Jump to content


Help!! Abbey are defending!!


sarahc2003
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5303 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

Just received Abbey's defence in relation to my claim! What they have written is quite funny really "The claimant's contention that the said fees are unenforceable and/or are "penalty charges" is denied. The fees reflect and are proportionate to the Defendant's administrative expenses incurred due to the Claimants breach of contract and are a genuine pre-estimate of the damage duffered by the Defendant" So it actually costs the Abbey £32 in admin costs for an unpaid direct debit charge - I think not!!!

 

A quick question - I started trying to claim my charges back in November last year and in Abbey's defence they have written "The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to charges prior to 5 March 2001 by reason of Limitation act". From what I can gather they are going back 6 years from the date of when the court served them with my claim. I requested my statements back in August last year and I think I should be entitled to claim charges going back 6 years from the date I started to write the Abbey to get these charges back - I am right in thinking this or is this another of Abbeys shabby tactics in not paying back what they should.

 

As the Abbey are defending it has now been forwarded to my local court. When I received the letter from the court they had crossed out the part that says that the AQ is enclosed and it just enclosed a copy of Abbey's defence. Has anyone else had this? What happens now?

 

Sarah

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Sarah,

 

These seem to be standard wordings on every defence, including the 6 year bit. It's on my defence yet my claim only starts from 2003, so it's just a regurgitated line. Your six years starts from the date of your first letter.

 

As to the bit about your AQ, sorry can't help on that one.

All advice offered here is my opinion only based on what I would do in a given situation. If you wish to act on it you do so at your own discretion

......................................................

I have no legal expertise or qualification, and give advice on the basis of my own experience and nothing else.

Link to post
Share on other sites

sadly the six years starts from when the cause of action, so you have six years from then to issue proceedings.

 

Your first letter is not 'issuing proceedings'

 

However, having said that my claim was for charges from Apr 1997 and they decided not to rely on the limitations act in anyway and settled.

 

I have just submitted my second claim against abbey with charges from 1997 and i expect them to settle these too.

 

HTH

 

Glenn

Kick the shAbbey Habit

 

Where were you? Next time please

 

 

Abbey 1st claim -Charges repaid, default removed, interest paid (8% apr) costs paid, Abbey peed off; priceless

Abbey 2nd claim, two Accs - claim issued 30-03-07

Barclaycard - Settled cheque received

Egg 2 accounts ID sent 29/07

Co-op Claim issued 30-03-07

GE Capital (Store Cards) ICO says theyve been naughty

MBNA - Settled in Full

GE Capital (1st National) Settled

Lombard Bank - SAR sent 16.02.07

MBNA are not your friends, they will settle but you need to make sure its on your terms -read here

Glenn Vs MBNA

Link to post
Share on other sites

do a site seatch on Statute of Limitations, and have a good read, many claims are going back prior to 6 years because they havnt got a defence for it, any more questions, come back and ask ;)

Lula

 

Lula v Abbey - Settled

Lula v Abbey (2) - Settled

Lula v Abbey (3) - Stayed

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I claimed charges, interest id paid plus i claimed contractual because of a small mistake i didnt get it but my next claim is submitted and who knows.

 

Glenn

Kick the shAbbey Habit

 

Where were you? Next time please

 

 

Abbey 1st claim -Charges repaid, default removed, interest paid (8% apr) costs paid, Abbey peed off; priceless

Abbey 2nd claim, two Accs - claim issued 30-03-07

Barclaycard - Settled cheque received

Egg 2 accounts ID sent 29/07

Co-op Claim issued 30-03-07

GE Capital (Store Cards) ICO says theyve been naughty

MBNA - Settled in Full

GE Capital (1st National) Settled

Lombard Bank - SAR sent 16.02.07

MBNA are not your friends, they will settle but you need to make sure its on your terms -read here

Glenn Vs MBNA

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just received Abbey's defence in relation to my claim! What they have written is quite funny really "The claimant's contention that the said fees are unenforceable and/or are "penalty charges" is denied. The fees reflect and are proportionate to the Defendant's administrative expenses incurred due to the Claimants breach of contract and are a genuine pre-estimate of the damage duffered by the Defendant" So it actually costs the Abbey £32 in admin costs for an unpaid direct debit charge - I think not!!!

 

A quick question - I started trying to claim my charges back in November last year and in Abbey's defence they have written "The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to charges prior to 5 March 2001 by reason of Limitation act". From what I can gather they are going back 6 years from the date of when the court served them with my claim. I requested my statements back in August last year and I think I should be entitled to claim charges going back 6 years from the date I started to write the Abbey to get these charges back - I am right in thinking this or is this another of Abbeys shabby tactics in not paying back what they should.

 

As the Abbey are defending it has now been forwarded to my local court. When I received the letter from the court they had crossed out the part that says that the AQ is enclosed and it just enclosed a copy of Abbey's defence. Has anyone else had this? What happens now?

 

Sarah

 

This is exactly why it is so important that people stick to their own timescale, not the banks. Their 8 week or more "investigation" is just their way of trying to get as many charges as possible to fall off the 6 year limit (which is also starting to become more & more challenged now).

 

As for the defence, it is the standard abbey defence, and has absolutely no substance whatsoever.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I go by the Abbey's date then I will have £120 knocked off my claim. Just because they have delayed in replying to me since I tried to claim back the money in November - it all seems a bit unfair to me!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sarah

 

The law isnt fair unfortunaltely. However, if you want to use the limitation act then go for it, chances are you will get the extra charges back without any great hassle.

 

The court wont strike the claimout if it comes to it.

 

HTH

 

Glenn

Kick the shAbbey Habit

 

Where were you? Next time please

 

 

Abbey 1st claim -Charges repaid, default removed, interest paid (8% apr) costs paid, Abbey peed off; priceless

Abbey 2nd claim, two Accs - claim issued 30-03-07

Barclaycard - Settled cheque received

Egg 2 accounts ID sent 29/07

Co-op Claim issued 30-03-07

GE Capital (Store Cards) ICO says theyve been naughty

MBNA - Settled in Full

GE Capital (1st National) Settled

Lombard Bank - SAR sent 16.02.07

MBNA are not your friends, they will settle but you need to make sure its on your terms -read here

Glenn Vs MBNA

Link to post
Share on other sites

I still haven't heard from the court with regards a court date and I still haven't received an AQ. All I have receieved is a letter from Northampton (through MCOL) advising me that it has now been passed to my local court, a copy of Abbey's defence was enclosed and then the part which says about an AQ has been crossed out. Should I give my local court a call on Tuesday to see what the state of play is with regard to my claim?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi sarah,

 

In the last couple of weeks the courts seem to have decided to do away with AQ's in order to speed things up which is perhaps why the bit about AQ's is crossed out.

 

a phone call seems to be a reasonable idea.

All advice offered here is my opinion only based on what I would do in a given situation. If you wish to act on it you do so at your own discretion

......................................................

I have no legal expertise or qualification, and give advice on the basis of my own experience and nothing else.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just phoned the court that my claim has been transferred to and they said that my case has been forwarded to the District Judges Office and I will hear within 4-6 weeks!! They will write to me and let me know what the next stage is after that. Do I start getting my court bundle ready yet?

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi sarah thats a new one not heard of that I rang my court up and they said ok will put one in post for you to fill out??????

yes i would start getting bundle together as its not a 10 min job got mine sorted out already just incase.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...