. The judge was very impressed by my articulate defence and WS (Thanks CAG!) he respected that I was wiling to engage with the process but commented only I  can know whether this debt is mine, but stated that Civil cases were based on balance of probabilities, not without shadow of a doubt, and all he needs to determine is whether the account existed. Verbal arguments aside; he has enough evidence in paperwork for that. He clarified that a copy of a DN and NOA is sufficient proof based on balance of probabilities that they were served. I still disagree, but hey, I'm just me.. It's definitely not strict proof as basically I have to prove the negative (I didn't receive them/they were not served), which is impossible. Overall, a great result I think! BT  
    • Seeking further advice now. The 33 days in which the defendant has to submit a defence expires at 16:00 tomorrow. The defendant has submitted an acknowledgement of service but looking to get the claim awarded by default in failure to submit the defence. This is MoneyClaim Online and can see an option to request a default judgement but believe that is for failure to acknowledge the claim within 14 days??  So being MoneyClaim Online, how do I request the claim be awarded in my favour?
    • Have to agree with the above Health and safety legislation is specific in that the service provider in so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of all his employees and those not in the employ of the business. You claim is like saying you slipped in the swimming pool area while taking a dip. As rightly stated by by the leisure centre, a sports hall has dedicated equipment and you yourself personally have a legal obligation in mitigating danger or injury to yourself by taking account of your immediate surroundings. Where your claim will fail is if it is reasonable and proportionate to impose liability of the Leisure Centre? The answer has to be no.
  • 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

New Claim - Another Capital One


doo
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6157 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

Thanks uk but I have already sent my letter but you are right in that the above is short and to the point. I just want to make a point on the Limitations Act. Please stick around though as I am sure I will have some question on the allocation questionnaire, am reading up on it now and will definately send with the the Draft Order for Directions.Just a question though, at the end of their defence they state 'Capital One will now defend the claim on the basis that the correct amount has been paid in full. (which is the amount they offered me but about £1,000 short of my claim.Now on the front page No. 1 How much of the claim do you dispute? They have ticked that they dispute the full amount but it gives the option under that 'I admit the amount of xxx If you dispute only part of the claim you must either, pay the amount admitted to the person blah blah blah. Then send this defence to the court.

They are confusing me to say the least.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 328
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

nice letter doo, by the look of it i'd say you should be getting a full offer before to long;)

OK I GIVE IN

 

Halifax £3600 charges, won with C/I £6400

 

NatWest S.A.R-05/06/06

Bug**r all recieved 03/11/06

Prelim guesimate sent for £3000 03/11/06

Cr*p one CONNED statements 08/06 ROFLMAO

Cr*p one charges=£976

con int 34.9% £1,003.75 £1,979.75.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi doo

 

The thing we seem to be doing across quite a few posts is remind the banks about the Limitation Act. There is no Statute Of Limitations, only in America. If they are still concealing their charges even today, then we claim it all back beyond the 6 years. BF added a note above all bank charges threads a short time ago.

 

They are saying that because you have been paid out, they dispute the claim if it was to go further. Stick to your guns on this, you maybe get a reply very soon. How long did you give them?.

 

Uk

WARNING TO ALL

Please be aware of acting on advice given by PM .Anyone can make mistakes and if advice is given on the main forum people can see it to correct it ,if given privately then no one can see it to correct it. Please also be aware of giving your personal details to strangers

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the letter they sent me was meant to panic me, quoting me Statute of Limitations and saying my calculations were wrong, well I certainly got my spready checked out by Redsonja and Bill-k. As to the six year thing they are implying I can only go back 6 years from the date of the actual claim being submitted to the court, well I started my claim with prelim in 1 Feb 07 and my first charge date was 6 Feb 01, so think I am right. I left off any earlier charges.

 

Did not actually give them a dead-line on the letter I sent - I thought it would be guided by court time-scale, well I am determined on this matter now. This afternoon I have gone through the guides for the Allocation Questionnaire and the Draft Order for Directions so I am prepared. Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi lurker, that is a great name lol, hope this thread has been of use to you, keep watching. By the time you get your statements you will know exactly what to do and what cap one are like to deal with.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi folks,

Just wanted to make reference to UKs letter a minute. Yep short and to the point but I would worry if you accept partial payments, as then you are taking them to court for just the interest and as we know this has been frowned upon previously. I personally would refuse any partial payments and then the whole amount can be taken to court. I know you have sent your letter doo but just wanted to point this out for other people who are watching your thread and are dealing with Capital One. I think its the wrong route to go with partial payments but that is just my honest opinion.

Morgan Stanley

**Won 31.01.07 with CCI**

Capital One

**Won 19.04.07 with CCI**

Halifax current & Joint

Verbal S.A.R 11.01.07, stats recd 18.01.07

Halifax Visa prelim sent 26.01.07. Reply 31.01.07 Filed N1 on 20.03.07 - Judgement granted, sent in the bailiffs

GE Capital

Frazercard Prelim sent with CCI 27.01.07

Burtons Prelim sent with CCI 22.01.07

 

RBOS Visa S.A.R sent 12.01.07

Partners JJB card (Creation) *Won* with part interest - 15.02.07

 

 

Partners LLOYDS Account S.A.R 13.12.06 - stats recd 30.01.07. Prelim sent with CCI 01.02.07

 

Partners BOS Mastercard Offered all charges except £12. Refused. N1 filed 20.03.07 - Judgement granted, sent in the bailiffs

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Sonja, this is the exact reason why I rejected their offer and will send back the cheque, I want to keep my claim intact so I don't just go to court to argue over the interest.Applecrumble thanks for post, it's so nice to have support.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Tanz, I wondered where you had got to - am going to hold out, principle and all that. Hope your credit files finally got updated.

 

I have been busy, experian is not showing as a default, however it is showing in the last 36 months as number of status 1-2 is 13 and the number of status 3+ is 4 (which is not helpful) I want it all removed really so might write a letter tomorrow morning and send it of reg delivery.

 

Also hadn't had time to call call credit to see if there was any change to my file so will do that tomorrow.

 

Tanz

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi folks,

Just wanted to make reference to UKs letter a minute. Yep short and to the point but I would worry if you accept partial payments, as then you are taking them to court for just the interest and as we know this has been frowned upon previously. I personally would refuse any partial payments and then the whole amount can be taken to court. I know you have sent your letter doo but just wanted to point this out for other people who are watching your thread and are dealing with Capital One. I think its the wrong route to go with partial payments but that is just my honest opinion.

 

Hi Redsonja

 

You are correct that we should'nt go to court on the contractual side alone, if they have offered the charges with 8% added and the court fees. As there is still some time left before the court hearing, the letter doo has sent to them is stating that the claim is already in the system with the court service. The banks are still trying to call the shots when claims have gone in. In my opinion if a claim has gone in for Contractual as well, as it is what they have charged doo on every charge, then full and final settlement is the amount on the claim form. We await the reply as they have paid out in full before.

WARNING TO ALL

Please be aware of acting on advice given by PM .Anyone can make mistakes and if advice is given on the main forum people can see it to correct it ,if given privately then no one can see it to correct it. Please also be aware of giving your personal details to strangers

Link to post
Share on other sites

They certainly have UK. They paid me full charges, court fee, postage for letters and full contractual interest..just waiting for the cheque. I just didnt want people to get confused over your letter :)

Morgan Stanley

**Won 31.01.07 with CCI**

Capital One

**Won 19.04.07 with CCI**

Halifax current & Joint

Verbal S.A.R 11.01.07, stats recd 18.01.07

Halifax Visa prelim sent 26.01.07. Reply 31.01.07 Filed N1 on 20.03.07 - Judgement granted, sent in the bailiffs

GE Capital

Frazercard Prelim sent with CCI 27.01.07

Burtons Prelim sent with CCI 22.01.07

 

RBOS Visa S.A.R sent 12.01.07

Partners JJB card (Creation) *Won* with part interest - 15.02.07

 

 

Partners LLOYDS Account S.A.R 13.12.06 - stats recd 30.01.07. Prelim sent with CCI 01.02.07

 

Partners BOS Mastercard Offered all charges except £12. Refused. N1 filed 20.03.07 - Judgement granted, sent in the bailiffs

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for bringing it up. It's a long shot to see if they will adjust the figure knowing that the case is still on.

WARNING TO ALL

Please be aware of acting on advice given by PM .Anyone can make mistakes and if advice is given on the main forum people can see it to correct it ,if given privately then no one can see it to correct it. Please also be aware of giving your personal details to strangers

Link to post
Share on other sites

hello doo

 

sorry for jumping in your thread, but like you am claiming against cap one!!well just about to do N1 forms and was wondering if you could help me with this as i am too claiming CI and not sure on how to word the N1 form also i have had a part refund put into my account and also dont know how to put this in my claim form

 

I know its cheeky but is there any way i could have a look as to what you put down in your claim please!!!:confused:

 

thanks

albbyswife

Link to post
Share on other sites

was this part refund enough to cover your charges?

and have you already accepted it?

OK I GIVE IN

 

Halifax £3600 charges, won with C/I £6400

 

NatWest S.A.R-05/06/06

Bug**r all recieved 03/11/06

Prelim guesimate sent for £3000 03/11/06

Cr*p one CONNED statements 08/06 ROFLMAO

Cr*p one charges=£976

con int 34.9% £1,003.75 £1,979.75.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi

 

No the part refund does not cover the charges as it was only a third of the ammount of the charges

 

I sent back a letter to say that i would only accept this ammount as part payment and would continue claim for the remaing ammount

Link to post
Share on other sites

you should be ok then, i asked because they'll try the pay the charges beck, then you'll have to claim for the C/I only, halifax have done this with me,[ and i fell for:o ] so now i've got the almost impossable task of claiming £31 in charges and £2500 in C/I:eek: , not good. so if you get another offer, do not accept it even as partial, keep the claim whole, very, very important.

i can't remember the wording i used sorry, but i'm sure doo will be able to help;)

OK I GIVE IN

 

Halifax £3600 charges, won with C/I £6400

 

NatWest S.A.R-05/06/06

Bug**r all recieved 03/11/06

Prelim guesimate sent for £3000 03/11/06

Cr*p one CONNED statements 08/06 ROFLMAO

Cr*p one charges=£976

con int 34.9% £1,003.75 £1,979.75.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks c allen, you took the words right out of my mouth, just to add as well - beware if you have a balance on your card - you may find they pay your card off, it seems it is another way of them separating the charges from your contractual claim. As c allen says, if you allow them to repay the charges you could end up in court just fighting for the CI.

 

albbyswife I will pm you my POC this evening and will subscribe to your thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...