ICY -v- Abbey

[GaryH]

UTTCCR 1999 or should i put the whole document in

 

also same with UCTA do i need any particular sections or should i include it all

All, of both

the supply of goods & services act again which bits or all of it ???

None of it - not necessary v Abbey

[GaryH]

The CC report is highly relevant, so certainly include that - in fact thats essential for any Abbey bundle IMO.

 

The Aussie one less so, but worth including as you've referred to it in your witness statement, presumably.

 

Here's some bits to add to your WS if you like -

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/abbey-bank/726-abbey-charges-5.html#post895532

 

some of the paragraphs from d) would be useful to include.

[GaryH]

Use the second SofE (Pre-estimate one), re-titled as a witness statement as a base, and add some paragraphs from section d) of what I just linked for you.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/53570-new-strategy-allocation-questionnaires-3.html#post482194

 

I would put it at the front - index/title page first, then WS, then the rest.

[GaryH]

The cut bits are deliberately cut - confidential. The important bits are all there, so don't worry about it.

 

Heres the full report, but all you really need is appendix 4.6.

 

Provisional Findings report -Northern Irish personal banking

[GaryH]

What stage of the claim are you at by the way? I've looked back over your thread briefly but I can't really see where you are. Have you even had directions from the court yet?

 

If not then you can't send your bundle yet, becouse you don't know what the court has directed you to provide. You may not even get a final hearing date - it may be a prelim or directions hearing first, in which case you won't need the bundle anyway.

[GaryH]

Gary

 

(Sorry to hijack ICY, but someone has asked me a question and I dont know the answer)

 

I have been asked why we dont need to include the SOGA in the court bundle, and I didnt know the answer to it. Can you help

 

Thanks

 

(sorry again ICY)xx

Becouse it relates only to the fallback argument if the fees were accepted by the court as a service charge.

 

Sale of Goods and Services Act 1982 s.15 provides that where a service is provided without a pre-agreed price, a "reasonable" price will be implied, and that what is reasonable will be a question of fact - I.e in our case actual cost vs. end price of charge.

 

Its irrelevant to Abbey claims becouse there is no question of the charges being a fee for a service - Abbey readily admit that they are damages for a breach and they defend on that basis.

[GaryH]

Strange. What interest are you claiming?

[GaryH]

I'm not sure how to deal with this. I think you need to send the same schedule but with an explanation or formula for how its worked out. Unfortunately I can't help you with that (maths never a strong point!!) but I know someone who will.....

[GaryH]

Here you go, request for judgement -

 

http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/courtfinder/forms/n225_0406.pdf