Jump to content


Firefly100 vs Barclays


Firefly100
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5134 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

Thanks saintly!

 

I'll ignore the letter then and continue as usual.

 

I've printed off the "stay objections statement" from http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o....ml#post1046820 ready to take to court with me on the 30th and will email Barclays again re settling out of court next week.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK - to be proactive I am considering sending the following letter together with the "Stay objections statement" to the judge for my file - would be great for some feedback on whether people think this is a good idea or whether I should just wait until the hearing (if it doesn't get cancelled!)

 

Dear Sir or Madam,

Claim Number: XXXXXXXXX

Claimant: XXXXXXXXXX

Defendant: Barclays Bank Plc

At my allocation hearing on 25th July 2007 the defendant, Barclays, stated they had not had time to look fully at my case due to the large volume of cases at present. The judge suggested we adjourn the hearing until 30th August 2007 at 10.30 a.m. to give the defendant more time and being reasonable I accepted this as being fair.

Subsequent to this decision and the judge on 27th July 2007 issuing a Notice of Adjourned Hearing for 30th August, I have now received correspondence from the defendant dated 7th August 2007 (attached) informing me of their intention to apply for a stay on my case pending the resolution of the OFT case. This conflicts with the directions we were given by the judge back on the 25th July to continue to work towards a settlement out of court and otherwise return to court on the 30th August 2007 at 10.30.

I have been endeavouring to resolve this case for months – initial correspondence in this regard commenced back in February 2007. I have been pro-active in endeavouring to settle this case outside of a court and have always complied with all necessary steps in a timely and efficient manner. I have also already been to court on 25th July 2007 to try to settle. At this time the defendant stated in my case they had received from me all the particulars of claim they required to deal with my case but, given their large workload, they had not had time to deal with it yet – hence the adjournment.

I had been intending to write again to the defendant next week to endeavour to negotiate a settlement before the next court hearing and if this failed, to attend on 30th July to endeavour to settle in court. In my mind this led me to believe this situation could be resolved before the end of the month – until I received this latest correspondence from the defendant re their intention to apply for a stay.

I would like to register that, given the above history, I beliieve a stay on my case at this stage in time would be unfair. I have attached herewith for the judge’s attention a statement detailing why I feel a stay would not be fair in my circumstances especially since I have tried to settle this case out of court since February 2007 and have already been to court to settle the matter once.

I would ask that the judge consider this statement when dealing with the application for a stay which the defendant has said they will be making.

Yours faithfully

Link to post
Share on other sites

That sounds OK to me :)

Any typos spelling mistakes are due to leprechauns in my keyboard they move the letters around sometimes (amended just for Bookie)

 

"How do I...?" A Dummies' Guide to this Forum

FAQ

Forum rules

Cag toolbar

 

 

Please Donate if you can - help CAG help others

 

I offer help and advice in good faith, based on my knowledge and experience. I am NOT a legal or financial expert. There are many CAG members and site team who are better qualified. Please do not make major decisions based on my advice alone.I do not give advice via P.M's. If anyone can correct my mistakes or improve on my advice, please do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

OK - so I went to my allocation hearing this morning at Kingston upon Thames County Court. There were quite a number of bank charge cases being heard for different banks and Abbey went in first which meant we didn't actually get in until gone 11.00 even tough the hearing was set for 10.30...

 

Barclay's rep Marianne Butler was talking to all Barclays's claimants before the hearing informing us she was going to be asking for a stay and handing out paper copies of the legal argument for this. I told Ms Butler that I had already written to the court and Barclays objecting to the proposed application for a stay - (letter in previous post plus statement on human rights etc I'd printed off from this site) - Miss Butler said she hadn't seen this so quickly scanned the copy I had brought for me to refer to in court and said she was familiar with this letter...

 

Anyhoo, we all trooped in - different judge from last time - not so smiley - rather like a posh Neil Fox! - there wasn't enough places for everyone to sit so a number of claimants had to stand.

 

The judge asked Ms Butler to state Barclay's position - she said that they were seeking a stay pending the outcome of the test case - she was aware that no formal application had been made but that everyone now had a copy of the skeleton argument for this.

 

The judge asked Ms Butler to outline the merits of a stay and she said a stay would ensure an expeditious and timely resolution of all issues - she asserted that it also did not make sense to have lots of identical cases being heard with different judges all over the country and all the costs incurred with that. She stated that as this morning's cases were allocation hearings we would probably not get a date until October, if the bank lost they would appeal and this court process would probably take us to the end of January anyway which was when the test case was to be heard so more timely all round if things were stayed until then. She said the claimants would be "protected and not prejudiced" by the stay and that although it was inconvenient for us to have to wait it would be no quicker to go ahead without a stay just wasteful in time and resources.

 

The judge said he wished to allay the fears of claimants that further bank charges applied in the interim would not be claimable in the future - he assured us that if the banks lose the OFT case we will be able to amend our claims to include all new charges applied to accounts - these can be post-dated on the claim form. He also said we should keep a record of costs as these can be determined at the end of the hearing.

 

We were then asked if any of us wished to speak to raise objections against the claim. I asked the judge if he had read my letter and the statement I had supplied outlinging my objections to the stay and he said he had. I tried to talk about the delay being longer if we waited for the OFT case as appeals for this might last 2 years etc and also tried to talk through some of the other arguments in the statement including asking why the banks were suddenley defending their principles now when from all my research on this site and other readings had intimated to me that the banks have only won one case anyway and in all other cases had settled - the judge said that not all cases lost by claimants had been published so basically ignored this tack.

 

I did ask about the fact that Barclays had not followed the correct court procedure in submitting the corrct form to apply for a stay together with a £65 cheque but this was discounted also.

 

In the end I gave up objecting to the stay and asked that if the stay was granted, would the judge consider stopping the banks imposing any further charges on accounts until the test case was decided. The judge asked Miss Butler what she thought about this one and she said it would be prejudicial to the banks as they were legally entitled to these charges until proved otherwise so I lost this argument too.

 

It was blatently obvious that nothing I could say was going to sway the judge not to grant the stay - he had already made up his mind that he was going to grant the stay before we even came into the room. In this sense I felt very patronised as we were obviously all just being allowed a say if we wanted one for the record but that a decision had already been made so it was all a pointless exercise and the whole trip to court was another waste of our time and expense. A couple of other claimants also had a say but to no avail.

 

Finally the judge asked a gentleman who was representing several claimants if he had anything to say regarding the stay and he answered no as he was already aware of the judge's opinion from the earlier Abbey hearing that morning - confirmed it all really - what a total waste of everyone's time in turning up at court at all.

 

So the judge ordered the stay on all cases and asserted his belief that this would create a "level playingfield" for all cases.

 

So basically, the court have my money in fees, Barclays have my money in charges and continue to keep making the charges every month and I now have to wait for possibly 2 years waiting to see if I can get any of this money back - the whole way things are panning out seems just so unfair on the consumer!

 

Not sure to apply for stay to be lifted or just drift for a bit keeping tabs on the new charges until after the test case..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Firefly

 

What a frustrating (and wasteful) time your court hearing turned out to be. Sadly, you are not alone.

 

I can't see much purpose to re-applying your Stay Objection where it has already been presented and rejected by the presiding judge - even if you were to be allocated a different judge to consider it, it's unlikely he will undermine his fellow judge by over-ruling.

 

Every time you post on here and log in to read your replies, add it to your £9.25 per hour Costs :)

3 Active Claims:

Barclays Refund of Bank Charges (Sole account) - Applied to lift court ordered Stay

Barclays Refund of Bank Charges (Joint account) - Awaiting court date

Barclays Refund of Bank Charges (Joint account) Pre-6 yrs- LBA sent.

 

 

3 Wins :

Barclays t/a The Woolwich (Data Protection Act breach costs & compliance)

HSBC (on behalf of brother)

Settled Out of Court - £3,874.76

Alliance & Leicester (on behalf of friend)

Settled Out of Court - £723.41

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...