Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • New figures from the Insolvency Service show that early termination rates of IVAs have dropped 11% in the past year, while total IVAs have risen by almost 20,000 in the past two years. View the full article
    • Amigo Loans has posted an £87m loss for the nine months to December 31 2020, a 289% drop on the same period in 2019 View the full article
    • I've had a brief look over the thread and I see that there principle point is that he didn't take out insurance. Your answer to this is very simple – that it is absurd that you are required to pay to protect them against their own negligence or criminality of their employees or the people who are acting for them – in this case, Hermes.Your point here is that any requirement that a customer is required to pay extra to protect against the breach of contract is unfair within the meaning of the unfair terms provisions of the Consumer Rights Act. Please have a read of the unfair terms provisions of the Consumer Rights Act. In In particular, after you have read the sections within the act itself, get a schedule two and you will see examples of unfair terms. These are nonexhaustive which means that they are simply examples and lots of others can be added. An important point is that it forms a significant imbalance between your interests and their interests. They are using a standard form contract which is nonnegotiable. There is no competition because all the courier industry are doing this so there is no opportunity for you to go elsewhere and get a different type of deal. You will need to point out to the defendant – through the mediator – that included in the unfair terms provisions of the Consumer Rights Act is a provision that gives the court the power – in fact a duty – on its own initiative to examine the fairness or otherwise of any term. Point out to the defendant that if they want to go to court then you are happy about it. That you will then raise the question of unfairness to the judge and also you will invite the judge to look at the entirety of the contract and to pronounce on the fairness or otherwise of the contractual terms. Tell the defendant that you expect that the judge will decide unequivocally that a term of the contract which requires the customer to pay extra to protect themselves against the service providers breach of contract is grossly unfair – and in fact it is ridiculous. Basically they are saying "pay us to deliver your goods – and pay us extra if you don't want us to lose them."   Explain to the defendant that you are fully aware that this is a culture within the courier industry which has developed over 30 or 40 years or more but it's not acceptable and that when you get a judgement in your favour which confirms that the term is unfair, (as will surely happen) that you will then make sure that copies of the judgement find their way all over the Internet including social media that is concerned specifically with complaints against the courier industry and then the game will be up for the loss of them. One the mediator to tell the defendant that once you get this judgement, not only will people be claiming for ongoing lost items, but they will also be claiming retrospectively for legitimate claims which have been rejected on the basis of this unfair term. Make it clear to the mediator – that they should tell the defendant that you're not dealing with very much money here – and you are prepared to risk it all in order to go to court and to demonstrate this principle. If the mediator says that you should compromise then you should tell the mediator that if the defendant pays up in full – including costs and interest – that they will then be spared the problem of going to court and getting a judgement against them which will result in the loss of millions of pounds in the future. Tell the mediator that this is the benefit to the defendant and you are not prepared to hand them any further benefit if it means sacrificing a single penny of your claim. Tell the defendant to take it or leave it – you are happy either way.   It is very important that the defendant understands that you don't care either way whether you settle now mediation or goes to court. The defendant as a huge amount to lose if it goes to court. You have very little to lose  
    • Firstly I am disabled and have brain fog so can forget anything.  Today I went online to check when the MOT is due as just had to renew my car insurance and know it comes quickly after that. I was shocked to see my car was flagged as NOT TAXED.  I have had disability tax for years so dont even have to pay. After ringing DVLA I eventually found out papers had been sent to my old house which I left 3 years ago. With the stress of moving etc I never changed the car address but did change the address on my licence as that is correct.   Now I am worried I may have picked up a speeding ticket sometime in the 3 years and also maybe recently on a day trip to London (2 miles too fast coming out a tunnel). The old house is 150 miles away so cant pop in and no idea who lives there now. Thats how I got caught out with tax as they sent the paperwork there to renew. The lady renewed the tax easily on the computer for me which I was so grateful for and backdated it to 1 Feb. Can anyone tell me how I can find out if there are any tickets out there in my name that I know anything about please? I have had a really awful week with so many problems and this is now really making me feel sick so dont want to worry for months to catch up with me.   Thanks  
    • Presumably you have received your own NIP/s172 request after the lease company identified you as the person the car is leased to?   First thing to say is that, regardless of any questions over the date of the first NIP, you must still reply to your own NIP/s172 within the time limit given otherwise you are committing an entirely separate and more serious offence than any speeding infringement.  If you were the driver you should nominate yourself.   You need to be careful arguing that the first NIP was not sent out in time.  Note that it is only the first NIP that is subject to the 14 day limit, and that NIP needs to go to the Registered Keeper.  There is no time limit on subsequent NIPs.   So are you 100% certain that your lease company is the registered keeper and do you know that for a fact?  Please note that the registered keeper of lease vehicles is often not the lease company, but a finance company.   If the police are saying that the first NIP was sent to the RK within the time limit, you can be 99.99999% certain that they will have evidence proving that fact.  Assuming it was sent out first-class, there is a legal presumption that it was delivered two working days after posting, unless the addressee can prove it was never received.  So if the police are saying the first NIP was sent out within 12 days, the RK would have to prove it was never received within 14 days to provide a defence.  As you might imagine, that is very difficult to prove otherwise everybody would claim it.  Unfortunately, "reminder" NIPs are usually not marked as such and may be indistinguishable from the original.   So you need to confirm (preferably by sight of a copy of the actual V5C document as staff of lease companies do not always know) who the Registered Keeper is, and when they recived the first NIP.  If it was received after 14 days can they prove that fact (eg by a date received stamp and an appropriate system for dealing with mail received) and can they prove that they didn't receive an earlier NIP?   Hope that makes sense!  If it doesn't another poster called Man in the Middle will clarify what I 've not explained well or got wrong.
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 33 replies

Tobes v Egg


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 5224 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Great site, great people :)

 

I understand that penalty charges are wrong, but I'm not sure what I should claim. Due to various reasons I have experienced financial difficulties over the years, and am now a defaultee with Egg's credit card. I've had charges over a number of years and now charges because of going over the limit. I still owe a balance (I of course accept that I owe the money I've actually spent) and it seems to have been frozen whilst it is sent out to unpleasant debt companies.

 

Because I haven't paid the the balance, having just paid minimum payments or partial payments, and have a balance outstanding, have I actually any claim? I'm thinking that it could be said that the charges form part of the monet outstanding that I have not paid...Would the charges be removed from the balance, reducing the total, or would you actually be sent a payment if successful? this point is confusing me!

 

Really grateful for any help on this - I looked at the FAQ but I think it is either too simple to be included or I am blind :o

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 74
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

You will not receive a cheque unless you have actually paid the charges! If you owe £1,000 and this includes charges of £500 then this £500 plus any interest that you've accrued on it should be offset against the balance. In other words it would reduce the balance of the debt. However, if in this case, the charges were £1,200 then you should get £200 plus some interest back.

Link to post
Share on other sites
You will not receive a cheque unless you have actually paid the charges! If you owe £1,000 and this includes charges of £500 then this £500 plus any interest that you've accrued on it should be offset against the balance. In other words it would reduce the balance of the debt. However, if in this case, the charges were £1,200 then you should get £200 plus some interest back.

 

Makes sense :) will probably go ahead with making a claim then :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Makes sense :) will probably go ahead with making a claim then :)

 

ooooh, what if the reduction takes the total to less than the limit - could i ask for defaults to be expunged, or as the penalties are made over time are they not considered to be the reason?

Link to post
Share on other sites
ooooh, what if the reduction takes the total to less than the limit - could i ask for defaults to be expunged, or as the penalties are made over time are they not considered to be the reason?

 

Possibly if the deduction of the charges meant that you would not have been in default at the time they issued the default notice. Do a search on "defaults" as this has been discussed quite a lot here. In the meantime, follow the step by step guide in the FAQs to get the ball rolling.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just sent my initial letter requesting a refund of charges - sent it by Special Delivery and it cost £4.10 :eek::rolleyes:

 

I didn't do a DPA, I just phoned up Egg and asked for all my statements; the first guy hung up but the second person said 'ok' and I received them a couple of days later, no £10, yay :)

 

Have also sent a DPA to HSBC through my local former branch, so have two claims, and I have another card with Egg so in the end it might get to three.

 

Will update when I need to :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks :)

 

 

Received a reply today, just a standard 'we have recieved your complaint, this is how long it could take blah blah' :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
:rolleyes: Hi guys, I'm trying to write my claim right now to send via Moneyclaim which I've said I'll do on Monday morning if I'm not contacted with a satisfactory offer...So can anyone offer me any advice on what to say on my claim? I've found the Which? document which details what you can say in three paragraphs but I was wondering if there are any examples anywhere on this site or if there is just stuff I MUST include - I have seen the Guidance section and it says the two arguments the banks can use and that I must argue against both, but can't find anything else...Just wondering if I'm missing something or if at this point we must do it for ourselves! :eek::D
Link to post
Share on other sites
:rolleyes: Hi guys, I'm trying to write my claim right now to send via Moneyclaim which I've said I'll do on Monday morning if I'm not contacted with a satisfactory offer...So can anyone offer me any advice on what to say on my claim? I've found the Which? document which details what you can say in three paragraphs but I was wondering if there are any examples anywhere on this site or if there is just stuff I MUST include - I have seen the Guidance section and it says the two arguments the banks can use and that I must argue against both, but can't find anything else...Just wondering if I'm missing something or if at this point we must do it for ourselves! :eek::D

 

In the library section there is an example Particulars of Claim to use.

Opinions given herein are made informally by myself as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I signed into moneyclaim and my claim made on the 5th has already been acknowledged (I assume by Egg!?) - though that might be because I sent them a secure message saying oi, biatches, I'm suing you...But would the speed hint that they did it by using moneyclaim as well?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Tobes,

 

Just wanted to wish you luck!!!

 

hondamad21:)

__________________

EGG CC Default Removal: Have reported Egg to Trading Standards, Summery Claim - 2nd Hearing Date 09/10/07. Click here to read posts

Monument CC: received statements, now need to send letters. . . !

BoS Current Account: Settled

Citi Cards: Hhmm seems like I have sued the wrong “entity”. Aaaaahhhhh . . .. oh well back to court I go, and they have settled in full!!!

 

:-D:p:D

This is just advice from me. If you are not sure please seek legal advice. However if what I have said has been helpful, than please add to my reputation by clicking on the scales :D

 

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

ok I have now received Egg's defence, and they have also submitted a counterclaim, so this is getting quite interesting now.

 

Do you guys think this will actually get to a courtroom?

 

I would really appreciate some help in filling out the allocation questionnaire!

 

Here it is in full:

 

1. The Claimant entered into an Egg credit card agreement withthe Defendant on 31 January 2001 (the "Agreement"). The Agreement was terminated due to the Claimant's default under the Agreement and the Claimant's debt to the Defendant was passed to a debt collection agency in June 2005. As at the date of this defence, the Claimant owes £1440.25 to the Defendant.

 

2. It is admitted that charges were added to the Claimant's Egg credit card during the course of the Agreement. Each charge was made pursuant to clause 7.1 of the Agreement as a result of insufficient funds being available from the Claimant's designated current account to cover the amount of the direct debit payment due on the Egg card and as a result of the Claimant exceeding his credit limit. Clause 7.1 clearly states:

 

"If you break the terms of this Agreement we may charge you the following, where relevant, to cover the additional cost to us:

 

£20 each month you go over the Credit Limit...

£20 if you do not keep up payments on the account..."

 

The Claimant failed to make payments on his credit card on 5 separate occasions and exceeded his credit limit on 24 occasions and charges were added to his credit card accordingly.

 

3. It is denied that the charges are "punitive" as alleged. The Defendant recognises that customers, such as the Claimant, sometimes exceed their credit limits and/or fail to make or are late in paying the required repayments and the Defendant therefore puts in place systems and processes to deal with the same. Such systems and processes included the use of computers, staff and other necessary overheads. The charges set out in Condition 7 of the Agreement are calculated by taking into account the total costs incurred by the Defendant in maintaining those systems and processes and the estimated number of customers (such as the Claimant) who will exceed their credit limits and/or fail to make or are late in paying the required payments. The Defendant avers therefore that the amount of the chargesapplied under Condition 7 represents a genuine pre-estimate of the loss and expense caused to the Defendant in respect of such customers exceeding their credit limits and/or failing to make or being late in paying the required repayments.

 

4. Further the Defendant takes steps to try to ensure that customers such as the Claimant do not incur the charges set out in Condition 7. For example, the conditions of the Agreement required the Claimaint to have a direct debit in place to make his monthly repayments. This was done to ensure (as far as possible) that the Claimant would not fail to make his monthly repayments or make such repayments late and thus avoid charges under Condition 7. Despite these steps the Claimant failed to make his repayments on no less that five separate occasions. With respect to observance of his credit limit, the Claimant was able to view his outstanding balance 24 hours a day on the Defendant's website and was thus able to monitor his spending to ensure he did not exceed his credit limit (and thereby avoid any charges under Condition 7). Nonetheless the Claimant exceeded his credit limit on no less than 24 separate occasions.

 

5. Accordingly, it is denied that the charges are unenforeable at common law.

 

6. Further on in the alternative, the Claimant has paid the default charges levied pursuant to condition 7 of the Agreement without demur or complaint on no less than 29 separate occasions over a period of four years: in the premises, the Defendant avers that Claimant is estopped from claiming that the said charges should be reversed.

 

 

Counterclaim:

 

7. In the event that the Court finds that the default charges levied on on the Claimant do constitute an unfair penalty and are thus unenforceable, the Defendant counterclaims for the actual cost to the Defendant of dealing with the Claimant's breach of contract in exceeding his credit limit and failing to make his repayments, such costs to be assessed by the Court.

 

8. The Defendant counterclaims further for all and ny other sums (£1440.25 to date) which may be due and payable by the Claimant to the Defendant as at the date of judgement.

 

Signed Dave St Clare Nelson

Legal Counsel

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do I need to file a defence for Egg's counterclaim against me? If anyone with experience of this stage could look at my Egg thread I'd be very grateful!

 

cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whichever mod moved this - I put the above post in the general thread because I wanted a general view on claim procedure!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi - firstly, PLEASE MODS, do not move this, this is a general query!! ;)

 

 

If a bank were to ask as part of its defence/counterclaim for the 'actual cost to the Defendant of dealing with the Claimant's breach of contract in exceeding his credit limit and failing to make his repayments, such costs to be assessed by the Court', would it not then have to provide some kind of evidence as to the costs it bears, or calculations as to true costs?

 

Would that not be a possible weakness, something the banks/CC companies would not want to happen in court?

 

Cheers :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, if a judge were to find in favour of the Claimant, i.e. one of us, would he/she then decide that the Claimant should pay true costs, and do you guys think that's fair? I suppose it is, because that's our whole agreement - that the charges and penalties because they're not a true cost.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am aware that Abbey use this in their latest defence, and yes you are correct. It is absolute twaddle and my view is that it is aimed more at getting people to settle for a percentage - rather than something that they would wish to argue in court.

Alan, Derby, UK.

 

 

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

 

________________________________

 

Sorry, but I cannot deal with your case by PM - please ask questions in your own thread. If you do not get a reply within 48 hours send a PM, with a link to the relevant thread, to any Site Team Member.

 

DO NOT SEND QUESTIONS ABOUT YOUR CLAIM TO ADMIN, or our WEBMASTER - YOU WILL NOT RECEIVE A REPLY.

 

Advice given is purely my opinion, and is not based on any legal training.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Also, if a judge were to find in favour of the Claimant, i.e. one of us, would he/she then decide that the Claimant should pay true costs, and do you guys think that's fair? I suppose it is, because that's our whole agreement - that the charges and penalties because they're not a true cost.

 

No, the whole charge would be disallowed.

 

However, if the bank was to go away, and then ask you for a charge that was reasonable, along with proof that they have been put to that expense, then I believe that you would have to pay it.

Alan, Derby, UK.

 

 

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

 

________________________________

 

Sorry, but I cannot deal with your case by PM - please ask questions in your own thread. If you do not get a reply within 48 hours send a PM, with a link to the relevant thread, to any Site Team Member.

 

DO NOT SEND QUESTIONS ABOUT YOUR CLAIM TO ADMIN, or our WEBMASTER - YOU WILL NOT RECEIVE A REPLY.

 

Advice given is purely my opinion, and is not based on any legal training.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 5224 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

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...