bp v abbey x2

[bp]

Well i've finally got my head down and round two began on 30yh April. Prelim letter sent. let's see how long this one takes!

[katesage]

Yaaaaayyyy!! Good luck on this claim BP:)

[bp]

hi all, i've not said anything for a while, bit too much going on at home.

 

Update: finally put claim in and Abbey had to respond by the 6th Aug. They acknowledged with he intention to defend on the 26th July, i've jut had an email from my favourite person at Abbey our lovely Inga to say that just in case i didn't know, abbey are applying for a stay of all cases, i've asked my court and they have said that my case is still ongoing. Is there a generic response to the courts when the banks ask for a stay? has a stay of all cases been agreed?

 

any advice would be much appreciated.

[Michael Browne]

Stay, Application for removal of: UPDATED

Application for removal of a stay - UPDATED TO ACCOUNT FOR OFT TEST CASE

Stays re: OFT Test Case - Info & Guidance

~~## Stays info and guidance ##~~

[bp]

thanks Michael, just found the link. Sorry i was just being lazy!

 

On a lighter note, right under Inga's email was "Ashurst, winner of law firm of the year 2007" God! i wonder what they had to do to get that? fob as many people as poss? offer lower amounts to claimants thereby still saving their clients money?

[bp]

I decided to be a bit cheeky and asked her if this new strategy of avoiding paying out money also applied to abbey suspending all future charges from its customers accounts? lets see if she replies to that!

[bp]

well she's a busy woman1 this is her reply

The whole purpose of the commencement of the Test Case is to clarify the law in this area. Abbey will continue to post updates on its websites to keep customers informed on progress of the Test case.

I feel like sending a message asking why if this issue needs clarification, why has abbey applied thse charges and why does still apply them while the issue is going to court?

[bp]

Quick update, i received the usual letter, Abbey will be asking for a stay of my case, they've acknowledged my case twice! and today, i got a copy of their defence. This defence is different from the other one back in April. Does anyone know if a copy of their new defence is posted on this site somewhere?

 

4.3 if the defendant honoured the payment instruction in question, the Defendant thereby accepted the claimant's offer.

 

4.4 Accordingly, the claimant became bound to pay interest and charges in relation to that loan at the stipulated rate.

 

4.5 That liability does not at common law, constitute a penalty charge.

 

 

 

 

So these are longer Breaches of contracts but loans? Anyone recognises this? Is this the new standard defence?

 

Thanks in advance

[Lula]

Hi BP long time no speak, yes it represents a change, BUT it is in response to Abbeys changes of terms and conditions, and if you have seen them then you will know that they are penalty charges by a different name, they have just changed what they call it and (so they say) how they apply it. unfortunately even Abbey cant backdate their own terms and conditions, so it really means jack IMHO, nontheless, i think that GaryH might like a look at it

[bp]

Hey Lula hun thanks very much.

 

I guess i'll just have to send the usual strike outs but include a copy of their prev defence. first thing, need to find out if they have asked the court for a stay.

[GaryH]

Funnily enough I got exactly the same defence through yesterday for my o/h's claim.

unfortunately even Abbey cant backdate their own terms and conditions

Exactly. They've defended based on terms which weren't even thought of at the time the charges were taken, let alone in existance. Its a completely invalid defence. I'm going for summary judgment on mine - I.e an application that the defence should be struck out and judgment granted without a full hearing becouse the defence has no real prospect of success.

[bp]

Quick Q, since i'll be applying for a strike out, will i still need to complete my AQ and pay the fee? Got to return my AQ by the 31st of Aug.

[GaryH]

Yup, 'fraid so!