HELP!!! -abbey claim

[nowayjose]

HELP!!!!!!

Just had a letter from the Abbey "A copy of the Defence that they have filed with the court". Its dated 26th July,

I'm really scared now, and unsure of what to do?

If this goes to court and I lose, do I have to pay their costs?

 

 

Hi cicerone, Ive also had a copy of the defence filed with the court dated 27th July, feeling just the same as you at this point, how much are you claiming for and have they offered you a gesture of goodwill??

Im dreading putting together a court bundle now it all looks so confusing:confused:

Keep us posted

nowayjose x

[cicerone]

I'm claiming for £2799-00. They did originally offer me £385-00!!!! (as if!)...

 

It is good to know others are up to the same stage, and it does help to keep me feeling stronger about it all.

 

 

Their Defence reads as follows;

"

1. Save as is specifically admitted in this Defence, the Defendant denies each and every allegation set out in the Particulars of Claim.

 

2. It is admitted that the Claimant has a bank account with the Defendant, account number to be particularised.

 

3. At all times the Account has been subject to the applicable terms and conditions ("Conditions"), which form part of the contract between the Claimant and the Defendant and to which the Claimant agreed when he opened the Account. The Defendant will refer at trial to the full conditions but for the purposes of this Defence will refer to the following extracts;

A. You can apply for an overdraft on your account. If we give you an overdraft we will tell you your limit and the interest rate applicable

B. An unauthorised overdraft occurs if without our agreement you overdraw your Account or exceed the limit of an overdraft which we have agreed.

C. If you have an unauthorised overdraft, you will be charged fees as set out in our tariff of Charges or specified to you and these may include fees for transations we are unable to process due to lack of available funds in your Account.

 

4. Throughtout the period that he has had the Account, the Claimant received a number of copies of Conditions and of the said Tariff of Charges as they were amended and updated (though there has been no material amendment to the Conditions extracted in paragraphs 3(1), (2) and (3) above.

 

5. Any overdraft facility on the Account was (and is) subject to the conditions.

 

6. The Claimant has overdrawn or exceeded authorised overdraft limits on the Account on a number of separate occasions, full details of which will be provided on disclosure. Therefore by virtue of the Conditions referred to in paragraph 3 above such overdrawing was unauthorised and in breach of contract and the Claimant became liable to pay fees to the Defendant in accordance with its Tariff of Charges applicable at the relevant time. In accordance with the Conditions, such fees were debited to the Account.

 

7. In view of the facts and matters referred to in paragraphs 3,4,5 and 6 above, the Defendant denies that the amount of £2799-00 or any other, amount was unlawfully debited to the Account and the Claimant's claim for the repayment of that amount is therefore denied.

 

8. The Claimant's contention that the said fees are unenforceable and/or are "penalty charges" is denied. The fees reflect and are proportionate to the Defendant's administrative expenses incurred due to the Claimant's breach of contract and are a genuine pre-estimateof the damage suffered by the Defendant.

 

9. Further or in the alternative, even if the said fees are not proportionate to the Defendant's admistrative expenses incurred (which is denied), the Claimant remains liable to pay such fees as may be found to be proportionate and the Claimant is not entitled to claim repayment of the full amount of each charge made to the Account.

 

10. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to claim interest of any amount.

 

11. No admissions are made as to the amounts claimed by the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof of the same.

 

The Defendant believes that the facts stated in this defence are true.

Signed by Vivian Roux."

 

Are anyone else's letters different to this?

 

Should I wait for the court to get in touch now?

Also, I have not really prepared my "court bundle", and am really unsure of how to go about this?

[cicerone]

Also, need help with my court bundle. I havent got a clue what to do...

[ohoh4312]

Hi cicerone

 

The defence you have received is exactly the same as mine, just signed by a different paralegal.

 

The next step will be that the Court write to you, confirming receipt of the defence, and advising you of the next stage - I received an AQ to file, but some courts are dispensing with this.

 

Don't worry about the whole court procedure thing - easier said than done, I know, but I can assure you if this quivering wreck (me), can do it, then so can everyone

 

You do not have to worry about a Court bundle yet - hate to say it but that could be months off. But by all means read up on the bundles to give yourself a headstart, and also on the AQ procedure, in case the Court decide to issue one.

 

You will be fine, I promise - shAbbey seem to have the monopoly on scare tactics, but thanks to this site we can always try to be one step ahead and not be intimidated by them.

 

Chin up - CAG is with you every step of the way:)

 

Lotsa luv

 

Jo xx

[cicerone]

Thanks Jo, Its so reassuring knowing others are going through the same. When I got my letter yesterday, I just burst into tears (yes, typical wimpy woman). I had previously claimed money from the halifax and got that back no problem, so guess I am just shocked by the turn of events with the Abbey. I will never use them again!

Will look for some more info. on court bundles though, as I want to keep on top of things.

Thanks xx

Lisa.

ps. I have been looking at your own posts and they are keeping me going too.

[ohoh4312]

ps. I have been looking at your own posts and they are keeping me going too.

Well then, you know exactly what I mean about me being a quivering wreck!

 

And as for you being a typical wimpy woman, no way - they have had me in tears too. But the tears will soon turn to ones of joy methinks!!

 

Power to the little people

 

Jo xx

[nowayjose]

Hi cicerone, yes my defence letter is the same except on point 10. The Defendant denies the Claimant is entitled to claim interest in the amount of £174.38, or any other amount. And my letter is signed by Willem Basson. Dated 27th July. My claim is for £2696.38.... just waiting to hear that it is transferred to my local court which will probably be Pontypridd... not looking forward to doing the court bundle, whats the chances of them offering a decent GOGW before going to court?? Pretty slim I suppose...

 

Oh well if they want a fight, theyve got it!!

 

Good luck

 

NWJ x

[cicerone]

Hi Everyone, Thanks again for your notes of encouragement. Youv'e all put a smile back on my face again. Until the next panic attack!! haha

 

Just received a letter advising that the claim has been transferred to my local court, and all communication should be addressed to them.

 

I take it I should now wait to hear from my local court?

 

xxx

[Bigmac versus]

Yes wait for now.

The defence is standard and nothing to worry about, keep the thread updated.

[cicerone]

Thanks x

 

I've been looking around the site for a basic court bundle and not sure if I am finding the right thing or not.

 

Could you send me a link I could look at and print?. Plus any other advice.

I'm feeling a bit thick right now.

 

x

[Bigmac versus]

You arent thick have a look in here.

 

GOT A COURT DATE? A guide to the later stages

[cicerone]

Wow, thanks, this will keep me busy.

 

Once again, I have to say, thank you to everyone on here, for all your help, kindness and support.

 

xx

[lisam1969]

I have just read your defence and is exacetly the same as mine to the word, and also signed by same person on 27th july, so will subscribe to your threads so we can both see what stage we are progressing, I tool also panicked a bit when the defence arrived, but all the reading i have done on this site since Feb 06 this all seems standard abbey practice...

[pinkbabez]

Mines exactly the same to, except signed on 31st

[cicerone]

Hi everyone, just received a letter from the Abbey (I can think of a few other names, but am biting my tongue here!), advising me that they have asked the courts for a Stay. So basically they are trying to put my claim on hold until the outcome of the test case.

 

I am not a happy gal....

[cicerone]

Hi everyone,

 

Well I got fed up of waiting for the courts to get in touch, so spent ages trying to get through. Eventually managed it and was told that they had sent out a letter requesting £100-00 AQ fee.

 

Great more money, I dont have. Will have to pay up and do a bit more waiting I guess.

 

x:(

[cicerone]

Hi,

I have received a letter (at last) from my court, as follows

 

NOTICE TO PAY FEE

 

A fee of £100-00 is payable unless you make an application for a fee exeption or remission.

 

-----------------------

 

Has anyone else had this?

I will be paying tomorrow.

 

Also, what should be my next plan of action?

 

Thanks,

Lisa.

[ohoh4312]

Hi Lisa

 

Sorry - I have been preoccupied looking at Secondary schools for my son, scary! - so I haven't been on here as much.

 

Anyhow, it looks as if your Court have dispensed with the AQ, but unfortunately because your claim is over £1500, the fee is still payable. Seems stupid to me, to pay for nothing but there you go!

 

Then you just have to wait - again! - for the Courts' instructions; either a Hearing, further directions, or a stay. In the event of the latter, you need to prepare an argument against a stay. All the info is here:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/17065-application-removal-stay-updated.html#post1046820

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/108430-stays-info-guidance.html

 

Hope that helps a bit.

 

Lotsa luv

 

Jo xx

[cicerone]

anyone know how i can paste a document on here! Trying for ages and not having much success. x

[ohoh4312]

Hi Lisa

 

If you select the text of the document, ie left-click at the start and drag the cursor to the bottom, then right-click and select "copy", the come here and right-click and select "paste" that should work.

 

Don't know if that is the "official" way to do it, but it works for me!!

 

Hope that helps.

 

Lotsa luv

 

Jo xx

[Lula]

Jo, thats the way I do it too lol

[cicerone]

Hi Everyone,

Got another crappy letter from the Shabby today. Basically it was a copy of their letter to the courts asking for a further stay on my case.

Its soooo frustrating, and I feel I should be firing off a letter myself.

Anyone else feeling the same? Or does anyone know of anything I can do?

Cicerone (fed up).

[ohoh4312]

Hiya hun - long time "no speak" and all that!

 

Why did you get a letter today?? Was it because your stay was limited to a definative date? I am just jealous because mine was not time-barred - the London Olympics could be over before my case is sorted!

 

Let us know the details, and in the mean time I hope you are keeping well.

 

Lotsa luv

 

Jo xx

[cicerone]

Here's a copy of my letter.

[cicerone]

We refer to the Court Order dated 26 September 2007 staying the above claim pending the ultimate determination of the Commercial Court litigation. or 31 March 2008, whichever is sooner. This claim was stayed in light of the litigation taking place in the High Court between the Office of Fair Trading and Abbey National Plc and others (Claim no. 2007, Folio 1186) ("the OFT proceedings").

 

A trial of certain prelimanary legal issues in the OFT proceedings has recently taken place in the High Court of Justice, Commercial Court, London, before Mr Justice Andrew Smith. The first hearing of the OFT Proceedings concluded on 8 February 2008, with judgment being reserved.

 

As a result of the complex legal and factual issues arising in the OFT proceedings and the need to manage practically these issues, certain preliminary issues were left outstanding as at the conclusion of the hearing. We understand that it is anticipated, subject to appeals by either the OFT or the Banks involved, or both, that the remaining further preliminary issues will be addressed in a second phase of the OFT proceedings as soon as this can be arranged following judgment on the phase which has just been completed.

 

At the recent hearing the Court confirmed its views that the OFT proceedings are the most appropriate mechanism for the resolution of the issues raised in the County Court claims. In this regard, Mr Justice Andrew Smith remarked as follows on Wednesday 6 February 2008:

 

"I understand that many proceedings have been on hold in the expectation that this case will assist the management of the county court litigation, and the expectation that every effort will be made to provide that assistance with undue delay... I haven't discerned anything during the hearing that undermines or significantly detracts from that expectation, and I certainly don't mind that being conveyed to those charged with managing the county court cases..."

 

While it is anticipated that judgment is being prepared as quickly as possible, Justice Smith has indicated that it is not possible to predict accurately when his judgment will be handed down. In addition, as indicated above, it is presently anticipated by the parties and the Court that, irrespective of the result, further hearings in the OFT proceedings and/or appeals will be required before all the relevant legal and factual issues are finally determined.

 

For these reasons, we respectfully submit that the appropriate mechanism for the resolution of the issues raised in the claim before you remains the OFT proceedings. In the circumstances, and in order to ensure effective case management and consistent and fiar treatment of similar cases throughout the County Courts, we would respectfully request that the stay on the above claim is extended and that the following order be made:

 

"Upon reading the Defendant's letter dated 25 March 2008;

 

And upon it appearing that the legal principles in this case are the subject of litigation commenced by the Office of Fair Trading against certain banks in the High Court of Justice, Case Number 2007, Folio 1186 (" the OFT test case").

 

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

 

1. The claim be stayed pending the final determination of the OFT test case, to include any appeal.

 

2. Permission to be given to apply to lift the stay or to set aside or vary this order within 7 days of the service of the Order. Any application shall be on notice to all parties and shall be supported by a statement setting out why this claim should proceed before the final determination fo the OFT test case.

 

3. Unless the Court has already given directions, the Claimant may within three months of the final determination of the OFT test case apply to a District Judge sitting at the the County Court where the claim is proceeding for directions for the future conduct of this action".

 

We would ask that this letter be referred to the District Judge at the earliest opportunity. We should also be grateful if it were possible for the Court to respond before the expiry date.

 

Abbey National

 

--------------------------

 

 

I am clueless as to what I should be doing.....

I want to fire a letter off saying "this should be settled now"