Hi Remember Me? Youngs Vs Lloyds TSB

[GuidoT]

Read this thread, you need to consider sending the New Strategy Order:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/80091-your-court-dispensing-allocation.html?highlight=dispensing

[GuidoT]

The draft order contains a set of directions that you are asking the judge to consider ordering.

 

It compels you to issue your documentation and then the Bank to issue theirs. I have not yet known a bank to comply and issue the documentation, therefore the defence gets struck out and you win.

 

It usually speeds up the process and cuts out the requirement for a hearing.

 

From a poll on this site Judges order it about 40% of the time. See here for further information:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/53570-new-strategy-allocation-questionaires.html

[GuidoT]

The documents are these:

• a) A schedule setting out each charge repayment of which is sought, showing the date, amount, and reason given (if any) for that charge being made;

• b) Copies of any statement or other document relied upon as showing that each and every charge has been made;

• c) A statement of evidence of all matters relied upon as tending to show that the charges are irrecoverable as penalties or otherwise;

• d) Copies of decided cases and other legal materials to be relied upon.

Yes you need to send the draft the order.

 

I do not mind helping, but this is a self help site. All the answers to your questions are contained in the links I previously posted.

 

If you do not understand the contents of the links then read then again the day following, eventually you will understand them.

[GuidoT]

Phone the court where it has been transferred to and explain. It is likely you will have to pay the AQ fee anyway, but again check with the court.

[GuidoT]

I presume you mean N150 and not N140.

 

Probably yet another mistake. The court admin is not good generally.

 

Ask the court about this too, they are likely to confirm no AQ, but to pay the fee.

[GuidoT]

The N149 is simpler to complete, there is an electronic copy in the link below, fill in this and post to the court along with the new strategy order:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/11644-allocation-questionnaires-guide-completion.html

.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/53570-new-strategy-allocation-questionaires.html

 

Cannot advise on your last paragraph.

[GuidoT]

No need here is N149:

http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/cms/files/n149_web_1105.pdf

[GuidoT]

This is better:

 

'The Claimant proposes the attached draft order for directions, for the courts due consideration. If ordered, the Claimant believes these directions will allow the overriding objectives to be furthered in that they will fully identify the most fundamental issues in dispute (as detailed below), and allow them to be assessed so that this claim may proceed justly and expeditiously.

- The crux upon which this claim rests is the true cost incurred by the Defendant as a result of the contractual breach from which its charges arise. If the Defendant cannot substantiate the cost of each charge as proportionate to its loss incurred, it has charged contractual penalties contrary to the UTCCR 1999 and common law principles established since the early 1900's.

- In the event that the Defendant’s charges were accepted as being a fee for a service (which is denied), examination of its true costs is required to determine whether the price is reasonable as required by the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982.

As the law relating to contractual penalties is long established, the Claimant believes the outstanding issues to be of fact. Accordingly, the Claimant respectfully requests that the claim be allocated to the small claims track, and estimates that the hearing of the claim should last no longer than one hour.'

[GuidoT]

Yes you can, but show a breakdown, although a letter for a different purpose have a look here:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/abbey-bank/58470-guidot-abbey-abuse-strike.html#post774654

[GuidoT]

Try this, the difficulty I have with your letter is that is does not say that it is attaching the schedule of charges and that is the reason why SCM wrote the letter:

 

'I am in receipt of your letter dated x and respond below.

 

Although I have previously forwarded the information you now request, I enclose a further copy of the my Schedule of Charges that answers points 1 to 3 inclusive of your letter.

 

The schedule attached also answers point 4, however the total has increased to £ , i.e. the daily interest rate is £0.XXp, plus court fees, (£120 filing fee + £100 AQ fee).

Regarding point 5, I confirm that my account no is x and sort x.

 

As the account is closed, I look forward to receiving settlement of the above by cheque.'

[GuidoT]

Have a look at the latter part of my Lloyds thread:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/lloydstsb-successes/47207-guido-t-lloyds-tsb-7.html

 

and

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/lloyds-bank/65921-application-costs-updated.html[url=http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/lloyds-bank/65921-application-costs-updated.html][/url]

[GuidoT]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/101412-document-library-work-progress.html

[GuidoT]

The order in post 76 is unclear, I have not seen an order like this before. Probably something to do with it being produced using the civil directions template by someone in the back office.

 

Prepare the bundle.

[GuidoT]

I have PMed you.

[GuidoT]

Which court are you at please?

[GuidoT]

I would apply to have it removed, see here also:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/17065-application-removal-stay-updated.html#post1046820

 

This matter will not be resolved in Jan 2008, I have seen judges ordering stays until April 2008. It would not surpirse me if this time next year we are still no further forward.

[GuidoT]

Hi Bev77

 

I said that on the 17 August 2007, on reflection, I think I was being optimistic.

 

In furtherance of that it would not surprise if we are no further forward this time next year.

 

Anyway we expect the judgement in July 2008 and that will not in itself resolve whether the charges are fair or not and will be appealed irrespective of the outcome.

 

We just have to be patient, my view is that the answer will be worth the wait.