Jump to content


Keith Jeramiah!?


Guest Lueeze
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5438 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

  • Replies 88
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

e) bah-goom, there's trouble at t'mill ! :lol:

If this has been useful to you, please click on the scales at bottom left of post. Thanks.

 

Advice & opinions of Rooster-UK are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Please use your own judgment.

-------------------------------------------------------

LOOK! Free CAG Toolbar.

Follow link for more information.

 

------------------------------------------------------

Please donate,

Help us to help others.

 

 

LINKS....

 

Forum Rules.

FAQs....

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guys, let's not get carried away with the fact that Keith "stupid-surname" Jeremiah is responding to our claims.

 

No disrespect to Mr Jeremiah (or other folk unfortunate enough to share his surname), but I expect he is no more than a low to middle-ranking bank employee, with little if any legal training, whose job title as "legal executive" gives him a 90% remit of replying to claims submitted by post or email. Simply stating the intent of Barclays to defend in full the relevant case. The other 10% of his job description probably involves urns, hot water, and lots of tea bags or decaf.

 

We must retain perspective, and find it encouraging that Barclays are;

 

a) clearly inundated with claims

b) have employed a fella called Jeremiah to handle the paperwork

c) show little understanding of the legal or wider implications of their predicament

d) have yet to successfully defend a claim (in full, or otherwise)

e) there is no letter e.

 

All knowing and scornful Don, i doubt it. I rang to speak with him and left a voicemail and it was his ' assistant ' who called me back as he was away. In addition I would expect that as he is the person named on all of the forms he would /will be the person attending as representation of Barclays - much in the same way if we intend for a solicitor or other person to attend on our behalf, we must name them on the AQs.

 

Hello - this is a multi billion pound institution - I work for a company that has roughly 300 employees that has its own Full Time legal team - albeit a team of two! It is an absolute certainty that they do and if so it is only logical that this chap is one of them, not some phone monkey who also does the lawns. In any case, we are having a bit of fun!

 

If not, and somebodys reading, Keith, as Creative Director of Hot Beverages, mines tea with two, milky. Cheers son!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Folks,

 

Recieved an acknowledgement of service this morning from the court...

 

Barclays intend to defend and have ticked the appropriate box...

 

However 'Hot news' it looks like Keith Jeramiah has realised he is going to be mega busy defending these claims the length and breadth of the country, and has taken on a trainee... a 'Nicholas Hartigan' (trainee solicitor) has signed the form...

 

Lets see what 'he' can come up with in 28 days... :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Nicholas Hartigan' (trainee solicitor) has signed the form...

 

Obviously a pre-requisite for employment in the legal services department of Barclays.. you will have a pretentious or silly sounding surname.

 

they'll be a J R R Hartley or Jethro Tull signing the next claim.

 

Actually, there is one other possibility.

 

Maybe Keith Jeremiah has had to take sick leave because of the stress and abrupt increase in workload...

"BA Group. The World's favourite CA Group"

 

HSBC 2 claims amalgamated. £1195. settled in full prior to filing claim.

BARCLAYS settled in full 2 days prior to submission of defence by Barclays

CAP ONE settled in full on day 14 of LBA (£210)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe Keith Jeremiah has had to take sick leave because of the stress and abrupt increase in workload...

 

Ha ha, a solicitor with a workload? Don't make me laugh.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that as time goes on, we'll see more names. After all, a person can't be defending in more than one court at the same time.

At least this new name is anagram friendly.

 

 

Nicholas Hartigan...........

 

Sir Anal Aching-Hot.

Hail Ignorant Cash.

Clannish Goat-hair.

 

:D

If this has been useful to you, please click on the scales at bottom left of post. Thanks.

 

Advice & opinions of Rooster-UK are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Please use your own judgment.

-------------------------------------------------------

LOOK! Free CAG Toolbar.

Follow link for more information.

 

------------------------------------------------------

Please donate,

Help us to help others.

 

 

LINKS....

 

Forum Rules.

FAQs....

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think that as time goes on, we'll see more names. After all, a person can't be defending in more than one court at the same time.

At least this new name is anagram friendly.

 

 

Nicholas Hartigan...........

 

Sir Anal Aching-Hot.

Hail Ignorant Cash.

Clannish Goat-hair.

 

:D

 

I like the first one best. Describes how certain Barclays moneygrabbers might feel when this is all over....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kieth Jeremiah.........

 

 

MR JAKE HI-TEE-HI.

 

 

That's the best that I can come up with.:D

If this has been useful to you, please click on the scales at bottom left of post. Thanks.

 

Advice & opinions of Rooster-UK are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Please use your own judgment.

-------------------------------------------------------

LOOK! Free CAG Toolbar.

Follow link for more information.

 

------------------------------------------------------

Please donate,

Help us to help others.

 

 

LINKS....

 

Forum Rules.

FAQs....

Link to post
Share on other sites
Have a date to see one of them - see my thread or one of the mods will slap my bottom!

 

Ah no, that's a service, not a penalty, we charge extra for that! :p

 

.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Keith Jeramiah has also submitted defence in my case with the Woolwich so you can add my name to the growing list

 

PS not had hearing date yet

Data Protection Act sent 10/03/06.....1st request 25/03/06.....LBA letter 10/04/06

 

Claim No : 6RG02794

Reading County Court £1,616.26 + interest

Served on : 27 April 2006

Acknowledged : 3rd May 2006

defence submitted by 24th May 2006

Allocation Questionnaire submitted 5th June

Court Hearing : 2nd October 2006

SETTLED OUT OF COURT 12/09/06

Link to post
Share on other sites
Looks like He is busy supposedly defneing all these users claims in the same week eh!

 

Skippy

Red_ratty_rat

Boonyed

Krisbutler

Kaznelson

Jinx_UK_98

Don Quioxte

JJ

Exbarclaysbanker

Oblong21

Babylon

Bren_01uk

Rebel_uk

Icefall

Carl stevens

Dom

Gemsurf

 

I bet you they WILL back down! He must be innundated!:lol: :lol: :lol:

Add my name to the list.Received defence notification from Mr Keith Jerimiah today

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any chance that somebody might be prepared to e-mail a scan or the defence please.

Link to post
Share on other sites

my case was settled by mr jeramiah,very nice man gave me all my charges back so do not worry peeps your money will be in your bank soon...good luck all ...paul

Link to post
Share on other sites

Got sent notification that they were going to defend by Nicholas Hartingdon a week or so ago.

Don't forget to contribute to the CAG. Without them we would probably still be drafting our prelim letters.

OH Cap One - £436/ So far received £40. MCOL submitted 17/7/06. Caved 4/8/06 for full amount!!!

OH Monument - £140, claim filed 8th May. Requested judgement by default, settled in full 4th July via out of court settlement (see thread). Total £192ish received.

Me Barclays - £630. Received letter 13th May offering £300 full and final (they can bog off). Claim filed 16th May. Acknowledgement of Service filed 22nd May to defend all of the claim. Allocation Questionnaire completed and Stay been ordered by Judge on 18/7/06!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

For BF and reference.

 

Barclays defence for our case is as follows:

 

1. They admit the claimant has an account with no authorised o d limit. They say that previously the claimant had the benefit of authorised limits of £600 and £450 but these have been withdrawn.

1.2 The balnce is currently £530.94 OD.

1.3 THe claimant incured bank chrges (paid referral fees) for unauthorised borroings by exeeding the aforemenioned authorised limits over the period 2000 - 2006

2. The defendant is entitled t charge by virtue of its standard terms and conditions, which the claimant accepted when the account was opened in feb 1999.

The terms and conditions which applied to this account would be:

i) A paid referral fee is charged when you go over your paid referral buffer. You will not incur more than three fees in any monthly period.

ii)£25 per day.

3. The defendants standard terms and conditions gives the claimant a fair and transparent view of those terms and the cahrges applicable for unauthoruisedborrowings (including whee the account is od without an od limitor where the customer exceeds thgeir od limit.

4. The charges the claimant paid to teh defendant when she incurred an od were payments which, under the T's & C's of the account, she agreed to make.

5. such administrative costs were consideration for the defendant advancing further credit to the claimant.

6. The defendant was under no obligation to advance the aforementioned further credit to the claimant, and was entitled to impose the charges when teh claimant incurred the OD.

7. It is denied that teh defendants charges are unenforceable, as alleged. It is further denied that the sums were unlawfully debited form the claimants account.

8. In all the premises, it is averred the bank charges are legally enforceable and the defendant was entitled to charge.

9. the defendant denies that it is liable to the claimant for the tortal sum claimed of £641.81 or at all.

 

 

This is a bit stronger in wording than my Natwest one was.

Points to note specifically in this case - they say there was an agreed od of £600. The only time in recollection of an OD was when a payment plan was set up to clear the OD this was recent. The total amount claimed is actually more than the current balance ie the account is £530 OD but this is ALL cahrges so if there had been an OD facility there would be no charges so no need to sue them.

 

point 5 consideration for further advancement - £25 a time.

Point 6 the bank could have NOT paid an Not charged.

 

THe whole defence really hangs on pomt 8 wher they say the charges ARE legally enforceable and there are enough cases / arguments and precedence to show otherwise.

 

Anyway - hope this helps BF and does this defense compare to any / all of teh others in this thread.

 

plaese excuse the attrocious spelling - got a dodgy wireless keyboard which my little one insists on pouring juice into.

Bank Claim Result

NatWest £2051 UnGagged myself. They paid up in full:D

Barclays £641.81 Settled in full.:D

MBNA AOL £390 account credited

MBNA Card £880 account credited

MBNA Loan £115 LBA 03/07

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Hi Guys,

 

I'm still waiting for a date of my court hearing but have recivied a letter from the courts

 

Reads as follows:

 

Further to the filing of allocation questionannaries in the above case Judge Jolly has reviewed the file and made the following comments:,

 

"It is difficultto see how the Defendant, absent any witness evidence, could show reasonableness of charges or details of its costs. Surely there will be a witness. This has a bearing on the time estimate for the case. Any observations please within 10 days, whereafter file to be referred to district Judge Jolly for directions."

 

What do you guys think? Sounds quite good I think.

 

thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5438 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...