MARTIN3030 Virgin Media charges ROUND 3

[havinastella]

webbs, don't have a fax number

[webbscatering]

webbs, don't have a fax number

 

You a nightmare...lol:p, Dont think for one moment I going to type that out now, I'm not like you I need my beauty sleep:lol:. Let me see what i can do.

[havinastella]

I have an email address

[webbscatering]

I have an email address

 

Yes thanks for that i have about twelve of those:lol:.

 

RapidShare: Easy Filehosting

This link will download the file you need, you will need to open it with "winrar", Cheers kev

[MARTIN3030]

Thanks emma, I am aware of that part. I however disagree that it is likely to succeed and until it is proven as successfully doing so by somebody experienced I would recommend to err on the side of caution.

 

All that needs to happen is that one member of staff within Virgin or a bank decides, 'Ok, I don't like this bloke, we're going to mess them right up', and you're done. Unless you have the relevant experience don't try anything new - just my recommendation.

 

 

 

It would cost them too much time and money to "Mess them right up "...and with no costs awarded

 

LegalPickle -if you have case evidence specifically to show a win by VM then please tell us-I dont know of any.

 

In fact to the contrary in the cases that I have seen thats got anywhere near the court front door-VM have usually lost lots of favour already by their late submissions etc.

 

 

Lets be clear -we are not talking of £1000s as in some bank claims-for most claims here we are talking of merely of a couple of hundred quid.

 

With reference to limitation-this would amount to them having to defend part of the claim-and is something the banks had second thoughts with, theres no reason to suspect VM would do things differently.

 

Hence onward and upwards-and good luck to those claiming.Again it would be nice to see everyone with their own threads.....to tell all about it when they pay out

[havinastella]

thanks Kevin.

 

And Martin, you know I have a thread open. N1 to be served at end of month.

 

JOgs

[legalpickle]

It would cost them too much time and money to "Mess them right up "...and with no costs awarded

 

LegalPickle -if you have case evidence specifically to show a win by VM then please tell us-I dont know of any.

 

In fact to the contrary in the cases that I have seen thats got anywhere near the court front door-VM have usually lost lots of favour already by their late submissions etc.

 

 

Lets be clear -we are not talking of £1000s as in some bank claims-for most claims here we are talking of merely of a couple of hundred quid.

 

With reference to limitation-this would amount to them having to defend part of the claim-and is something the banks had second thoughts with, theres no reason to suspect VM would do things differently.

 

Hence onward and upwards-and good luck to those claiming.Again it would be nice to see everyone with their own threads.....to tell all about it when they pay out

 

I am just making people aware of all the risks - something that should be done. With the banks, the first ten thousand at least were settled without much difficulty, it was only when it got really bad for them that they started dragging their feet.

 

Anything is possible and one should be prepared. I've seen cases struck out on the basis of £20 being claimed that shouldn't have been and costs awarded. So have colleagues - who are Solicitor's, even though I'm not - so I would be more cautious and forget about the extra £20 going back out of the limitation period.

[MARTIN3030]

I am just making people aware of all the risks - something that should be done. With the banks, the first ten thousand at least were settled without much difficulty, it was only when it got really bad for them that they started dragging their feet.

 

 

No LP - It got really bad for them when THEY KNEW that they had no game plan to address things-and it wasnt for lack of trying.

The ones that were settled were only done so after the revolt and efforts of the claimants-lets be clear,the Banks dragged their feet from day 1 and continue to do so.

 

The OFT case was always going to surface-the Banks knew this because they had already seen Credit card charges investigated and ruled on in 2006 (albeit outside the courtrooms)

[legalpickle]

I am just making people aware of all the risks - something that should be done. With the banks, the first ten thousand at least were settled without much difficulty, it was only when it got really bad for them that they started dragging their feet.

 

 

No LP - It got really bad for them when THEY KNEW that they had no game plan to address things-and it wasnt for lack of trying.

The ones that were settled were only done so after the revolt and efforts of the claimants-lets be clear,the Banks dragged their feet from day 1 and continue to do so.

 

The OFT case was always going to surface-the Banks knew this because they had already seen Credit card charges investigated and ruled on in 2006 (albeit outside the courtrooms)

 

Risks are involved in every court action and they should be assessed by each Claimant based on their own circumstances. It is not right to not cover the risks as well, and that's what I was doing. If people are confident and not worried about those risks, then good on them and I hope they win, but not telling people of the risks is not right.

 

2 weeks ago, a friend put somebody in touch with me for advice. He had issued a small claim thinking there was no risk of costs and has now been served with a costs schedule, so wanted advice. He had no clue of CPR 27.14 about the reasonableness test, had he had any clue he would have been more cautious. He got his advice mainly from forums, like this one, and nobody had told him of the risks. Thankfully with my advice he managed to rectify the situation, but it could have been a lot worse - £3k worse!

[Bookworm]

Martin is perfectly correct, no bank ever settled happily and without trying to discourage claimants in the first instance. They tried every tactic under the sun to make people go away or settle for less than they were due. Anybody who thinks otherwise is obviously not as clued up as they think.

 

As regards the Limitation Act, there is no harm in adding these to the claim, and if VM settles out of court, all good, if VM were to go to court, then the judge can deal with those separately (2 different arguments deriving from one - a) lawfulness of the charges THEN b) statute-barred or not). The only issue arises if VM settles before court but digs their heels in about the 6 yrs+ charges, in which case one has to decide whether to go to court on those charges alone.

 

As for CPR 27.14, it is highly unlikely a judge would award costs based on an action which is based on law, may or may not have a valid argument (no precedent set as of yet) and which the claimant brought out on good faith. If that were the case, no-one would dare bring out a case ever in case they get landed with costs, and the beauty of the Small Claims system is that it is designed precisely to protect the litigant in person from exorbitant costs when they bring actions against big corporations. What you refer to is CPR 27.14 (2) (g) which is the exception to CPR 27.14 (2):

The court may not order a party to pay a sum to another party in respect of that other party's costs, fees and expenses, including those relating to an appeal

 

As for your mate, if he only got advice from forums without doing his homework and finding things for himself as well, then he deserved everything coming to him, frankly.

[MARTIN3030]

Thank you LP.

Of course it would be correct to say that in the nature of things,there are risks to consider-and that is highlighted in many places throughout the site.

But CAG has been around for over 2 years and I think its fair to say that this site has made its mark by demonstrating an ability to embrace the processes.

However any advice offered either from the site team or individuals is wholly up to users as to whether to take it or not.

[legalpickle]

Martin is perfectly correct, no bank ever settled happily and without trying to discourage claimants in the first instance. They tried every tactic under the sun to make people go away or settle for less than they were due. Anybody who thinks otherwise is obviously not as clued up as they think.

 

As regards the Limitation Act, there is no harm in adding these to the claim, and if VM settles out of court, all good, if VM were to go to court, then the judge can deal with those separately (2 different arguments deriving from one - a) lawfulness of the charges THEN b) statute-barred or not). The only issue arises if VM settles before court but digs their heels in about the 6 yrs+ charges, in which case one has to decide whether to go to court on those charges alone.

 

As for CPR 27.14, it is highly unlikely a judge would award costs based on an action which is based on law, may or may not have a valid argument (no precedent set as of yet) and which the claimant brought out on good faith. If that were the case, no-one would dare bring out a case ever in case they get landed with costs, and the beauty of the Small Claims system is that it is designed precisely to protect the litigant in person from exorbitant costs when they bring actions against big corporations. What you refer to is CPR 27.14 (2) (g) which is the exception to CPR 27.14 (2):

 

As for your mate, if he only got advice from forums without doing his homework and finding things for himself as well, then he deserved everything coming to him, frankly.

 

 

Firstly it wasn't a mate, it was a mate of a mate. I'm not mates with such stupid people ;-) Yes, he did deserve everything coming to him, however to help prevent something like that happening it is best to let people know the risks.

 

Yes, it is extremely rare that costs are awarded in small claims, but it happens and people should be aware of it. I believe that at last estimate 85% of small claims cases are settled prior to hearing, but out of the remaining 15% anything can happen.

 

The reasonableness test depends on the judge and the parties. Unfortunately it is impossible to predict the outcome, therefore in my opinion best to err on the side of caution.

 

In this specific case, the Claimant had tried adding claims for a variety of things and written his Particulars of Claim as 28 pages long for a £950 claim! That's before any attachments, statements or evidence of any sort, just the statements after the Claim form regarding the case!

 

Had I done the same claim, I would have made the PoC 3 pages long [max] and claimed £280, and that's being generous. He refused to settle for less than £800 [reasonable if he was entitled to all of it], they had offered him £350. He had then submitted statements in response to their defence [which was 2 pages long] of 36 pages excluding witness statements!

 

All of it was based on advice from forums like CAG. So yes, he deserved what was coming to him, but had people made him aware of the risks whilst in the forums, there was a good chance he would have been smarter.

 

If a claim does get to hearing and the judge does not accept part of the claim, it is not likely costs will be awarded, but it has happened and people need to be aware of the risks.

 

I'll leave it with that disclaimer.

[emmaf01]

Well we have the result of the SAR and it seems to be partially useless and inaccurate. We have a list of computer print outs of the account input logs- the notes put into the system when we phone with a query (or a technical difficulty). Then we have a few sheets of account balances (for the Telewest era) with no charges logged(even though we had them) and then some partial bill printouts from the virgin era but with what we suspect is a large amount of the late payment charges missing.

 

For many months we know we got stuck one months behind with payment- we know we incurred loads of these charges. But not if you look at these printouts.

 

Also in the covering letter, they ask for clarification for what we mean by manual intervention, so they can provide info?

[MARTIN3030]

strange.What many people do not know is that a data controller can refuse to satisfy a request if its not specific.

Many people simply ask for a list of late payment charges.

The request should be for copy statements showing all transactions between .....and......

They are not obliged to give you a list of late charges.Its for you to get this info from the statements.

Looks like they have sent you Screenshots.

My Telewest SAR came back the size of a yellow pages.

You are entitled to contact VM and say that you do not feel they complied in full with your DPA request.

Ask specifically for copy statements.

[hawk1979]

Hi guys,

 

I have read this thread with care and i guess that i can claim the charges back from the company who happen to be Virgin Media now. If i have read this properly could you please pm me and send me a link for a copy of a letter i should send to them to request this.

[emmaf01]

If you have all the statements, just adapt the bank charges prelim letter.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/671-2-letter-preliminary-approach.html

 

If you need to get all of the statements, adapt the SAR, here.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/516-1-data-protection-act.html

[stikky62]

I've not yet started my claim for the Late payment charges (too busy with DCA's and dont want too much going on at once - it's getting confusing ),,, but what's the latest opinion on going for the non DD fees too?

 

Webby - did you claim for the non DD's or was it just late payment charges?

[legalpickle]

I don't know if it's been covered before in this thread, and it may be irrelevant but there was a Solicitor a while ago who tried to claim the non-D/D fees from British Trouble and lost big time.

 

Whilst the case was not a precedent, it was very well publicized so if a claim here went to court there may be a good chance that the judge would rely on that case - which they are allowed to, whilst not being obligated to.

 

I'd say the late payment charges are easier to claim than non-D/D fees.

 

Just my two pence!

[emmaf01]

I'm focussing solely on the late payment fees.

[stikky62]

Didn't the solicitor that made the claim for non DD's fee put in an appeal?....and has there been an outcome on that yet?

 

And what if we ever follow Ireland and (was it?) France and the non dd fee becomes illegal ~ would it be reclaimable then?

 

One last question. In my S.A.R i put:

 

Furthermore, if I discover that you have levied disproportionate penalties against me, then I shall be reclaiming them, and also reclaiming the enclosed £10 Data Protection Act subject access request fee.

 

Should i claim for that £10 fee also? (including interest from the day they received it?)

 

thanks all, i think i'm ready now

[legalpickle]

Didn't the solicitor that made the claim for non DD's fee put in an appeal?....and has there been an outcome on that yet?

No clue but would be interesting to know.

 

And what if we ever follow Ireland and (was it?) France and the non dd fee becomes illegal ~ would it be reclaimable then?

You can't apply rules from another country, EU or otherwise, unless it is a Directive that relates to the whole EU.

One last question. In my S.A.R i put:

 

Furthermore, if I discover that you have levied disproportionate penalties against me, then I shall be reclaiming them, and also reclaiming the enclosed £10 Data Protection Act subject access request fee.

 

Should i claim for that £10 fee also? (including interest from the day they received it?)

In my opinion - yes.

thanks all, i think i'm ready now

Good Luck!

 

Please keep us posted.

[stikky62]

Will do.

 

I've got a thread going (its on page 4 of this forum)...i'll update once i've sent the claim in and get a response

[emmaf01]

I've just had the worst phone conversation with Virgin. It was about a different issue, when I thought I'd just ask them to send copies of all our bills/statements as a lot of info is missing from our SAR.

 

I had explained about the SAR, the woman phoned customer services (i was talking to customer relations- how many "customer departments does a company terrible at dealing with customers need?).

 

She came back and told me that I would have to pay £2 per bill and it would take 90 days. I re-explained about a SAR and asked if they were refusing to give me information they held on my account. They said bills aren't covered in a SAR.

 

I am being specific about this as we have received nothing apart from a couple of balances for our account for the first seven months of the account in the information already received.

 

So my letter before action is off, recorded delivery today, and they only have 12 days left. God, they really made me angry.

[hawk1979]

Hi everyone,

 

Just had an intresting conversation with Virgin complaints over the phone, there said there gonna respond in writing and give me a run down of the charges etc.. should be fun to see what excuse there come up with. Also there gave me a different address to request all the statments on my account since day one, which of course i'm going to do hehe. If anyone else is intrested the address is

 

Virgin Media

Wigmore House

Wigmore

Luton

LU2 9EX

[emmaf01]

Just wondering what to do as today we had the response to the prelim-

 

Blah, Blah, re- your letter, sorry if you are not happy....

 

If regular payments are not maintained, late payment charges of £10 per bill will be applied. This is contained in our terms and conditions as follows:

 

F Paying for you services

 

31. You must ensure that your payments are received by Virgin Media Payments by the due date for payment shown on your bill. If you do not pay your bills on time, you will be liable to interest or other charges on your default.

 

These charges are therefore correct and chargeable.

 

I understand that ****************** contacted you at the beginning of this week concerning the provision of your S.A.R - (Subject Access Request).

 

I understand that this is not the outcome for which you had hoped, However I do not believe Virgin Media have mishandled our case and as such I have now deadlocked your complaint. I confirm that this is Virgin Media's final decision in this matter and will not address any further issues or requests in relation to this complaint.

 

If you wish to have your complaint case reviewed independently, you may do this by contacting CISAS on **************.

 

Yours sincerely, ************

 

Any thoughts? Do I just wait and send the LBA next week as usual?

 

I don't see why I should refer to CISAS, when my complaint is deadlocked and won't be looked at again!