Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Well we can't predict what the judge will believe. PE will say that they responded in the deadline and you will say they don't. Nobody can tell what a random DJ will decide. However if you go for an OOC settlement you should still be able to get some money
    • What do you guys think the chances are for her?   She followed the law, they didnt, then they engage in deception, would the judge take kindly to being lied to by these clowns? If we have a case then we should proceed and not allow these blatant dishonest cheaters to succeed 
    • I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.  
  • 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

MCOL against Barclays **WON**


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6080 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

Right after the usual route of SAR and LBA requesting money back, Barclays said no. A little surprising as had been a success with First Direct and Morgan Stanley.

 

Have just filed a MCOL. It took time and concentration but following the advice on the CAG pages was quite frankly nothing like as scarey as you might think.

 

So time to sit and back and see what happens. While I wait I will look through some other posts and get an idea of the time scales involved with the courts.

 

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep going, you will get your money back. Barclays keep you waiting until you've got a court date so wait until a couple of weeks before the hearing and give them a call on 020 7116 5634, ask who's dealing with your claim and if they want to settle. They will! Good luck!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right MCOL completed 16FEB07. I also posted the letter and schedule of bank charges to the court, all as the templates on here. So far so good.

 

The MCOL website now has "start" in the judgement box on my claims summary. Do I just wait now for the court to do what they have to do?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It will change to issued...you will recieve a letter from the court telling you this. Barclays then have 14 days to reply!

 

I am currently in the middle of Barclays 2 week period to reply to my claim (so I am roughly 2 weeks ahead of you)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Today I printed and read all 14 pages of welshmans thread. It is excellent and tells you exactly what is coming with Barclays. Recommend anyone up against then gives it a read. Covers all the court stuff and eventual settlement by Barclays.

 

Here is a link

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/barclays-bcard-woolwich-successes/21951-welshman-barclays.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Well things are moving onwards. In the post today "Notice that Acknowledgement of Service has been filed". Barclays have confirmed they intend to defend my claim as at 27FEB07. This gives them 28 days (27MAR07) to file a defence.

 

Guess I will be re-reading welshmans thread this weekend, lol.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Today have received in the post a Notice of transfer of proceedings to my local (Chichester) County Court. Together with the Barclays defence (quickly scanned) seems to be same as all the others, yawn, no surprise there! lol

 

So this weekend will be filling in AQ. Am already subscribed to two good threads on AQ's so if I get stuck plenty of help to hand.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right Barclays defence document is below. I copy and pasted this from Welshmans thread, post #105 as link below. The bits in red are new on mine compared to his. The bits underlined are missing in my document.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/barclays-bcard-woolwich-successes/21951-welshman-barclays-6.html

 

1. The Particulars of Claim do not provide details or particulars of the account in question and/or the precise charges alleged to have been unlawful, or the date thereof. To the extent it is alleged that the Claimant incurred bank charges on his/her account for unauthorised borrowings (whether unpaid fees for returned cheques, "Paid Re~erral fees" or any other such fees), the Defendant puts the Claimant to strict proof of each charge and the date thereof.

2. Accordingly this defence is summary in nature and the Defendant reserves the right to amend this Statement of Case in due course.

3. 2. The Defendant's standard terms and conditions give the Claimant a fair and transparent view of those terms and the charges applicable is entitled to charge the Claimant for unauthorised borrowings by reason of its standard terms and conditions. (including where the account is overdrawn without an overdraft limit or where the Claimant exceeds his/her authorised overdraft limit). The Claimant accepted the same when the account was opened, including (in particular but without limitation) the following terms and conditions (which are summaried) :

a. The Defendants right to charge a "Paid Referral Fee" where the Defendant pays an amount (either by compulsion or election) which causes the account to become overdrawn - £30 per item (previously £25).

b. The Defendant's right to charge an administration fee if any cheque, standing order or direct debit cannot be paid because of insufficient cleared funds in the account - £35 per item (previously £30).

c. The Defendants entitlement, if the Claimant becomes overdrawn without an overdraft limit, to charge interst at the unauthorised borrowing rate on the excess balance.

 

4. The Defendant's standard terms and conditions give the Claimant a fair and transparent view of those terms and charges applicable for unauthorised borrowings (including where the account is overdrawn without an overdraft limit or where the Claimant exceeds his authorised overdraft limit).

 

5. 3. If and to the extent it is the Claimant's case that the failure to make necessary payments and I or failure to remain within authorised overdraft limits failure to arrange an authorised overdraft constituted a breach of the terms applying to the account and that the contractual entitlement to debit charges from the Claimant's account constitutes a liquidated damages clause, the same is denied. The charges constitute payments the Claimant agreed to make by reason of the terms a.."1d conditions or hisiher account and Were consideration for the Defendant advancing creditto the Claimant, which the Defendant was under no obligation to advance. The Defendant was entitled to impose such charges and interest when the Claimant incurred the overdraft.

 

6. 4. Accordingly, it is denied that the legal principles relating to liquidated damages clauses and penalty charges are relevant or applicable to the facts set out above. Further or alternatively it is denied that any such charges constitute unlawful penalty charges or are in breach of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (particularly but without limitation to, paragraph l(e) of Schedule 2), or are in breach of the Unfair (Contracts) Terms Act 1977 (or any other provision), or are unreasonable within the meaning of the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 (or indeed any other provision). It is further denied that any such charges unduly enrich the Defendant

7. 5. Therefore, it is denied that the charges were unlawfully debited from the account.

 

8. 6. If and to the extent the Claimant incurred charges on hislher account, this was caused by the Claimant having gone into overdraft without having agreed with the Defendant an authorised overdraft facility or to increase the overdraft facility and I or hislher failure to make payments to bring the balance of the account back into credit.

 

9. 7. It is averred that the said charges and interest are and remain lawful and enforceable and that the Defendant was entitled to debit the same. Accordingly, the Claimant is not entitled to a declaration by the Court as to the enforceability of the said charges.

 

10. 8. The Defendant denies that it is liable to the Claimant for the sums claimed and interest as pleaded by the Claimant or at all. In the alternative, which is denied, if the said charges amount to sums payable on breach of contract, it is averred that the charges asserted by the Claimant to have been applied to the account prior to O8th September 2000 would not be recoverable for reason of exhaustion of time in bringing contractual claims from the date of accrual, pursuant to the Limitation Act 1980.

 

11.9. In the alternative, and without prejudice to paragraph 6 above, if (which is denied) the said charges and interest or any part thereof are unlawful or unenforceable as alleged by the Claimant or at all, the Defendant has nonetheless suffered loss and damage as a consequence of the Claimant's breach of contract in allowing the account to go into unauthorised overdraft. Accordingly, in the event that the Defendant is unable to rely on its express entitlement to enforce the charges as set out at paragraphs 2 to 3 above, it will seek to recover to the extent necessary such loss and damage as it actually suffered, which will not necessarily be limited to the value of the said charges, and the Defendant seeks to set off such sums against any liability owed hereunder to the Claimant.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's remarkably similar to the defence they entered (at 11th hour) in my case. Clearly they're doing a cut n paste job. They also said that some of my claims were time barred but did not give specific dates. As it happens they are incorrect as NONE of my claim is time barred. A friend of mine who is a Magistrate said judges hate this kine of generic defence particulalry when it is wrong

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Right I have a court date. Received a "Notice of Allocation to Small Claims Track (Hearing)". It says the Court has made an Order of its own initiative without a hearing. ........ allocated the claim to the small claims track.

 

So off to Chichester on 13th June 2007.

 

I have the threads below printed off to read this weekend

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/guidance-notes/64911-got-court-date-guide.html

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/33060-basic-court-bundle.html

 

plus will have another look through WELSHMANS thread to see how Barclays may play this out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Be aware that in the court bundle file [zip file] there are two links to the WWW.

These need to be opened and printed also.

 

You need three copies of the completed bundle.. ok?

.

http://www.findmadeleine.com/

http://news.sky.com/skynews/madeleine

 

If I dont reply to a direct question please feel free to PM me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good news I called Barclays using the number from welshmans thread

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/post-419818.html

Alex gave me the direct line of the person dealing with my case. I spoke to them and she confirmed they will settle the case with me but she is so busy she cannot do it till nearer the time. So we agreed I would call her last week of May and they would settle it over the phone!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good news I called Barclays using the number from welshmans thread

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/post-419818.html

 

Alex gave me the direct line of the person dealing with my case. I spoke to them and she confirmed they will settle the case with me but she is so busy she cannot do it till nearer the time. So we agreed I would call her last week of May and they would settle it over the phone!

Wouldnt it be more benificial to B's to settle sooner rather than later as the delay only means they are paying out more in interest ??? Not got this far yet myself im still waiting the arrival of my statements :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Alex gave me the direct line of the person dealing with my case. I spoke to them and she confirmed they will settle

 

can you remember if it was Krysta or Kate?

.

http://www.findmadeleine.com/

http://news.sky.com/skynews/madeleine

 

If I dont reply to a direct question please feel free to PM me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you deal with her dar3n? The only concern I had was should I prepare court bundle that has to be submitted minimum 14 days prior when I expect case to be settled before. Though only 21 dyas before!

 

I think I might prepare one copy ready to produce two more if required. Then it is all ready and if the cheque hasn't cleared I can just mail it all off. Besides will be useful experience for my MCOL against Intelligent Finance and Lloyds TSB that are following behind.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I dealt with Krys, and have recommended her to be the initial contact to several users who have all had positive results in settling.

 

I dont know if ive missed something in your thread but I dont understand why you think you will be settled prior to 14 days before the hearing. I honestly think that if you phone in May, they will say they are busy with iminent cases taking priority and ask you to call back in a week or so, which takes you past the bundle deadline.

 

You are right in getting at least one copy of your bundle completed, but it depends on how quickly you can get copies run off, you dont want to be in a position that your at a deadline that you didnt expect to be at and have no access to a copier.

 

If you call in MAy and get fobbed off, send your bundles out without delay by Special Delivery.

.

http://www.findmadeleine.com/

http://news.sky.com/skynews/madeleine

 

If I dont reply to a direct question please feel free to PM me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers. She said call me three weeks before your court date and we will settle over the phone! But was already aware of not getting caught out by the 14 day deadline of the courts. I will prepare the bundle anyway and get it sent off. Then when I do call her can let her know it is all done.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If B's always settle before the court hearings anyway, why do they go so far through the whole process until just before the court date and cause themselves much more workload? Is it to scare off people in the first place - or because they hope we will withdraw our claims because we fear court - or simply to annoy us?

Link to post
Share on other sites

saka if 100 people start with letter 1 followed by LBA and MCOL. Then the defence AQ and court bundles. I bet the 100 is down to around 70 by then as people miss deadlines and give up.

 

The only reason Barclays make it go to the last minute before court date and we settle is because it is cost effective with people giving up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...