Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Absolutely for the agreement they are referring to.... puts them on notice that this is going to be a uphill fight.   Andy 
    • Particular's of claim for reference only 1. the claim is for the sum of £6163.61due by the defendant under an agreement regulated by the consumer credit act 1974 for hsbc uk bank plc. Account (16 digits) 2. The defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a default notice was served under s 87(1)  of the consumer credit act 1974 which as not been compiled with. 3. The debt was legally assigned to the Claimant on 23/08/23, notice on which as been given to the defendant.  4. The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the county courts act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £117.53 the Claimant claims the sum of £6281.14. Suggested defence 1. The Defendant contends the particulars of the claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.3 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. The claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre action protocol) failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st of October 2017. It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant 7.1 PAPDC. 3. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had financial dealings but do not recognise this specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification. 4. Paragraph 2 is denied. I have not been served with a default notice pursuant to the consumer credit act 1974. 5. Paragraph 3 is denied. i am unaware of any legal assignment or notice of assignment. A copy of assignment was sent by Overdales solicitors when acknowledgement of receipt of CPR request was received, but this was not the original.   6. Paragraph 4 is denied. Neither the original creditor or the assignee have served notice pursuant to sec86c of the Credit Consumer Act 1974 Notice of Sums in Arrears and therefore prevented from charging interest on debt regulated by the CCA1974. 7. The defendant submitted a request for a copy of the alleged agreement pursuant to s78 CCA 1974. The claimant has acknowledged receipt of request but has failed to comply. The claimant has failed to provide any evidence of balance or Default Notice requested by CPR 31.14 8. It is therefore denied with regards to defendant owing any monies to the claimant. therefore the claimant is put to strict proof to:  a.  Show how the defendant has entered into an agreement with HSBC. b.  Show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a Default notice pursuant to section 87 (1) CCA 1974. c.  Show and quantify how the defendant has reached the amount claimed for. d.  Show how the claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity  to issue a claim. 8.  As per civil procedure rule 16.5 (4) it is expected claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 9.  Until such time the claimant can comply to a section 78 request he is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement 10. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.     .
    • OK, well rereading the court orders from March, in the cold light of day rather than when knackered late at night, it is quite clear that on 25 June there will only be a preliminary hearing about Laura representing her son.  Nothing more. It's lazy DCBL who haven't read things properly and have stupidly sent their Witness Statement early. Laura & I had already been working on a WS, and here it is.  It needs tweaking now after reading the rubbish that DCBL sent and after all of LFI's comments.  But the "meat" is there. Defendant's WS - version 1.pdf
    • Morning, I purchased a car from Big Motoring World on 10th December 2023 for £14899.00. On the 15th December I had a problem with the auto start stop function of the car in which the car would stop in the middle of the road with a stop start error message. I called the big assist and the car was booked in for February. The BMW was with them for a week and it came back with the auto stop start feature all fine and all error codes cleared on the report from big motoring world. within 5 days I had the same issue. Warning light coming on and the car stopping. I called big assist again and the car was again booked in for an other repair in May. Car was taken back in may, they had the car for a week and returned with the report saying no issue with the auto stop start feature and blamed my driving. Within 5 days of having the car back it broke down again. This time undrivable. I had the rac pick my car up and take to Stephen James BMW for a full diagnostic. The diagnostic came back with the car needing a new fuel system as magnetic swarf was found.  I have sent big motoring world a letter stating all the issues and that under the consumer rights act 2015 I have asked for a replacement vehicle. all reports from Stephen James BMW have been sent over to big motoring world. Big motoring world have come back and said they will respond to my complaint within 14 days for the date of my complaint letter. I am not feeling confident on the response from them, what are my next steps?   Thanks in advance. 
    • That is really good is that a mistake last off "driver doesn't have a licence" I assume that should be keeper? The Court requested me to send the Court and applicant proof of my sons disability from their GP this clearly shows he has Severe Mental Impairement, he is also illiterate.  I naively assumed once the applicant received this that they would drop the claim.  It offends me that Bank has asked the Judge to throw the case out at the preliminary hearing and to make us pay up.
  • 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

ME vs NATWEST + COBBETTS! A Claim going down the pan!!!


leviathan
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6254 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

PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

1. Between the dates of [insert dates of first and last charge] the Defendant applied numerous default charges to the Claimant’s bank account.

2. The charges applied constitute an unfair penalty under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations, which state: “A term is unfair if it requires any consumer who fails his obligation to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation”. The amount charged does not reflect the cost of the breach.

3. Under the law of penalties, the charges are an unlawful ‘extravagant’ penalty. Referring to the case of 1896, Wilson v Love, a charge is a penalty if it does not reflect an item’s true cost.

4. Under the County Courts Act 1984, the claimant is entitled to interest at a rate of 8% per annum from the date they were first deprived of the money to the date of this claim. This amounts to a total sum of [insert amount of interest], continuing to accrue at the statutory daily rate of 0.021% until judgment or earlier payment.

5. The Claimant therefore asks the court to enter judgment in their favour for the sum of [insert total charges] plus interest, amounting to a total of [insert total charges plus interest].

 

Is this what you used as your POC's? Which bits did you leave out?

 

Do I take it you have already submitted the AQ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suggest you amend your claim as follows:

 

N244 AMENDMENT

With regard to the N244 -

 

Top left hand box:

1. Tick c), without a hearing

Leave the rest blank

 

Part A

intend to apply for an order that:

amends my particulars of claim

 

because:

my particulars of claim did not state the statutory provisions on which my claim relies, and did not include a schedule of charges

 

Part B

Tick evidence in part c

 

Part C

Please find attached to this application my proposed new particulars of claim, amended to include the statutory provisions on which my claim relies , as well as a schedule of the amount claimed in respect of penalty charges levied by the defendant"

Send N244 + 3 N1 + 3 schedules + £35 fee to the court. They will send 2 back, 1 of which you serve/send to the defendants and confirm to the court that you have done so.

 

N1 PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

 

1. The Claimant [has] [had] an account (XXXX Account No) with the Defendant which was opened on or around Date [and closed on or around date]

 

2. During the period in which the Account [has been] [was] operating the Defendant debited numerous charges to the Account in respect of purported breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant and also charged interest on the charges once applied. The Claimant understands that the Defendant contends that the charges were debited in accordance with the terms of the contract between itself and the Claimant.

 

3. A list of the charges applied is attached to these particulars of claim.

 

4. The Claimant contends that:

a) The charges debited to the Account are punitive in nature; are not a genuine pre-estimate of cost incurred by the Defendant; exceed any alleged actual loss to the Defendant in respect of any breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant; and are not intended to represent or related to any alleged actual loss, but instead unduly enrich the Defendant which exercises the contractual term in respect of such charges with a view to profit.

b) The contractual provision that permits the Defendant to levy such charges is unenforceable by virtue of the Unfair Contract Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations (1999), the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and the common law.

 

5. Alternatively, if the charges are a fee for a service, then they must be reasonable under S.15 of the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982.

 

6. Accordingly the Claimant claims:

a) the return of the amounts debited in respect of charges in the sum of £XXXX and any interest charged thereon;

b) Court costs;

c) Interest pursuant to S.69 County Courts Act 1984 of 8% as set out on the attached list of charges - £xxx [enter interest total at date of claim] continuing at 8% until judgement or settlement at a daily rate of £0.xx.

 

 

For the schedule of charges use the Simple S/S here:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/182-interest-calculation-spreadsheets.html

and visual guide here:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/barclays-bcard-woolwich-successes/7226-maisielou-barclays.html#post50088

 

Overwrite the existing examples type of charge, amount and date.

 

The days since and 8% will be calculated automatically

 

Having completed the s/s, save it. You will need to produce one as of the date you filed. So click on the time in your taskbar and reset the date to the date you filed at court. Open the s/s and print off. Reset the date.

 

 

N1 Claims form in .PDF format with form filling

N1 Claims form in .PDF format with form filling

 

N244 - application notice

Form N244 - application notice

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I assume you mean on the N1

 

Value:

Bank charges - £XXXX

Data Protection Act Fee - £XX (if claimed)

S69 8% Interest - £XXX

Total of - £XXXX

Plus daily interest at 8% of £0.XXp from the date of issue until settlement.

 

 

 

Amount claimed: Charges (+ Data Protection Act Fee if claimed) - £XXX

Court fees: £XXX

Sols costs; None

 

 

Human Rights: No

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's in your POC's:

6. Accordingly the Claimant claims:

a) the return of the amounts debited in respect of charges in the sum of £XXXX and any interest charged thereon;

b) Court costs;

c) Interest pursuant to S.69 County Courts Act 1984 of 8% as set out on the attached list of charges - £xxx [enter interest total at original date of claim] continuing at 8% until judgement or settlement at a daily rate of £0.xx.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...