Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have just read the smaller print on their signs. It says that you can pay at the end of your parking session. given that you have ten minutes grace period the 35 seconds could easily have been taken up with walking back to your car, switching on the engine and then driving out. Even in my younger days when I used to regularly exceed speed limits, I doubt I could have done that in 35 seconds even when I  had a TR5.
    • Makers of insect-based animal feed hope to be able to compete with soybeans on price.View the full article
    • Thank you for posting up the results from the sar. The PCN is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. Under Section 9 [2][a] they are supposed to specify the parking time. the photographs show your car in motion both entering and leaving the car park thus not parking. If you have to do a Witness Statement later should they finally take you to Court you will have to continue to state that even though you stayed there for several hours in a small car park and the difference between the ANPR times and the actual parking period may only be a matter of a few minutes  nevertheless the CEL have failed to comply with the Act by failing to specify the parking period. However it looks as if your appeal revealed you were the driver the deficient PCN will not help you as the driver. I suspect that it may have been an appeal from the pub that meant that CEL offered you partly a way out  by allowing you to claim you had made an error in registering your vehicle reg. number . This enabled them to reduce the charge to £20 despite them acknowledging that you hadn't registered at all. We have not seen the signs in the car park yet so we do not what is said on them and all the signs say the same thing. It would be unusual for a pub to have  a Permit Holders Only sign which may discourage casual motorists from stopping there. But if that is the sign then as it prohibits any one who doesn't have a permit, then it cannot form a contract with motorists though it may depend on how the signs are worded.
    • Defence and Counterclaim Claim number XXX Claimant Civil Enforcement Limited Defendant XXXXXXXXXXXXX   How much of the claim do you dispute? I dispute the full amount claimed as shown on the claim form.   Do you dispute this claim because you have already paid it? No, for other reasons.   Defence 1. The Defendant is the recorded keeper of XXXXXXX  2. It is denied that the Defendant entered into a contract with the Claimant. 3. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was simply contracted by the landowner to provide car-park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant has authority to bring this claim. 4. In any case it is denied that the Defendant broke the terms of a contract with the Claimant. 5. The Claimant is attempting double recovery by adding an additional sum not included in the original offer. 6. In a further abuse of the legal process the Claimant is claiming £50 legal representative's costs, even though they have no legal representative. 7. The Particulars of Claim is denied in its entirety. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all. Signed I am the Defendant - I believe that the facts stated in this form are true XXXXXXXXXXX 01/05/2024   Defendant's date of birth XXXXXXXXXX   Address to which notices about this claim can be sent to you  
    • pop up on the bulk court website detailed on the claimform. [if it is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] . When you select ‘Register’, you will be taken to a screen titled ‘Sign in using Government Gateway’.  Choose ‘Create sign in details’ to register for the first time.  You will be asked to provide your name, email address, set a password and a memorable recovery word. You will be emailed your Government Gateway 12-digit User ID.  You should make a note of your memorable word, or password as these are not included in the email.<<**IMPORTANT**  then log in to the bulk court Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform . defend all leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit the website .get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486334-CPR-31.14-Request-to-use-on-receipt-of-a-PPC-(-Private-Land-Parking-Court-Claim type your name ONLY no need to sign anything .you DO NOT await the return of paperwork. you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Seminole v Abbey: £10,235 RECEIVED


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6353 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

Massive congrats!!!:D

Have been following this thread tentaviely for a whiel.

 

Can I ask, when would you recommend the declaration, when a claim amount is very high or when they are messing you around? Just curious!!

 

Well done, inspiring!

 

Carly;)

Lloyds TSB credit card-Judgement by default filed 8/06/07

 

Virgin credit card-£120 claimed Settled in full

Business barclaycard-£200 claimed Settled in full

Business a/c-£961.31 claimed Settled in full

NatWest personal a/c-£3010.28 claimed Settled in full

Abbey business a/c-£2390.96 Settled in full

Halifax personal a/c-£497 claimed Settled in full

HSBC credit card-£175.65 claimed Settled in full

Co-op credit card-£150 claimed Settled in full

NatWest business a/c-£250.00 claimed Settled in full

Halifax personal a/c2-£336 claimed Settled in full

Lloyds Business a/c-£1027 claimed Settled in full:lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 285
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Massive congrats!!!:D

Have been following this thread tentaviely for a whiel.

 

Can I ask, when would you recommend the declaration, when a claim amount is very high or when they are messing you around? Just curious!!

 

Well done, inspiring!

 

Carly;)

 

I think that has to be a judgement call Carly, its a dangerous business and it can all go pete tong, I dont think that Semi would endorse anything like that, it is what is appropriate at the time to your own specific case :)

Lula

 

Lula v Abbey - Settled

Lula v Abbey (2) - Settled

Lula v Abbey (3) - Stayed

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't want to take the responsibility of advising anyone to go down the path of seeking a declaration. It is risky.

 

However, I intend to try to make Abbey have to explain why they took this approach to my claim. There is only one answer and they won't want to give it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

All very interesting-thank you!:D

Lloyds TSB credit card-Judgement by default filed 8/06/07

 

Virgin credit card-£120 claimed Settled in full

Business barclaycard-£200 claimed Settled in full

Business a/c-£961.31 claimed Settled in full

NatWest personal a/c-£3010.28 claimed Settled in full

Abbey business a/c-£2390.96 Settled in full

Halifax personal a/c-£497 claimed Settled in full

HSBC credit card-£175.65 claimed Settled in full

Co-op credit card-£150 claimed Settled in full

NatWest business a/c-£250.00 claimed Settled in full

Halifax personal a/c2-£336 claimed Settled in full

Lloyds Business a/c-£1027 claimed Settled in full:lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seminole

Welldone and have enjoyed the ride and enjoy the money what was yours anyway but enjoy what ever you do with it.:):):);)

DONT FORGET TO DONATE TO THIS SITE WHEN YOU WIN THANKYOU

If you dont it wont be here:x

 

Let battle commence!!!!!:mad:

All advice and opinions given by people on this site are personal, and are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, please seek qualified professional legal Help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Crap, crap, crap.

 

Grand total is £8,196.50 plus interest of £3.050.74= £11,247.24

 

No wonder they didn't want to send me the bloody statements.

 

Think how much you would of got if you claimed contractual interest - you could of got onto the Multi-track if you wanted.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there have just read your thread with interest we have just received a letter back from abbey saying that the charges are not excessive and if we do proceed with it we will risk the closure of our account. We have already opened another bank account in readiness our claim is for £10,700 plus interest. We are going to go the fast track do you have any help for us with completing the forms or advice? we would really welcome this as we are a first time novice at this.

 

Regards

Catherine:)

:D :D :DMoney in account £13216.66!!!!

GMAC - stmnts rec'vd letter requesting £1662 refund of chrges MCOL on line being issued for ERC

SPML - issued MCOL on 21.11.06!

Kensington - statements received letter requesting £2455.55 refund of charges issuing MCOL for ERC

MBNA - refund £341 offered-sent letter requesting refund of £3846.59 charges!!!!!!

Capital One-going to issue MCOL for £1243!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope you're not going to do a Spicey on us and retire to the backbenches? Mind you, both of you deserve at least a long holiday with all you've both put into all this site whilst having your own claims going on. I take my hat of to you. Well done anyway Seminole.:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Email to Working Lunch:

 

Dear Mr Knight

 

Dave XXXX from the Consumer Action Group (CAG) suggested that I should contact you regarding my successful claim against Abbey for the return of just over £10k of charges and interest. I am one of the moderators on the CAG web site.

 

I first wrote to Abbey about my former bank account with them in February asking for a refund or a full report under the subject access provisions of the Data Protection Act (Data Protection Act). Abbey refused to refund me and failed to properly comply with the DPA. I was eventually forced to launch a Section 7 DPA claim to seek compliance. In the meantime I submitted a county court claim for an estimated £5k of charges. When I eventually received the statement information from Abbey I amended my court claim to the correct amount of £8,218.50 plus interest and costs.

 

I pointed out to Abbey that a claim of this size would be likely to be allocated to the fast track of the court hearing process. This would expose me to a risk of costs but would also mean that there would be standard disclosure.

 

Standard disclosure requires both sides to a case to provide full documentary and other evidence to support their argument and also the inclusion of information that may prejudice their case. In a bank charges claim the bank would be required to provide full details of the costs they are seeking to recover through their charges and would demonstrate whether they are making a profit. No bank has been prepared to allow such disclosure in any of the claims that have been submitted.

 

On 13 July 2006 I received a copy of Abbey’s defence. On the same day I wrote to Abbey’s solicitors informing them that unless their client settled my claim in full by 5.00pm on Tuesday 18 July 2006 I would further amend my claim to request the court to declare that the charges levied on my account were unlawful. This means that the claim would no longer be merely for money but would also specifically challenge the lawfulness of the charges. It also meant that any subsequent offer of settlement could be rejected unless Abbey publicly agreed that its charges were unlawful. On Monday 17 July 2006 I received an email from Abbey’s solicitors offering full settlement of my claim excluding a small amount of charges that were argued to be time barred by virtue of the Limitation Act.

 

In summary, rather than risk disclosure and an escalation in the seriousness of my action against them, Abbey conceded my claim within two working days of me demanding that they do so. They have now sent me a cheque for £10,235.37.

 

I believe that Abbey’s speedy concession of this matter has several implications:

 

  • They do not want the specific issue of the lawfulness of their charges determined by the Court
  • They are not prepared to go into court on a track that requires disclosure
  • Their argument that they settle claims for commercial reasons no longer holds true because I was prepared to use a court track where there was a risk of significant costs being awarded against me. If Abbey are too scared to take on someone with deep enough pockets to confront them at a full hearing, they cannot have much confidence in the lawfulness of their charging regime.

I have attached various documents to this email including:

 

  • Original claim form
  • Amended claim form
  • Email of 13 July 2006 from me to Abbey’s solicitor offering settlement
  • Letter of 17 July 2006 from Abbey’s solicitor offering settlement

I would be more than happy to discuss this matter with you. I am quite happy for you to report this story if you wish to do so and I am prepared to discuss it with you on the record.

 

Yours sincerely

Link to post
Share on other sites

Being sent to the Mail, Guardian and the Sun:

 

PRESS RELEASE

ABBEY SURRENDER IN £10,000 BANK CHARGES CLAIM

Abbey National plc have failed to defend a claim for a refund of more than £10,000 in bank charges to a Bromley based company director.

XXXXXX, 41, claimed the refund of charges applied to his account between 2000 and 2004. Like thousands of other people Mr XXXXXX used information and templates provided by the Consumer Action Group website (www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk) to prepare his claim.

The claim was so large that it would have fallen outside the small claims procedures in the county court. As a consequence, the bank would have been forced to declare its costs for bounced transactions and other charges. Instead of doing this the bank caved into a demand for full settlement.

Mr XXXXX commented:

“Abbey told me that they were settling this claim for commercial reasons because it would not be economical to fight a court case. Yet I was prepared to run the risk of costs in this claim.

The simple truth is that Abbey, like the other banks, are terrified of letting a court decide whether their penalty charges are lawful or not. If Abbey are not prepared to defend a claim like this one, it’s hard to believe that they will defend any claim”.

XXXXXXX

Tel:

Email:

Notes to editors:

The Bank Action Group and Consumer Action Groups were set up in January 2006 to assist members of the public reclaim their rights as consumers. They now have nearly 50,000 members. Their website is at www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk

This claim was for £8,218.50 plus interest and costs.

Claim forms and correspondence are available on request.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cant wait to see this in the papers and I would think that working lunch would run with the story as the interest in the bank charges story and how many claims are now going though the courts seems to be generating more and more interest.

Keep up the good work:)

DONT FORGET TO DONATE TO THIS SITE WHEN YOU WIN THANKYOU

If you dont it wont be here:x

 

Let battle commence!!!!!:mad:

All advice and opinions given by people on this site are personal, and are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, please seek qualified professional legal Help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fantastic news, can u lend me a few quid? Ha Ha.

 

Relax and enjoy.:D

.

.

.

Sign the Phil Whitmore petition: http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/PAYUSBACK/ :)

 

 

Abbey Current Account claim for charges £1307.11

 

26/01/07 Awaiting court date

25/01/07 Courts lost my file!! Said it will be sorted soon

23/11/06 Defence recieved from Abbey

20/11/06 Statements a full 6 years received

16/11/06 AQ completed & submitted

30/11/06 Claim number 6SQ06250 recieved from courts

24/10/06 Claim submitted to courts x3 copies

21/08/06 Prelim letter asking for it back, sent to Pam Speed. 14 days up 05/09/06.

21/08/06 Data Protection Act non compliance letter sent. 7 days up 29/08/06

11/07/06 Reply to Pam Speed Data Protection Act fob off letter.

10/07/06 Data Protection Act fob off letter received from Abbey. dated 06/07/06.

29/06/06 Data Protection Act statement request sent

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Semi. Any of the papers or Working Lunch taken this up yet?

Abbey - 547.00 settled in full.

Second claim: £204 WON.

Barclaycard - 142.88 incl interest due WON BY DEFAULT as they didn't even bother entering a defence. Barclaycard paid up £184.88.

 

MBNA - Concluded £634.31

Capital One Concluded £148

Kinda disappointed I've no more banks to go after now...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Semi. Any of the papers or Working Lunch taken this up yet?

 

No, I wouldn't expect to hear anything until later today, or more likely tomorrow.

 

It's quite possible or even probable that they won't take this up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I reckon they will... Keep us posted!

 

You mentioned before that there was 'more' you wanted to say... Are you in a position to do that yet?

 

By the way - what happened to the pretty kitty!!? He's a scary dude!!

Abbey - 547.00 settled in full.

Second claim: £204 WON.

Barclaycard - 142.88 incl interest due WON BY DEFAULT as they didn't even bother entering a defence. Barclaycard paid up £184.88.

 

MBNA - Concluded £634.31

Capital One Concluded £148

Kinda disappointed I've no more banks to go after now...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I reckon they will... Keep us posted!

 

You mentioned before that there was 'more' you wanted to say... Are you in a position to do that yet?

 

By the way - what happened to the pretty kitty!!? He's a scary dude!!

 

No, not yet.

 

Oh, and he ate the cat.

Link to post
Share on other sites

:o

 

Looking forward to the update/s...

Abbey - 547.00 settled in full.

Second claim: £204 WON.

Barclaycard - 142.88 incl interest due WON BY DEFAULT as they didn't even bother entering a defence. Barclaycard paid up £184.88.

 

MBNA - Concluded £634.31

Capital One Concluded £148

Kinda disappointed I've no more banks to go after now...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seminole-I was delighted to read of your success today.[ I have been away for much of the last ten days and have only had a quick scan over some of the threads

from time to time, and missed yours totally].

 

It would be interesting to know if you are considering going after them for the

other £1000 odd from beyond the 6 year limit. To be honest, I did think that you might insist on it as part of the settlement, on the grounds that if they weren't prepared to argue over £10,000, another £1,000 wouldn't be sufficient to get them in Court.

 

If you haven't ruled it out, did you include something in the settlement that would

allow you challenge them, since they were asking for a full and final settlement?

And that would presumably prevent you claiming for it again. Or is there a way round it?

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent! Do let us know when it will be on.

Abbey - 547.00 settled in full.

Second claim: £204 WON.

Barclaycard - 142.88 incl interest due WON BY DEFAULT as they didn't even bother entering a defence. Barclaycard paid up £184.88.

 

MBNA - Concluded £634.31

Capital One Concluded £148

Kinda disappointed I've no more banks to go after now...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done Semi. It seems as if all of us that were around the same stage are getting our refunds!!!!!! That got to add up to a lot of money. God help those still banking with Shabby cos they just might have their charges put up to pay our refunds!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!(would be just like Shabby to do thAT)

Well done agen

Eileen x

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...