Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


srfrench

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

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3632 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

Thought you already had lol


:madgrin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep I see the excellent PRE LIM but no mention of the actual argument being used to back up CI.

 

I know the you've had my money for so long you've made a profit on it etc etc etc...

 

??

 

BJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sola??

 

Sorry....

 

Will look at it but read the thread Precendent Lost WWYO!

 

BJ

Share this post


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

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3-0 to you

 

WWYO - "would wecome your opinion"

 

LOL

 

BJ

Share this post


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?

Share this post


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

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your prompt reply Lula it is a great help. It gets abit scarey once u have to produce the court bundle, so much paper, although i am looking forward to the court appearence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

cool, well done, it is an experience, im sure lol, what court are you in?


Lula

 

Lula v Abbey - Settled

Lula v Abbey (2) - Settled

Lula v Abbey (3) - Stayed

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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:

Share this post


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:

Share this post


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:

Share this post


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:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doooooooooooooooooooooooooofus Lol


Lula

 

Lula v Abbey - Settled

Lula v Abbey (2) - Settled

Lula v Abbey (3) - Stayed

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know....... just plain embarrassing :rolleyes::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:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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:

Share this post


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

 

Share this post


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:

Share this post


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:

Share this post


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:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...