Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • There are 10 pages, and the other 9 are standard. E.g. ask me whether plea or not, my information etc. I would like to send another begging letter, but there’s no email address of the prosecutor.😭
    • correct thats all they are duty bound to supply. what else were you expecting it to provide? dx    
    • you seriously need to read up here then you'd know these answers. and TBH you are panicking about a nothing burger. the process they must follow is: send a letter of claim. ASK northants bulk to raise a court claim. IF IF IF you lose and a judgement CCJ is granted, THEN they have 6yrs to enforce said judgement, but ofcourse this is a debt regulated by the consumer credit act so there is NO right of forced entry even if they do return to court within 6yrs from judgement and again ASK the court to send bailiffs out. as for statute barring, the 6yrs SB starts ticking from the issuance date of the default notice+14 days or from the date of YOUR last payment/use of the credit...whichever is the LATER. the issuance of a court claim (regardless to if it progresses anywhere) stops the SB clock.
    • sorry but we need the full n244, their witness statement and ALL exhibits to one mass PDF please to properly advise. we do not need statements or blank forms or info leaflets. if Kearns have sent you their N180 then.... https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/347310-legal-n180-directions-questionnaire-small-claims-track/#comment-5088148 3 copies yes to mediation (unless you filed our Statute Barred Defence OR this is a claim for a Private Parking Ticket) 1 wit you Suitability for determination without a hearing? no (that the issues are so complex they need to be argued orally') the rest is obv 1 to the court 1 to their sols (omit phone/sig/email) if no sols send to claimant 1 for your file ................. if they've sent an N181 please advise here. dx      
    • you dont have to await the 50% time to come, she could VT today and you hand the car back and then only have the remaining sum to the 50% mark to pay going fwd. just stopping paying is not really a worthy way forward, as if if if they were to goto court and attain a return of goods order, then she would be liable to hand the car back and have to pay the full sum on the agreement, just like if she were to let them just repo the car now, under Voluntary Termination, both of which you need to avoid...so do a VT ASAP. if she wants to keep the car, then do a time order. as for advice on other sites, which you should not be refering too anyway, use CAG, they always fall toward finance co's getting their maximum buck.  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Tom Brennan v NatWest - This is a must-read!!!


calvi36
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5917 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

Guest NATTIE

The issue is not on defending charges but the level of compensation from my reading of this. OFT do not make law so they have no real input into the eqaution.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

also i think we should have uk collection fund for this man if he lost this would pay his fees / but he will not lose then all the funds what ever it is goes to charities. just a idea i put in £20 he is asking for the bank to show the true cost of returned d/d cheques etc

Link to post
Share on other sites

My gut feeling says the issue is really to do with the issue of compensation and not the costs involved. I am sure if this was an area which you could have gone down that it would have been done before. Wait and see i guess

 

 

Or maybe as he said in the radio interview, he is pursuing it for the principle (and for other people in this situation) and in rejecting the offer and arguing exemplary damages, he will attempt to force the bank to disclose their charges.

Link to post
Share on other sites

wonder if we could get a hold of a copy of his POC. I seem to recall reading somewhere that documents are available for public viewing at the court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the contrarie Nattie, the claimant would appear to be asking the courts to rule on the lawfulness of the charges.

 

So it could be about charges, we will have to wait and see.

 

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

ooooooooh exciting then................. lets wait and see. I see feel for the lovely man whose doing this. He must be fair old poopying his drawers at the moment, whilst also being a very brave individual. I personally wish him all the very very best. Hes a star...............

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest NATTIE

I am so tired of the threads in progress. NatWest will not be forced to declare costs. To put it bluntly. If this was the case then Stephen Hone(stephen) the moderator on here and also the guys who runs Penalty charges website would have explored and possibly taken that route. It is highly unlikely or a defence which i am not going to speculate on will be made. I think the bank have admitted the charges aspect just the damages bit would be at issue. Just my opinion but my last one on this topic until after the damp squid hits the fan and sighs arrive afterwards.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok Master Nattie. Were shutting up on this one. I was just intrigued as to whether or not they would just dish out compo on top of charges rather than defend at all, or defend the compo only. Sorry, I know we mere mortals bore the nuts off you at times but you have to remember, we are only mere mortals in the dark about banks,,,,,,, whereas you, this to you, with all your inside knowledge is just a walk in the park and a bit of a non story, but CAN YOU blame us for getting just a tinsy bit excited at the prospect of what the outcome might be.................. anyway besides anything else, its fun to speculate. Lol. Just try and humour us humans........... Lol . You do ok usually. Lol. Fendy xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx HAPPY SATURDAY NATTIE.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just had a listen online, this is great stuff

 

Those above wondering about the damages hes aiming for, he mentions 50 - 100% of the charges

 

Very risky, but the impact of this could be amazing

 

Gutsy guy, best of british to you if you're reading this mate

 

:cool:

omnia praesumuntur legitime facta donec probetur in contrarium

 

 

Please note: I am not a member of the legal profession, all advice given is purely my opinion, if in doubt consult a professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see this as a way to get a bank into court (and Nat west may still settle on the court steps). What banks are afraid of is being forced to reveal their internal costs, if they get a court order to disclose they may bottle out and pay up. From the banks viewpoint they have to put up a fight, because if this goes against them it will be very bad for all banks. However I would like to wish Tom Brannan every success, as he is putting his future on the line on this important public issue. It's tough one to call I have no idea what the judge will decide, he may just ajourn and give the litigants 28 days to make an effort to settle out of court; which is the kind of anticlimax I have come to expect!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The banks catch students young, offer loads of incentive to use up their student loans knowing they will get paid in spades when they qualify. The banks prey on the weak and inexperienced.

Stands to reason a smart law student sooner or later will say enough is enough.

My best wishes to Mr Brennan, Friday the 13th is only unlucky for some, lets hope its not unlucky for him.

pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest louis wu

I know petitions have been a bit of a touchy subject lately, but I am wondering if we could maybe help this guy out.

 

Quote

 

 

"If I lose and they state that I am acting unreasonably they can ask for their costs," he said.

 

"They are employing senior barristers. It would bankrupt me, and that prevents you being a practising barrister or transferring to be a solicitor.

 

"But that will only happen if the judge awards costs and he may not if he decides I am bringing this for public reasons. This case has a momentum of its own and is too important to walk away."

 

 

This could be an oportunity for CAG to get together a supply him with 120,000 signatures in support of his action, it may just help the judge decide this is in the publics interest, and may get a bit of publicity for CAG into the bargain.

 

I havn't really thought this through, but wonder if its worth discussing the merits of such a collected action.

 

Louis

Link to post
Share on other sites

At least this barrister fellow will be paying his own costs.At £200 per hour or so.:)

A person is only as big as the dream they dare to live.

 

 

Good things come to he who waits

 

 

Its your money taken unlawfully from your account and you have a legal right to claim it back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest NATTIE

I think i can confirm the damp squid earlier than normal by re-reading the article which states that the judge will rule about exemplary damages. If that part of the case is won THAT is the moment when we can all go over the top about a bank revealing costs. Friday is a simple hearing not his case actually being heard.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Precision is your forte Nattie. ;)

A person is only as big as the dream they dare to live.

 

 

Good things come to he who waits

 

 

Its your money taken unlawfully from your account and you have a legal right to claim it back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL Nattie

 

You could be right of course, but did the Barrister is apparently asking the court to rule on the lawfulness of the charges with subsequent permission to seek exemplary damages.

 

Whilst it may not be heard on Friday (i.e. a hearing into the lawfulness of the charges) it may be the first step to the ultimate goal.

 

Incidentally have you listened to the recording on Money Box I haven't as yet i am going by what i heard on the TV Friday.

 

For the avoidance of doubt he is asking the court to rule on the money they made by the bank from the charges and to strip them of profits based on those charges. Which would require them to reveal their costs.

 

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

Guest NATTIE

Glenn, i haven;t but that is my understanding from a further re read yesterday and this morning. It would compel the bank to reveal costs if he is successful. I think i may try and listen to it, i am just surprised nobody has tried this route previously. one to watch on Friday the 13th.

Link to post
Share on other sites

BBC Radio Player - all BBC players

 

hope this link works, it should be the radio 4 money box broadcast with CAG involvement.

 

Nope it did not, try this BBC NEWS | Programmes | Moneybox | Court bid for bank charge ruling then click moneybox listen icon on left hand side.

 

Right hand side even, GOD don't take any advice from me I don't know the difference between left and right ffs lol

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the reason nobody has tried it is because none of us are legal brained enough to see it through to the end, or we dont have the money to back it up with costs if we lost. C'est la vie ????

 

Parky, u sure youre not said barrister, Lol Fendy xxxx My cluedo brain is working on overtime again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...