Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The digital bank has introduced three new plans - Extra, Perks and Max - replacing its existing Plus and Premium plans for new customers.View the full article
    • Agree it is not a modification that needs to be disclosed to Insurers as changing the seats has not changed the risk.  
    • Frpm David Frost and Robert Jenrick: 'Conservatives must show we respect the votes in 2016 and 2019 and not give the Opposition the chance to undo the benefits of leaving the EU'   Sweep away the Brexit gloom – or Labour will unravel a huge gain ARCHIVE.PH archived 22 Apr 2024 05:47:50 UTC  
    • Please please help we were miss sold full fibre by EE July 22  Install couldn’t go ahead no equipment sent and no. Survey it was hell  foind out no full fibre in road so we had to go back to cooper no choice we involved. Ceo and they put in a man from customer resolution s  he was vile he told me I had to go to engineers  something very odd about the ex resolution s in bt basically they took my drive up said they Would put ducting in ready for full fibre we have got £ 40 for a hours upon hours phones stress and more told to go to ombudsman  then bill was £35 we called twice told it was that price as they had treated us appalling two weeks later all sky package gets pulled we call again our bill goes to 165 the next two weeks was hell trying to get yo bottom why it’s off our package it was all on in the end I spent a day on the phone  341 mins was the call anyway I got to the bottom it was this resolution man coveting up the other issue another deadlock  to cover it all up  they hide data  ee did so couldn’t get the miss sell in writing I have now only from sept  Basically now we tried getting full fibre and they have found my drive had to be taken up again which has sunk .  The engineer has placed the wrong ducting again under my drive and need s to be taken to again apparently and the pipe sticks up middle of the drive near gate not behind look so odd it’s a big as a drain pipe open to water and it’s below touching the electrical cables to hot tub . I was sent a letter from the ex resolution to say I had stopped the work  I haven’t  it’s so sadistic she covering up for her mate in that team as the orginal install he didn’t check it had been done correctly  I took to Twitter and posted on open reach they ignored me then after 3 calls of two weeks they sent a engineer bt ignored me ceo emails blocked tag on Twitter unanswered then we get someone from twitter send a engineer he written report to say it’s dangerous since we have  had a  letter to say our problem can not be resolved  then a email to say sorry we are leaving and we can’t get into our account Bt will not talk to us ofcom tells us nothing they can do Citzens advice said go to the police  we can’t go back to virgin due so mass issue with them only option is sky  but point is they make out we have canceled we haven’t we have this mess on our drive dangeous work we are in hell  it’s like she covering up for this collegue it’s all very odd I am disabled and they like played mentaly with me open reach say bt resolved the issue no they have not  I recon they have terminated us making our we have  to hide it from mgt  Help it’s hell I don’t sleep we have 29 may we have tried  calling they just ignore me  at first they are so lovely as they say I am then they go to nnamager and say we can’t say anything to you end call  Scared police are rubbish I need help even typing is so painfull  Thankyou  anyone hello be so grateful     
    • There's a thread somewhere about someone sending the baillifs against Wizzair that is quite hilarious. I would love to see someone do the same to Ryanair. Question is, should you be the one to take that role. You are entitled to the £220, if your flight was from the UK. If it was TO the UK I suppose it is more of a grey area... though the airlines I know have been using £220 as standard. Not that surprising for Ryanair, the worst cheapskates in the universe, to go for the lower amount, and if you forward this to the CEO he will probably have a jolly good laugh and give his accountants a verbal bonus. After all he's the one who said and I paraphrase "F*** our customers, they'll fly with us again anyway". While we would all love to see Ryanair get wooped in court again, I have to join my fellow posters in thinking it's not worth the hassle for (hypothetically) £7 and not sure it will expedite the payment either. It's already an achievement that you got them to accept to pay.
  • 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

French v. Abbey (3) - Into the breach once more my friends!


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5108 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 280
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

the argument for CI comes if they actually use it in their defence, in both Frenchy;s and my claim, both using Sola and CI, they havnt even bothered to defend, my suggestion is do a site search on arguments for Contractual Interest, it may throw up something interesting to reach, I seem to remember a big discussion going on about it about a year ago

Lula

 

Lula v Abbey - Settled

Lula v Abbey (2) - Settled

Lula v Abbey (3) - Stayed

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

SOLA Statute of Limitations

 

yes i read the Contractual interest lost thread which is why we need to argue another point other that mutuality and recuprocity now, which is why I post you that thread lol WWYO?

Lula

 

Lula v Abbey - Settled

Lula v Abbey (2) - Settled

Lula v Abbey (3) - Stayed

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry to gatecrash this thread but i keep asking questions on my thread but am not getting answers.

Have court date of 17th August. AQ was dispensed with. Have download CAG bundle, included correspondense, schedule of charges and bank statements. Should I include witness statement, disclosure by list and case summary? Is there anything else you would suggest?

Can i claim additional interest from date of action to court date?

If I want my husband to represent me in court how do i go about it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi psm, i havnt seen your thread other wise it would have been answered, yes the other items are fine to all, yes your husband can represent you in court but you do need to be there too, and when you reach settlement you can ask for interest from filing to settlement, for the daily rate just multiply the total by 0.00022% and that is your daily rate.

 

I would recommend the new consumer wikipedia, its great, just log in using your CAG log in and away you go, it i on http://www.consumerwiki.co.uk

Lula

 

Lula v Abbey - Settled

Lula v Abbey (2) - Settled

Lula v Abbey (3) - Stayed

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Ok....times up shAbbey......

 

Am now sending with my fee a Cpr Part 18 request to Leeds Merc Court to be made an Order....

 

CLAIM NUMBER: XXXXXXX

In the LEEDS HIGH COURT, QUEENS BENCH DIVISION (MERCANTILE COURT)

 

Between:

 

srfrench

Claimant

 

-And-

 

 

ABBEY NATIONAL PLC

Defendant

_______________________

DRAFT ORDER FOR INFORMATION AND

CLARIFICATION UNDER CPR PART 18

___________________________

 

This Order for information under CPR part 18 is served after allocation to the Multi-Track, Leeds Mercantile Courts from the Harrogate County Courts. (Claim number changed from XXXXXXXX).

1. Please provide copies of the terms and conditions governing the account in question and which are referred to in Paragraph 3, 4 and 5 of the defence. The terms and conditions required are those that formed the contract between the Claimant and Defendant covering the entire period from when contract was first entered into until the present day, including amendments or alterations where appropriate.

 

2. In relation to each and every breach by the Claimant which resulted in a charge being levied as confirmed by the Defendant in its Defence, please provide full details (with all relevant supporting documentation) of any letters, telephone calls, or incidents of manual intervention into the account in respect of each and every charge claimed by the Claimant in the Particulars of Claim.

 

3. If the Defendant employs or operates any system, either automated or manually operated or otherwise, which is used to assess, audit, track or refine the costs or "administrative expenses" of dealing with current accounts incidents - in particular any delinquency incidents, such as refusal or otherwise of direct debits, referral of cheques for any reason, refusing or permitting any formally agreed overdraft limit to be exceeded or any other delinquency event, such a systems existence is required to be confirmed and named and full details given.

 

4. In respect of the Defendants reference to the "administrative expenses" to which the charges are averred to be proportionate, as referred to in paragraph 9 of its defence, please provide full details (with all relevant supporting documentation) of the justifiably objective principles upon which all such costs or expenses are calculated and result in the specific level of each charge levied by the bank in respect of each of the breaches which resulted in the charges now claimed by the Claimant.

 

 

5. The Defendant shall, within 14 days of the Order being issued, provide a full response to each and every point of this Order to the Court and the Claimant.

6. If the Defendant fails to comply with the Order, the Defence will be automatically struck out.

 

 

 

 

Now a little wait methinks. :p

srfrench :eek:

 

Fight incompetance, stupidity, greed and unfairness......There's no excuse and no place for it in society, unless they really are! :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh.....and just for the hell of it...... decided to submit my CMI sheet at the same time.... :rolleyes::D

 

Case Management Information Sheet

 

Case No: XXXXXXXX

srfrench - v – Abbey National PLC

Party filing: Me [The Claimant]

Solicitors: Claimant in person

Advocate(s) for trial: ––

Date:28th July 2007

 

 

Substance of case

1. The Claimant seeks repayment of unfair and unlawful bank charges and interest and challenges the lawfulness of the level of levied charges.

Parties

2. Are all parties still effective? - Yes.

3. Do you intend to add any further party? - No.

 

Statements of case

4. Do you intend to amend your statement of case? - No.

5. Do you require any “further information” - see CPR 18? -Yes. The Claimant seeks the Court to order the defendant to provide a full breakdown of the actual cost incurred by the defendant in respect of each of the said bank charges.

 

Disclosure

6. By what date can you give standard disclosure? - Within 7 days of being requested by the Court.

7. Do you contend that to search for any type of document falling within CPR 31.6(b) would be unreasonable within CPR 31.7(2)? - No.

8. Is any specific disclosure required - CPR 31.12? - Yes. Disclosure of documents by the defendant showing the defendant’s costs incurred and its profit on bank charges relative to the claim.

9. Is a full disclosure order appropriate? - Yes.

10. By what dates could you give:

(i) any specific disclosure referred to at 8? - Within 7 days of the Court’s directions.

(ii) Full disclosure? - Within 7 days of the Court’s directions.

 

Admissions

11. Can you make any additional admissions? - No.

Preliminary issues

 

12. Are any issues suitable for trial as preliminary issues? - No.

 

Witnesses of fact

13. On how many witnesses of fact do you intend to rely at the trial (subject to the court’s direction)? - One.

14. Please name them, or explain why you do not. - The Claimant.

15. Which of them will be called to give oral evidence? - The Claimant.

16. When can you serve their witness statements? - Within 7 days of the Court’s directions.

17. Will any require an interpreter? - No.

Expert evidence

18. Are there issues requiring expert evidence? - No.

19. If yes, what issues? - N/A.

20. Might a single joint expert be suitable on any issues (see CPR 35.7)? – N/A.

21. What experts do you intend (subject to the court’s direction) to call? Please give the number, their names and expertise. - N/A.

22. By what date can you serve signed expert reports? - N/A.

23. Should there be meetings of experts of like disciplines, of all disciplines? By when? - N/A.

24. Which experts, if any, do you intend not to call at the trial? - N/A.

25. Will any require an interpreter? - N/A.

Trial

26. What are the advocates’ present estimates of the length of the trial? - 2 hours.

27. What is the earliest date that you think the case can be ready for trial? - 4 weeks from the Case Management Conference / Directions Hearing.

28. Where should the trial be held? - Leeds.

29. Is a Pre-Trial Review advisable? - No.

 

A.D.R.

30. Might some form of Alternative Dispute Resolution assist to resolve the dispute or some part of it? – No.

31. Has this been considered with the client? – No.

32. Has this been considered with the other parties? – No.

33. Do you want the case to be stayed pending A.D.R. or other means of settlement - CPR 26.4; or any other directions relating to A.D.R.? - No.

 

Other applications

34. What applications, if any, not covered above, will you be making at the conference? - None.

 

Costs

 

35. What, do you estimate, are your costs to date? - Claimant in Person costs £9.25 per hour plus expenses. 24 hours research and preparation plus sundry expenses, total £282.54

36. What, do you estimate, will be your costs to end of trial? - Claimant in Person costs £9.25 per hour plus expenses. 20 hours research and preparation plus sundry expenses, total £350 from now to the end of the trial.

 

 

Signed (Claimant):

srfrench :eek:

 

Fight incompetance, stupidity, greed and unfairness......There's no excuse and no place for it in society, unless they really are! :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

What happens if either party fail to sendtheir CMI sheet in to both the Court and other Party?

srfrench :eek:

 

Fight incompetance, stupidity, greed and unfairness......There's no excuse and no place for it in society, unless they really are! :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh poo!

 

Guess what happened this morning after the postie had been?

 

I received a thick letter from the Leeds Courts. Inside it was my request for a CPR Part 18 Order and my cheque. "Oh Bugger" I thought, they're not going to grant it and/or a stay is being placed?

 

WRONG!

 

Incorrect fee! Not £35 in my case, because of the amount I thing being claimed but £50. So re-wrote another cheque and OOF it goes! :D

srfrench :eek:

 

Fight incompetance, stupidity, greed and unfairness......There's no excuse and no place for it in society, unless they really are! :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Actually as an aside....... is anyone aware of this new costing £50 instead of £35?

 

Just had my two Credit Card ones returned also demanding £50 each rather than £35!!

 

Nothing in the Courts cost tarriffs about this?

srfrench :eek:

 

Fight incompetance, stupidity, greed and unfairness......There's no excuse and no place for it in society, unless they really are! :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is nothing about it on hmcs hun, make sure you get a receipt as you may be able to ask for the difference back :-)

Lula

 

Lula v Abbey - Settled

Lula v Abbey (2) - Settled

Lula v Abbey (3) - Stayed

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just bet it's a pompous ass of a clerk getting facts wrong. Anyway, "correct" amounts now off so no more delay tactics from anyone!

srfrench :eek:

 

Fight incompetance, stupidity, greed and unfairness......There's no excuse and no place for it in society, unless they really are! :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good news in sofar as:

 

Taken from the BBC website this morning 24 August 2007

 

 

A judge has stopped Barclays bank taking any more penalty charges and interest from a customer who sued for their return.

 

Judge Abrahams, at Luton County Court, has ordered Barclays to stop applying the charges until a High Court test case settles the legal issues involved.

 

Barclays said it will be entitled to reclaim any further charges from Nadine Fry should the test case be successful.

The five main banks have handed back almost £400m in charges since January.

 

Barclays itself has so far repaid £87m in overdraft charges this year.

 

'Not general policy'

 

Judge Abraham's decision is likely to be deeply disturbing to the UK's banks, in case other judges around the country adopt a similar line.

_44075013_lutonorder203.jpg Luton county court's order against Barclays bank

 

 

 

A spokesman for the Judicial Communications Office (JCO), which speaks on behalf of judges, said: "This is not a general policy - each case is assessed on its own merits."

 

In the past year, tens of thousands of bank customers have been winning refunds of overdraft penalty charges from their banks, amounting to millions of pounds.

 

 

To resolve this vexed issue, the banks, along with the Office of Fair Trading (OFT), agreed at the end of July to stage in the High Court next year a test case on the legality of the charges.

The OFT believes they are an unfair and illegal penalty under consumer protection regulations.

The banks say they are a fair charge for providing a service to their customers while their accounts are in the red.

 

Waiver win

 

At the same time as announcing the test case, the banks won from the Financial Services Authority (FSA) a waiver from the current rules so that they can largely stop processing new claims against them until the legal issues are sorted out.

Likewise, the Financial Services Ombudsman (FSO) decided to stop dealing with the thousands of similar complaints it has been receiving.

The banks also asked the courts to suspend all existing legal actions against them for the time being. However, any decisions on cases that are already before the courts have been left up to local judges to decide.

 

 

:D :D ;)

srfrench :eek:

 

Fight incompetance, stupidity, greed and unfairness......There's no excuse and no place for it in society, unless they really are! :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Had another letter from the Court today (Leeds Merc) stating that my application for a CPR Part 18 Order will be heard at the hearing on the 29th August 2007. So I was right, this "Hearing" is a Directoions/Case Management Hearing and not the full hearing as others suspect! No harm in going in prepared though as it will give the Abbey a few pins in the backside and eyes! :D

srfrench :eek:

 

Fight incompetance, stupidity, greed and unfairness......There's no excuse and no place for it in society, unless they really are! :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...