AQ New strategy means I pay £35

[Destinyofsouls]

Hi,

Posted this on another thread somewhere but cannot find it. Attaching the order to the AQ ended with the claimant ( work colleague) getting a letter from the Court saying it is now a claim and she has to pay £35.00.

Glenn pointed me to regulations that don't agree with that. She wrote a nice letter to the court as Glenn suggested but they have written back telling her to pay the £35 or send in another AQ without the draft order.

SO....... I am putting this on the AQ (N150) is this OK?

 

There is now a wealth of evidence that the Banks are reluctant to pursue any defence of the claims of their clients against unfair bank charges, thus abusing and wasting valuable court time and resources.

Attached is a list of cases of the bank filing a defence for this type of claim and yet has failed to attend court to defend the claim,settling the claim before the court hearing.

Accordingly, the Claimant respectfully asks the court to request from the Defendant a schedule setting out all claims of this type in England and Wales which have proceeded to a final contested hearing, and the outcome of such hearings, together with a schedule of all such claims which it has settled before final hearing, after proceedings have been issued. If the defendant does not comply within 14 days, the defence will be struck out.

The Claimant believes this will bring an end to the banks abusing the Court system and delaying tactics in settling such cases.

 

The case is for £5,487 (inc 8% S69) and we have asked to be heard in the SCC.

Any help would be accepted gratefully

[Advoc8]

Obviously I'm not aware of the full facts but my personal opinion is that if paying an extra £35 will bring your friend £5487 somewhat more quickly than not paying it (I know what the rules say but sometimes it pays to be a little flexible) I'd risk the money. After all it's less that 1% of the total.

 

With regard to your proposed submission for the N150 my thoughts are:

 

There is now a wealth of evidence (what evidence do you have, other than the list that you refer to - if there is some list it?) that the Banks (how is the behaviour of another bank relevant to your claim? Make it specific to the defendant) are reluctant to pursue any defence of the claims of their clients against unfair bank charges, thus abusing and wasting valuable court time and resources.

 

Accordingly, the Claimant respectfully asks the court to request from the Defendant a schedule setting out all claims of this type in England and Wales which have proceeded to a final contested hearing, and the outcome of such hearings, together with a schedule of all such claims which it has settled before final hearing, after proceedings have been issued. If the defendant does not comply within 14 days, the defence will be struck out you can't tell the court to strike out a defence! Ask nicely!

 

The Claimant believes this will bring an end to the banks abusing the Court system and delaying tactics in settling such cases. The court does not care what you believe. This is also a bit of a sweeping statement.

 

To be honest it looks like you're trying to sneak a disclosure order in via the back door and I also don't think it helps to try and tell the court what to do. I don't know what your prospects of success are in getting this actioned but I do think you need to make it more specific to your bank.