Beckett v Lloyds TSB - Going Back More than 6 Years

[TBeckett100]

received 10 point defence

 

1) bank admits I have been customer

2) By opening account, I agree to the bank charging for services

3) Keeping inredit i would avoid charges

4) no breach contract has occured charge cannot be a penalty

5) customer given advance warning of charges

6) charges fair and reasonable

7) customer notifed chasrges in a clear language

8)charges for service and are not penalties

bank entitled to impose charges,

9) claim is based on charges prior to 6 years claim is statute barred, particulars do not show how claim arrived at

10) claimant not due a penny

 

what now then. can I request a strike out based on the bank settling before cases are due?

 

help!

[TBeckett100]

bump

[TBeckett100]

Hello

 

I am claiming only for the period of 1998-2000 when the account was closed.

 

The lloyds defence brought this matter up and said the claim was not valid.

 

i have received the following

 

DISTRICT JUDGE XXXX has considered the statements of case and allocation questionnaire (there wasnt one) filed and allocated the case to the small claims track.

 

The hearing of the claim will take place at 14.00 on the 7 September 07 at Reading County Court and should take no longer than 10 MINUTES

 

the court must be informased if party settle etc

 

Each party shall deliver to every other party and to the court copies of all documents on which he intends to rely on no later than 14 days before the hearing.

 

Original documents should be brought to the hearing.

 

1) should i be worried about the 10 mins as this seems like my case will be chucked out over time barring

2) are they asking me to submit the bundle everyone discusses on here?

 

Should I take it to the 16th day before and submit in the hope they settle or what?

 

Help.

[TBeckett100]

i havent heard a bean from SCM they have defenced and my court date is through, shouldnt i have heard now as sone have recived offers be3fore the court date??

[TBeckett100]

spoke to SCM they are still waiting to hear from lloyds whether they wish to make a settlement or defend

[TBeckett100]

the person i spoke to seemed genuine enough and it makes sense, launch a defence, buy time and wait for LTSB to confirm what they wish to do. fiver says they take mine to the court sice i am claiming back o/s the 6 years

[TBeckett100]

please list any wins here to help others who may also be worried at having to wait a bit longer.

[TBeckett100]

A new tact

 

I am in the financial industry and it seems that some people are getting payouts awarded before others despite it being at the same stages, the FSA recently brought in the TREATING CUSTOMERS FAIRLY regime

 

Consumers can be confident that they are dealing with firms where the fair treatment of customers is central to the corporate culture;

 

if the judge does award a Stay, I think CAG etc need to post a firm appeal template against this.

[TBeckett100]

thought it may be useful to see geographically where claims are being allowed to contine and those which have been stayed

[TBeckett100]

Just called SC&M, they havent heard from Lloyds yet offering settlement on my case. certainly no talk of change or staying or OFT, it seems biz as usual for claims running through

[TBeckett100]

the re post above mine, i think its court date orientated. the sc&m guy said it can drag due to sheer volumes of claims.

[TBeckett100]

spoke to the court, case still being heard on 7th September in Reading at 2pm. all bundles to be cc'd to each other and sent to the court house 14 days prior, will leave it to the 20th Aug before doing the bundle if i dont hear beforehand otherwise.

[TBeckett100]

spoke to SCM, still no word from Lloyds. i reckon they will defend this one.

[TBeckett100]

Just had a call back, Lloyds are applying for stays on all cases pending now. do we have something to use to appeal if the court agrees?

[TBeckett100]

I HAVE RESPONDED AS FOLLOWS - IS THIS AN OK LETTER? MY ACC IS CLOSED SO DELETED NON RELEVANT BITS AND ADDED MY OWN. TB

In the READING County Court

 

Between:

 

 

BECKETT

-and-

 

LLOYDS BANK PLC

 

 

Saturday, August 18, 2007

I strongly object to the proposed order of a stay in respect of the claim detailed above upon the following grounds. I understand District Judges have been asked to consider Stay requests on a case by case basis.

 

Human rights

 

It would infringe my rights under the European Convention on Human Rights directly and as enacted in the Human Rights Act 1998. Article 6 of the Convention provides that;

 

“1. In the determination of his civil rights… everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time.”

 

It is submitted that the ordering of a stay as proposed is not reasonable. The 8 banks involved in the High Court test case have recently published identical statements on their websites informing customers that they expect the test case to last for over a year. Moreover, the nature and gravity of the case is such that any judgment is highly likely to be appealed to the Court of Appeal and possibly even then appealed further to the House of Lords. It is entirely conceivable that a final resolution may not be reached for 2 – 3 years or perhaps even longer. It is thus submitted that the period of any proposed stay cannot be accurately predicted and would therefore in effect be indeterminate, which is contrary to the right of entitlement to a fair hearing within a reasonable time as provided for by Article 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998.

 

 

• The Overriding Objective
   
  The Overriding Objective requires that my case is allowed to proceed speedily so that a just settlement may be obtained by the parties to this case. Dealing with cases justly includes ensuring that this case is dealt with expeditiously and fairly and in a way that is proportionate to the amount of money involved. It is submitted that the imposition of an indeterminate stay in a small claims track case involving a relatively small sum, at such an advanced stage in proceedings, is not just, nor is it expeditious, nor is it fair on a claimant who has outlaid sums by way of court fees in pursuit of a legitimate right to seek a remedy.
   
  The Status Quo
   
  The stay does not maintain the status quo. As submitted above, a stay favours the bank by preventing the claimant’s pursuit of its legitimate remedy without placing any restriction upon the banks activities which I submit are unlawful and/or retaliatory.
   
  Furthermore, as submitted above the present case concerns a relatively small sum and is at a late stage in proceedings, and therefore I submit that to impose an indeterminate stay is unnecessary, inappropriate, not in the interests of justice and further, is detrimental to my rights in a way which is unfair and inequitable.
   
  Other Points
   
  The amount in which I am claiming is to be tested under the Statute of Limitations Act where I intend to present my case in Court since the charges in which I am claiming fall outside the 6 years. However since I have only been aware of the potential unlawfulness of the charges for 1 year, and the majority of that time was taken trying to extract information; I prefer to present my claim in court as I do not believe the OFT Test Case will take into account charges specifically beyond the limitation period and therefore I have an opportunity now to present my case rather than in some years to come.

In addition I have spent a great deal of time preparing my case and have booked leave from work to attend the hearing. I feel that in allocating 10 minutes for the planned hearing, the Court accepts the the chances of Lloyds presenting a defence will be unlikely. However, I would like to see whether Lloyds wishes to defend the Limitations Act or whether like so many cases gone before will use the Court process as a tool for keeping claimants in an orderly queue for settlement. When Lloyds submitted a defence, unless they were abusing the court process, Lloyds were committed to defending their key points, once of which was the Limitations Act.

Since making my compliant to Lloyds requesting back charges, I have never received any correspondence relating to my compliant and thus I have been forced into taking legal action, as it appears the only method of having dialogue with the Defendant. So far I am a further £120.00 out of pocket. If the court directs a Stay, I would hope that it will also order the return of my £120.00 court fee.

The defendant has made numerous out of court settlements since the OFT Case announcement. Under the Treating Customers Fairly principle from the FSA the following two principles are relevant

“Consumers can be confident that they are dealing with firms where the fair treatment of customers is central to the corporate culture”

“Consumers do not face unreasonable post-sale barriers imposed by firms to change product, switch provider, submit a claim or make a complaint.”

I attach a list of cases which I understand to have been settled prior to court.

Finally, I hope you are able to give my points some due consideration as I wish to have the chance to present my case before you as agreed in September.

Signed

TBECKETT

[TBeckett100]

Just to add, I spoke to Reading County Court this morning and pending cases are being reviewed on a 121 basis if an application is made for a Stay.

 

New cases are issued and then referred to the judge straight away.

[TBeckett100]

received letter , well 2 from [problem] saying they are applying for a stay. tele'd READING court this am and no application has been made,all being done on a case by case basis.

 

sent in my whopper of a bundle. SCM have until Fri to get a stay or submit their bundle.

 

if they dont do anything by friday, can i get a judgement?

[TBeckett100]

Just called the court and they are proceeding with my case. called SC&M they havent heard but havent done the bundle which has to be there tomorrow.

 

How is this looking?

 

It was READING county court

[TBeckett100]

i have sent a letter tonight for the judge to read tomorrow/tuesday as the deadline is tomorrow and they havent sent anything yet.

 

lets hope they choose to settle pre the date or not bother with the bundle at all.

[TBeckett100]

Hi Guys

 

Just an update on my claim.

 

Firstly I am claiming for the period of 1998-2000 around 2.5k inc interest and fees.

 

SCM wrote to my judge asking for a stay which was rejected so the sceduled date of the 7th Sept is still ongoing.

 

My question is the following, SCM had until Friday to submit their bundle (mine was done the week prior), i sent a letter on Thurs night dated Friday to remind the judge that SCM have not supplied their evidence,

 

Am I right in assuming that SCM cannot plead a case on the actual date if they havent supplied the evidence? What can the judge order?

[TBeckett100]

hi, could we please have a sticky listing all the cases where like mine the stay has been rejected and the case proceeding, itg would be good for us "lucky" ones to be able to locate each other quickly on this thread.

 

in addition, if your case is proceeding, please post it here

[TBeckett100]

OH MY WORD, well since my claim is for over 6 years this is a separate issue surely and not covered by OFT

[TBeckett100]

my date is next Friday the 9th, I think i have good grounds to overturn a stay request as my case will have to go to court anyway as its over 6 years.

 

What power does a HSBC rep have on a Lloyds case? unless your was a HSBC claim...

[TBeckett100]

I have called the curt who are allowing the case to continue. No bunle has been received from SC&M by the court ,however the order was for them to submit what they intend to rely on anyway, so lets assume they arent relying on anything.

 

Since the Stay has been refused, I want to contact SCM to confirm this with them, ask them if they have submitted anything, check they have mine (they do according to royal mail website) and to see whether they wish to settle.

 

Should I call them or leave it?

[TBeckett100]

what is the point in Reading ordering no stay YET bowing down quickly on such a small point. since my case is over 6 years and would have to be tested anyway, once can hope the judge allows mine to continue.