Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Include that in your witness statement along with that letter as an exhibit.
    • Yup, well so far they have lied to me about responding to a CCA,  are threatening me with a default notice that they don't have, produced a knocked up version of my NOA, sent me 29 pages of spew for an agreement. No wonder they pay 5 p in the pound for that crap.
    • Paragraph 2. I think there should be further down and also you should make the point that the payment to was made unilaterally and without the imposition of any conditions. Paragraph 3 – this is unnecessary because you are not claiming as an entitled third-party. This worries me because it makes me feel that you haven't fully read around because this is a paragraph which you would include where you were suing EVRi as a beneficial third party because you had actually made your contract with Packlink or some other broker. I think you need to revisit and do some more reading. I'm afraid I have a sense that you have simply copied this from somebody else's witness statement without understanding that it wasn't necessary. Please can you post the amended draft. Other than the suggestions above, it looks okay – but let's see it again for a further appraisal. In terms of the evidence, parties bundle, I think it might be an idea to start off with the correspondence with EVRi and then go onto the other evidence. You will have to amend the index page accordingly. You could shorten this bit. Take 19 is pretty well blank and you may as well miss it out also, there seems to be some repetition of emails and the email chain. I think will be worth going through and getting rid of duplicates if you can. 49 pages is a bit long and it would be a good idea to try and reduce the number. I have a feeling that 50 pages as the County Court limit anyway. The judge will be happier with you if the bundle is smaller. Maybe you could reduce the size of some of the images or messages et cetera. You have got several messages which straddle onto a second page so that things like sign off information and standard confidentiality information become orphans. A bit of manipulation and they could be joined to their parents I think. Page 31 as an example. So is page 19. You may only be up to shorten the whole thing by 56 pages – but I think it would be a good idea. 56 pages is, after all, 10%. If you can do more then so much the better
    • Investment by Dutch brewing giant will create 1,000 new jobs and reopen dozens of closed pubsView the full article
    • Qantas agrees to pay millions to settle lawsuit accusing it of selling tickets to cancelled flights.View the full article
  • 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

ICY -v- Abbey


ICY
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5057 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

Not confirmed by my court yet, like i say will ring them tomorrow, i submitted request for judgement last week, i will be really angry if after abbey failed to respond to the JUDGES ORDERS he stays my case after they have shown total disregard for how the court process goes, however as said it has NOT yet been confirmed, so lets not lose hope just yet

:madgrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 624
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi all, can anyone clarify this as been ordered from the heirarchy as the court informed me that they had only just received the directive this morning, and it may still be uo to the judges decision at their court.

please don't panic, it might only be mine.I do not want to start a panic, it may only be a few courts and I will go that extra mile to a court that is continuing.

regards

chris

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will let you know how Oldham is getting on we are only about 1/2 hour away, glad i dont live in fax anymore, and i am hoping she was a misinformed joker who has a big chip on her shoulder from having to do all the extra work.

Not seen anything anywhere officially stating that a blanket stay has been granted.

:madgrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes that was good news wasn't it? I love the bit where the Judge asked had she even read the claims!!

 

Incompetence brings justice!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!;):D

 

Tick Tock.....fingers crossed!

 

Jo xx

Six Nations Champions 2009

Triple Crown 2009

Grand Slam 2009

:cool::-D:cool:

Link to post
Share on other sites

it makes me feel better some judges are continuing, do they fancy working at alternative courts to help others who have crumbled at the last hurdle and surrendered to the banks.:mad:

regards

chris

ps fingers crossed Icey, let us know how it goes, it may be that if you are due a hearing it may be too late for the judge. Here's hoping

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just called the court, told me the judgment had not been dealt with yet and could be up to another week, when i questioned the "blanket stay" he said the judges are reviewing each claim on a case by case basis, and he said there has not been a blanket stay on all bank charge claims, which is good news as going by some orders have received from Oldham they have some good judges

:madgrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Icy, that's good news, was quite worried when I first saw these postings but certainly seems to be which Judge you get, here's hoping that all Judge's go ahead with bank claims - the Banks seems to get too much of their own way.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Need some help here please. I am about to do a witness statement and I am finding it a bit difficult. On the link it says that photo copies of court documents are not necessary. Does that mean I only have to take mine in my own bundle or don't I need to take them atall? I have posted this on my own thread but wondered if there was anyone here who might know. sorry to hijack ICY

:-|

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh these people are starting to £%$% me off now, just got a letter from abbey, i thinks ooh i wonder if this is a cheque, ripped it open and guess wht it was.

 

 

 

 

 

Yup well done, a letter informing of stay or rather them saying they want a stay. AARRRRRRRRGGGGGGHHHHHHH

 

Dear Sir

 

ABBEY NATIONAL PLC -ATS- YOURSELF

CLAIM NO: 7QZ62720

 

Your claim in relation to unauthorised bank charges is currently being litigated in the County Court.

 

Although we believe the charges are fair, clear and lawful [OF COURSE THEY ARE] since you have filed your claim in court, Abbey (along with six other banks and a building society) has become involved in legal proceedings with the Office of Fair Tradingin relation to unauthorised overdraft charges. We believe this will resolve the issues regarding the fairness and legality of your unauthorised overdraft bank charges. [WHATS WRONG WITH FOLLOWING THIS CASE ALL THE WAY AND MAKING IT INTO A TEST CASE]

 

Pending the outcome of this test case, we are asking the County Courts to stay all claims relating to unauthorised overdraft bank charges. A stay means that the case is put on hold. [THANKS FOR THE PATRONISING COMMENTS] If your claim has not already been stayed then, we have written or will shortly be writing to the County Court seeking a stay of your legal claim. As a result your case is likely to be put on hold until the outcome of the test case is known. [sO YOU DONT EVEN KNOW IF YOU HAVE OR HAVENT REQUESTED A STAY]

 

Given the court case, we have asked the Financial Services Authority to suspend the normal timetable for dealing with bank charges complaints, and the FSA has agreed to this request subject to conditions that protect complainants rights.

 

We have also asked the Fnancial Ombudsman Service not to proceed with any other case they are hearing until the test case is resolved. FOS has indicated that as a general proposition it will indeed not proceed with cases which rely on the legal issues being considered in the test case. [WHO THE HELL IS RULING WHO HERE SURELY THE OMBUDSMAN SHOULD BE TELLING ABBEY WHAT TO DO NOT THE OTHER WAY ROUND]

 

Exactly what will happen next will be depend on the courts. We do not know how long the test case will take [bUT I BET YOU WILL DRAG EVERY LAST SECOND OUT] we have promised to proceed as quicky as possible [WHATS THAT SMELL - OH YEAH BS] but inevitably given the importance of the issues being considered, this may take many months to finally resolve. We will keep you updated appropriatly in respect of the proceedings with the OFT. You can also check the latest position on our website @

 

In the interim, please retain your bank records, as this will make it easier for you to support your legal claim on resolution of the test case. We can assure you that we have kept a record of your legal claim [JUST REMIND YOURSELF THAT WHEN THE JUDGES ISSUES JUDGEMENT AGAINST YOU]

 

If we have made you an offer

 

We may have written to you recently to make you a goodwill offer [GOODWILL PFFFHHHHTTT] in full and final settlement of your legal claim. Provided that you have not rejected that offer, the goodwill offer the bank has made to you still stands and will be honoured. [THATS NICE OF YOU TO HONOUR A TOTALLY INSULTING OFFER BUT SORRY I ALREADY THREW IT BACK IN YOUR FACE SO STICK IT]

 

If you wish to take up this offer, the bank will take this acceptance as "full and final" settlement of your legal claim. To accept this offer you must contct us within two months of the date of this letter. If you accept our goodwill offer as "full and final" settlement, it is highly unlikely you will be awarded a further sum at a later stage even if the test case established you were otherwise entitled to a larger amount. However, this does not preclude you from asking for repayement of any future charges if the courts find they are unlawful. [WELL DROP THE FULL AND FINAL PART THEN]

 

Please contact us if you are nt sure whether you have an open offer or not.

 

After the test case is finished

 

Once the legal proceedings between the OFT and the banks have finished, we will resolve your legal claim as quickly as possible applying the principals established in the test case, which may generate larger or smaller figure when compared with any current offer we may have made to you.

 

The FAS requires us to ensure that your legal claim will not be adversly affected by stay of your court proceedings [NO COMMENT]

:madgrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

so what the hell now icy thats not fair after all that you gonna object to the stay of course arent u but guess youll have no choice if they go with it will you xxxkia

Link to post
Share on other sites

I received exactly the same letter! Was yours on Abbey headed paper (the red letterhead)? Mine was a photocopy, black heading!!!:rolleyes: I took this to mean that they were bulk produced and only the case number had been typed on individually ~ or they are so overworked they've filed the top copy and sent me the file copy!!!:rolleyes:

 

I think I'm going to phone the court next week to find out whether or not Abbey have requested a stay ~ mind you, the directions hearing isn't til November so there's still time for them to forget!:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

ICY

 

I have received exactly the same letter this morning, I was due in court 12th September. Do we just ask for the stay to be lifted or are there laws and regulations we shall need to relate to in our request?

 

If anyone can help please do so.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi ICY.

 

We got exactly the same letter as well. I contact the court because they said they was defending and then they sent their so called defense. The court told me they had received the same as me and it will go before the Judge who will decide. When we got the letter saying they was asking for a "Stay" the court told me it was up to the Judge and they advised me I can appeal. So I intend to do just by sending the appeal letter I found on this very website :D

 

I`m just waiting for instructions from the judge now. I`m kinda hoping he doesn't bother with the AQ and throws it out with abuse of process ;)

 

Ladidi

Ladidi

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi again,

 

Here's a good thread to look at if you haven't been into it yet. The title is (and you need the full sentence as there is a similar thread title) 'office of fair trading test case' and start at top page 43. I can't find the thread on the list any where. Must be in the Tardis.

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry to say I am in the same boat as you ICY they have also requested the stay with me too :mad:

:eek:ABBEY

Data Protection Act request complied with within 40 Days and no £10 charge..

31/01/07 Prelim Letter sent with schedule of charges.

19/02/07 LBA Sent with schedule of charges

08/03/07 MCOL started

09/03/07 £160 GOGW payment into account

23/07/07 Court Date set for 10/10/07

02/08/07 CPR Part 18 Request Submitted

10/08/07 Stay requested by Abbey :mad:

20/08/07 Claim Stayed by District Judge :mad:

:eek:HSBC

02/02/07 S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) Letter sent

22/02/07 Statements received and again no £10 charge...."happy to provide at their cost"

26/02/07 Prelim Letter to be sent with schedule of charges.

12/03/07 LBA sent with schedule of charges

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi guys,

 

is it better to write to the judge WITHOUT using the N244 form therefore no expense paid, ie £35 for removal (not garruanteed) or £65 to see the judge?:confused:

 

Might just write with non-grovelling grovelling letter.lol:D

 

stay fresh peeps

 

regards

chris

 

oh KKKKKKKKKKERRRRRRRRRCHHHHHHHHINNNNNNGGGGGGG another £1.26 daily interest mr Bank Manager.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...