Claiming beyond 6 yrs - important new information!!!

[zootscoot]

You would generally get the opportunity to object to the strike out which is generally dealt with at a hearing.

[zootscoot]

I personally would include it from POC stage. There is no duty to refer to it in POC or at all unless they raise it in their defence, however, I know one user had her POC returned and told to take out the older charges where she did not refer to the Limitation Actin her POC. Also another court struck out a claim on its own motion where the claim was entirely made up of an ERC outside the limitation period. Also its more likely that the defendant will apply to have part of the claim struck out. There is the opportunity to object to strike out, however, this is more likely to end up in a hearing. Including the Limitation Act in your POC will not completely eleminate the risk of strike out but would make it less likely.

[zootscoot]

Is the rate of interest not stated on the statements?

[zootscoot]

BBC Radio 4 'Today' did all us victims proud this morning, two slots, our own spokesman & a conceeding BBA Angela Light. BBC - Radio 4 - Today

 

Awaiting BankFodder to depose a cogent state of the play as to where we are, post Lloyds/TSB.

 

 

See:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/lloyds-bank/90521-lloyds-victory-birmingham-perspective.html

 

Originally Posted by skeggs885

...confused about whether its wise to try to claim post years now...

 

...should I continue with my quest or is it dodgier trying to go back more than 6 years and why?

 

It has always been 'dodgier' to claim post 6 yrs simply because this is still in its infancy and has not been fully tested. There is no reaon why the Lloyds claim would have any bearing on this. The claimant lost because he did not include a copy of the T &Cs in his bundle which he was relying on in his argument.

 

I've also asked if I should put the pre-6 year argument in my POC but again no one seems to want to answer that either.

 

 

I have posted this in this thread somewhere before.

 

Its a bit hard to feel confident about pre-6 year claims when no support is forthcoming. :-|

 

Appologies but there is an awful lot going on at the moment

[zootscoot]

Add this to your template POC:

• a). In so far as any charges relating to the period before xx/xx/xxxx, the Claimant wishes to invoke s.32 (1) (b) of the Limitation Act 1980 in that the Defendant deliberately concealed the true cost of administering the contractual breaches committed by the Claimant and thus essential facts relevant to the Claimant's right of action have been concealed and continue to be concealed by the Defendant.
   
  b). Alternatively, the Claimant seeks to rely upon s.32(1)© of the Limitation Act. The Claimant paid the charges in the belief that they reflected the true cost of administering the contractual breaches. The Claimant has now discovered, following revelations relating to a similar organisation, that the true costs are much lower and that the belief held by Claimant was in fact mistaken.
   
  It is thus submitted that in accordance with s.32(1)(b), s32(1)© and s.32(2) that the time period for the purposes of the Limitation Act does not begin to run until the Claimant’s reasonable discovery. This was the 21st March 2007 when the revelations were made public.

[zootscoot]

Matters of admissable evidence will be decided at a later stage. There have been differing views from judges regarding evidence one judge has specifically requested inclusion of the Whistleblower program in the bundle.

 

DJ Cooke's statements in the Lloyds case, relating to 'estimates in the media' is something quite different from the whistleblower evidence we have.

[zootscoot]

Where is your POC?

[zootscoot]

Not quite sure what you mean about safe, but I'll have a look.

 

Do you have a link?

[zootscoot]

I'll pm you my email address:)

[zootscoot]

If its fast track then if you went to court and lost then you would be liable for the banks legal costs incurred in defending the claim. If it is small claims then you are not liable for their legal fees but you are liable for their disbursements such as travelling expenses and also you would forfeit your court fee.

[zootscoot]

I think that a single instance of concealment invokes s.32 and the limitation barrier falls away completely.

 

Concealment amounts to a question of the morality of the defendant's action. Once this is established then I do not believe that the courts will strive to give them any help.

I understand from Zootscoot that this view is also confirmed by case-law.

 

 

Sheldon v. R.H.M. Outhwaite (U/W Agencies) Ltd.

 

It is the first part of the statement to which the case law relates to.

[zootscoot]

Some additions for your bundle:

 

 

Limitation Act 1980 (c. 5:cool: - Statute Law Database

 

 

House of Lords - Kleinwort Benson LTD. v. Lincoln City Council

Kleinwort Benson LTD. v. Mayor etc. of the London Borough of Southwark and Others

Kleinwort Benson LTD. v. Birmingham City Council

Kleinwort Benson LTD. v. Mayor etc. of the Lo

 

Williams v Fanshaw Porter & Hazelhurst [2004] EWCA Civ 157 (18 February 2004)

 

Cave v. Robinson Jarvis & Rolf [2002] UKHL 18 (25th April, 2002)

 

Sheldon v. R.H.M. Outhwaite (U/W Agencies) Ltd.

[zootscoot]

Could anyone please tell me what this paragraph is from?

 

 

c) The Defendant has concealed, and continues to conceal that the charges debited are unlawful. If this is not the case, and the Defendant truly believes that these charges are lawful, then the Claimant contends that the Defendant is mistaken. As the Claimant only became aware during February 2006 that the charges debited were unlawful, then section 32(1 Xb), or section 32(1 )©, of the Limitation Act 1980 should apply, and the charges debited are therefore within the primary limitation period.

Thanks

 

I don't know where its from but it is misconceived in that the mistake must be that of the claimant's and not the defendant's and therefore it is unsafe to rely on it.

[zootscoot]

a). In so far as any charges relating to the period before xx/xx/xxxx, the Claimant wishes to invoke s.32 (1) (b) of the Limitation Act 1980 in that the Defendant deliberately concealed the true cost of administering the contractual breaches committed by the Claimant and thus essential facts relevant to the Claimant's right of action have been concealed and continue to be concealed by the Defendant.

 

b). Alternatively, the Claimant seeks to rely upon s.32(1)© of the Limitation Act. The Claimant paid the charges in the belief that they reflected the true cost of administering the contractual breaches. The Claimant has now discovered, following revelations relating to a similar organisation, that the true costs are much lower and that the belief held by Claimant was in fact mistaken.

 

It is thus submitted that in accordance with s.32(1)(b), s32(1)© and s.32(2) that the time period for the purposes of the Limitation Act does not begin to run until the Claimant’s reasonable discovery. This was the 21st March 2007 when the revelations were made public.

[zootscoot]

Thanks so much for clearing that up.

 

is it also worth putting in the law case

Kleinwort Benson Ltd v Lincoln City Council as a reference

 

 

Celicaman

 

Yes there is some further case law in the case law library forum near the templates.

Hi Zootscoot,

 

Thanks for that info. I have just sent in my allocation questionairre. My claim is mixed some beyond 6 years, some not. Where do I put the info you quote in the court bundle

I have not mentioned this previously as it came to light after I had filed my claim.

 

Cheers,

 

HBukowski

 

Include the case law in the bundle and add the bits above to the witness statement.

 

This argument cites 21st March 2007 (i.e. the 'Whistleblower' programme), as the date of discovery. Has it been your experience that the argument is diminished in any way (or at any rate more easily challenged) if the litigant's account is not with one of the banks featured in the programme?

 

Thanks

Mac

 

Whilst the Whistleblower featured Yorkshire, Clydesdale and Northern banks the costing system for other banks is unlikely to vary greatly when you consider the wide mark up value added to the actual costs.

[zootscoot]

I have just won a claim consisting of 12 years of charges, this was the most recent 6 years, plus the 6 years prior to that.

 

 

 

Congratulations!!!

 

Which bank was this?