Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • There's no facility for a settlement "out of court" as such. But matters that are started under the "Single Justice" (SJ) Procedure can often be concluded without the defendant appearing. The SJ procedure, as the name suggests, involves a single magistrate, sitting in an office with a legal advisor, dealing with matters "on papers" only. Nobody else can attend. The SJ deals with straightforward guilty pleas. Anything where the SJ believes the defendant should appear, or which should be dealt with by the "ordinary" court are adjourned o a hearing in the normal magistrates'  court .As well as this, all defendants have the right to a hearing in the normal court if they wish. Nobody is forced to have their case heard under he SJP.  In particular, as far as traffic matters go, a SJ will not disqualify a driver and if a ban is to be considered, the case will be passed over to the normal court. Because, following your SD, you will be pleading Not Guilty (and offering the "deal"), your case would usually be heard in the normal court, meaning a personal appearance. To be honest, performing your SD at the court is a more straightforward way of doing things. It avoids any possible hitches involved in serving he SD on the court. But of course, as I said, most courts have backlogs which mean an SD may not be quickly accommodated. If you do end up doing your SD before a solicitor, check with them the protocol for serving it on the court. Do let us know what the solicitor says about Wednesday.    
    • Welcome to posting on CAG cabot, people will be along soon to help you try to sort this out. Please complete this:  
    • Quotes of the day penny mordaunt came out swinging with her broadsword, and promptly decapitated sunak while Nigel Farage, representing Reform UK, made contentious claims about immigration policies, which were swiftly fact-checked during the debate.   Good question though raised at labour about the 2 child benefit cap, which I broadly agree with, but the tory 'trap' assumes tory thinking - rather than child centric thinking. There should be no incentives to have kids as a financial way of life paid for by everyone else ... ... BUT the kids should not be made to suffer for the decisions of their parents Free school meals would feed the kids, improve their ability to learn, and incentivise them to go to school. As an added benefit ... it would invest in our nations future.   How far this should go is a matter for costing, social intent and future path of the nation, but not feeding our nations kids is an abomination. There should be at least one free school meal per day for every child who attends school. Full Stop. Its the cheapest and most effective investment in our future we could make.
    • Hey people, I've been browsing this amazing forum for the past year and recieved a letter today which has made me require some help. Received a claim form from Cabot in the Civil National Business Centre in regards to an Aqua Credit Card taken out in 2018. I failed to make payments due to financial hardship and have not taken out any credit or uses any forms of credit since. Received a lot of letters from Cabot and their solicitors Mortimer Clarke which I've ignored    By an agreement between New Day Ltd RE Aqua& the Defendant on or around 26/03/2018 ('ths Agreement) New Day Ltd RE Aqua agreed to issue Defendant with a credit card. The Defendant failed to make the minimum payments due. The Agreement was terminated following the service of a default notice. The Agreement was assigned to the named Claimant. Cabot Credit Management Group Limited, acting as servicing agent of the named Claimant through its Appointed Representative (Cabot Financial (Europe) Limited), has arranged for these proceedings to be issued in the name of the Claimant. The named Claimant may be entitled to claim interest under the Agreement but does not seek such interest and instead claims interest under Section 69(1) of the County Courts Act 1984 at 8% p.a.from03/03/2023 until date of issue only, or alternatively such interest as the Court thinks fit THE NAMED CLAIMANT THEREFORE CLAIMS 1. 3800.82 2. INTEREST OF 379.84 3. Costs How would I go about this and what could happen? I don't remember much details about the card either.
    • cause like you said in post one, 99% of people think these are FINES (it now reads charge). and wet themselves and cough up. they are not, they are speculative invoices because the driver supposedly broke some imaginary contract by driving onto privately owned land which said owner may or may not have signed some 99% fake contract with a private parking co years ago, thats already expired or has not been renewed or annually paid to employ them dx  
  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Contractual Interest - Precedent - LOST


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5946 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

well we will see now, have filed for judgement today!

 

my court is very unsympathetic to banks so heres hoping.

 

voyager9

nationwide settled in full 7/06/2007

 

yorkshire bank settled in full 15/06/2007

 

capital one filed at court 06/06/2007 acknowledged 15/6 defence received 30/6 AQ sent 2/7 with application for summary judgement--hearing date 18 sept foe defence to be struck out

 

cahoot filed at court 25/06/2007 to acknowledge default judgement granted 27/06###won###settled in full

 

HBOS filed at court acknowledged 20/06/2007 default judgement granted 16th july so won

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 414
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Thanks for the reply Chatz and the (as always) sound advice.

 

I know what your saying is right, Im quite satisfied with that.

 

Regards :)

 

 

Aww gee thanks for the kind words! :) Well as long as you are satisfied with it & are happy not to proceed (fight maybe) for the rest then take the money & run ...all the way to wherever makes you happy :D

links to my current claims ...

My claim - Yorkshire Bank Visa

chezt V RBS Mastercard

Chezt v RBS Joint Account

chezt v Abbey Credit Card

 

Settled ...

chezt V Duet Card/Creation Finance

chezt v's Studio Cards

chezt v's Littlewoods Catalogue

 

Next ...

Abbey Joint a/c & Single a/c

Barclaycard (Mine & Hubby's)

Anyone else I can think of ...! :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh Chezt

 

You have just sown a seedof doubt in my mind now,

Have I read inbetween the lines right . If it were you would you have continued till you got everthing.

This is the way I am reading it.:confused:

30-12-2006--Requested statements from Local Halifax.

02-02-2007--Statements Recieved.

18-04-2007--Prelim sent.

20-04-2007--Reply , Thanks , give us 8wks letter.

02-0502007--Sent L.B.A. & Schedule of Charges

11-05-2007--Recieved reply ,still investigating.

17-05-2007--Sent Amended L.B.A. for Contractual Interest this time.

14-06-2007--Received standard Bog Off letter.

13-06-2007--Took N1 to Local Courts.

26-06-2007--Copy of N1 from Court, issued 21-06-2007. to Halifax, Deemed Served 25-06-2007

Have till 09-07-2007 to file Defence.

05-07-2007--Note that Acknowledgment of Service been Filed on 29-06-2007.

Have 28 days from date of Service to File Defence.

07-07-2007--Offer from Halifax.

09-07-2007--Rejection letter sent to Halifax. Next day delivery.

10-07-2007--Money put in Account:mad:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh Chezt

 

You have just sown a seedof doubt in my mind now,

Have I read inbetween the lines right . If it were you would you have continued till you got everthing.

This is the way I am reading it.:confused:

 

No no not at all ... If I were offered an amount which basically equalled charges + interest paid on them + court costs + any extra (8% or whatever) I would seriously consider doing a runner myself to my happy place! :)

 

In the end it all boils down to how much more work you are willing to put in for the rest & if it is ultimately worth it ..... Also how willing are you to go to court for the rest .... 'cos that's what could still happen too :)

links to my current claims ...

My claim - Yorkshire Bank Visa

chezt V RBS Mastercard

Chezt v RBS Joint Account

chezt v Abbey Credit Card

 

Settled ...

chezt V Duet Card/Creation Finance

chezt v's Studio Cards

chezt v's Littlewoods Catalogue

 

Next ...

Abbey Joint a/c & Single a/c

Barclaycard (Mine & Hubby's)

Anyone else I can think of ...! :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

As my claim included an 'either/or' for the Court to consider re: CI, do I need to be concerned now as my AQ has gone off and all the other bits, like request for striking out the defence, Draft Order for Directions, etc.

 

I mean, I included both the authorised overdraft interest rate AND eight per cent. Two separate Statements of Charges spreadsheets for the Court to consider.

 

So if I can't claim the authorised overdraft rate, surely the Court will just go for the eight per cent?

 

How can I best incorporate this information into my claim at this stage to ensure every chance of success?

 

Thanks in advance!

Link to post
Share on other sites

As my claim included an 'either/or' for the Court to consider re: CI, do I need to be concerned now as my AQ has gone off and all the other bits, like request for striking out the defence, Draft Order for Directions, etc.

 

I mean, I included both the authorised overdraft interest rate AND eight per cent. Two separate Statements of Charges spreadsheets for the Court to consider.

 

So if I can't claim the authorised overdraft rate, surely the Court will just go for the eight per cent?

 

How can I best incorporate this information into my claim at this stage to ensure every chance of success?

 

Thanks in advance!

 

Its not actually a problem at court IF it ever got there, as the court would only award what it sees fit and that at worst that is the 8%.stat

The problem with the claim that was lost was he had been paid the charges & 8% in full & cont with his claim for the CI alone. the bank only had to argue against the award of CI as there were no charges to account for.

Not Sure how to add it into claim at moment, i dont think its a problem at the moment but if it gets to court bundle you need a better argument than R & M. The bank may just wait till last minute & pay you the charges plus int plus costs and let you get on with it as they know you cant win CI claim alone.

However if you can back CI up with another legal case IE account of profits, then you fight on that basis, and the bank DONT know if they could win that one, so will settle for paying you off with CI.

Hope thats clear ( I think )

 

And no i dont understand the account of profits part yet either, Hopefully a MOD can confirm how to claim on that basis and give us a template.

 

Anyway its off to MIL's now for a goood old fashioned sunday dinner :D

 

CM

Templates Library

 

GE Capital Won

Capital 0ne Won

Northern rock Claim stayed working on negotiation

HSBC personal claim 1 ''WON''.

£1800 plus full stat interest plus costs.

Claim started 14/02/07 offer 3/07/07

 

Next:Coming soon to a thread near you! :)

HSBC personal Part 2 'return of the Celicaman'

HSBC business 1 ' my empire strikes back' N1 claim POC in progress after usual offensive offer from bank

HSBC business 2 'attack of the Celicaman'

HSBC business claim 3 'bank account menace'

HSBC business 4 'Revenge of the CAG Member' the final insult ....................... 'Maybe'

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/halifax-bank-bank-scotland/70034-monkey_uk-halifax-bank-accounts-3.html#post998187

 

I've 2 claims running with Hfx, one for Visa charges, and one for charges on two bank accounts (one closed, one open).

 

they've paid money into my account that equates to:

 

all of the charges back, and the £120.00 court fee.

 

They've written to me and told me that they are paying this in "within 5 days" (it was done the same day that they sent the letter to me!), and have also put in the letter that they are also crediting money of what they calculate I was charged in interest on my account as a result of charges (they actually mean they've paid the 8% interest).

 

However, looking at this, they;ve credited for the interest:

 

£216.53 and £104.59

 

Now, using Mindzai;s spreadsheet, changing the date to the 12th of July, which is when they money was credited, the 8% interest due was actually:

 

£216.76 and £104.74.

 

I've even backdated the sheet to 11th July, just to make sure, which would make it:

 

£216.57 and £104.68.

 

Now, they have until the 21st the enter a defence I believe.

 

They are considering the claim settled.

 

My question is, is it reasonable to leave it until the 21st, enter a default (they are unlikely to defence as they believe the figures are correct and that the only difference is the further £1342.38 in CI (28.8%) that I'm claiming.

 

Basically, defaulting them as they've paid me less than £1.00 less than what I'm owed. Is that reasonable?

 

One part of me says no it isn't, but the other part says that they should pay me exactly what they owe me.

 

How likely would I then be to secure a default against them?

If you found this post useful, please click on the "scales" icon in the bottom left of my post and say so!

 

The opinions of this post are those of monkey_uk and do not constitute sound legal advice. I am not a lawyer.

--

 

Halifax Unlawful Bank Charges: S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) Sent 28/02/07 - CC Statement's rcv'd 18/04/07 Bank a/c statements rcv'd 19/04/07

 

 

 

First Direct Unlawful Bank Charges: Settled in Full 12/05/06 | £2235.50

Link to post
Share on other sites

But what about the CI part of the claim? I'm wanting to persue this if I can find a way...!

If you found this post useful, please click on the "scales" icon in the bottom left of my post and say so!

 

The opinions of this post are those of monkey_uk and do not constitute sound legal advice. I am not a lawyer.

--

 

Halifax Unlawful Bank Charges: S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) Sent 28/02/07 - CC Statement's rcv'd 18/04/07 Bank a/c statements rcv'd 19/04/07

 

 

 

First Direct Unlawful Bank Charges: Settled in Full 12/05/06 | £2235.50

Link to post
Share on other sites

But what about the CI part of the claim? I'm wanting to persue this if I can find a way...!

 

It would depend really on the arguement you aere using as their is now a precedent for M&R, so if this is what you are using I would consider not going forward for the CI aspect alone. However if they have not agreed what you believe to be the full amount of charges then you could continue but you would need to reject their offer and ask them to remove it from your account. Give them poss 7 days to do this and if they don't then say you will off set it from the total in a way you see fit.

 

It its entirely up to you. But you will have to show you are being reasonable and this seems to be a close call IMHO.

 

Tanz

Link to post
Share on other sites

well in my poc I stated that I'm claiming CI "on the basis of mutuality of contract AND unjust enrichment, at bank's unauthorised borrowing rate of 28.8%".

 

Quoted word for word from my PoC.

If you found this post useful, please click on the "scales" icon in the bottom left of my post and say so!

 

The opinions of this post are those of monkey_uk and do not constitute sound legal advice. I am not a lawyer.

--

 

Halifax Unlawful Bank Charges: S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) Sent 28/02/07 - CC Statement's rcv'd 18/04/07 Bank a/c statements rcv'd 19/04/07

 

 

 

First Direct Unlawful Bank Charges: Settled in Full 12/05/06 | £2235.50

Link to post
Share on other sites

Monkey

 

I've lost the thread a bit (if you'll pardon the expression). Is your claim for a current account or a credit card. If it's a CC I think you can claim CI on the basis that that is what you have actually paid them - ie it is the interest they charged you on the charges. This is not true of a current account claim.

 

If the claim come to court I think the judge woulkd throw out the CI aspect of your claim on the strength of the recent test case. However, if the bank settles out of court, they may well take the economic decision to pay it - it would still be cheaper than them actually defending the case.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Steven, it is for bank accounts. I've yet to hear from them about the Visa, but don't worry, what you've said about that is exactly what I'll be doing.

If you found this post useful, please click on the "scales" icon in the bottom left of my post and say so!

 

The opinions of this post are those of monkey_uk and do not constitute sound legal advice. I am not a lawyer.

--

 

Halifax Unlawful Bank Charges: S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) Sent 28/02/07 - CC Statement's rcv'd 18/04/07 Bank a/c statements rcv'd 19/04/07

 

 

 

First Direct Unlawful Bank Charges: Settled in Full 12/05/06 | £2235.50

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,To be able to win any case for CI, you would need to be able to back your claim up with a case of law.

Your POC claim for CI

"on the basis of mutuality of contract AND unjust enrichment'

as far as i know there is no 'case of law' that was set using that as a winning argument, the same as reciprocity & mutuality.

IMHO You would have no chance of winning on that basis.

The fact that the Bank have paid in full charges, interest & costs to within £1 (they would up the offer to finish if needed) frankly leaves you no argument for charges, and ultimatley for the CI part, as previous case tried same and lost. You need a new argument.

Now the banks Know they would win on R & M, they will pay up with charges plus stat, knowing if you continue, you will lose any further claim for CI.

 

If we can start to claim for account of profit, it is an argument the banks do not know they would win, so would pay out CI before they would set foot in a court to argue the point.

This is a new argument to which i do not know how to argue it so dont ask me how to do it.

Help MODS ?

 

Basically at this point YOU HAVE WON, take the money WELL DONE

 

Celicaman

Templates Library

 

GE Capital Won

Capital 0ne Won

Northern rock Claim stayed working on negotiation

HSBC personal claim 1 ''WON''.

£1800 plus full stat interest plus costs.

Claim started 14/02/07 offer 3/07/07

 

Next:Coming soon to a thread near you! :)

HSBC personal Part 2 'return of the Celicaman'

HSBC business 1 ' my empire strikes back' N1 claim POC in progress after usual offensive offer from bank

HSBC business 2 'attack of the Celicaman'

HSBC business claim 3 'bank account menace'

HSBC business 4 'Revenge of the CAG Member' the final insult ....................... 'Maybe'

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,To be able to win any case for CI, you would need to be able to back your claim up with a case of law.

Your POC claim for CI

"on the basis of mutuality of contract AND unjust enrichment'

as far as i know there is no 'case of law' that was set using that as a winning argument, the same as reciprocity & mutuality.

In fact there is a recent case (Halliday v HBoS plc 2007) that specifically says you are NOT entitled to CI on this basis.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just one question please.

If you put the M&R reason in the POC , could we then put the account of profit argument in the Court Bundle. Could we change things by doing this?

30-12-2006--Requested statements from Local Halifax.

02-02-2007--Statements Recieved.

18-04-2007--Prelim sent.

20-04-2007--Reply , Thanks , give us 8wks letter.

02-0502007--Sent L.B.A. & Schedule of Charges

11-05-2007--Recieved reply ,still investigating.

17-05-2007--Sent Amended L.B.A. for Contractual Interest this time.

14-06-2007--Received standard Bog Off letter.

13-06-2007--Took N1 to Local Courts.

26-06-2007--Copy of N1 from Court, issued 21-06-2007. to Halifax, Deemed Served 25-06-2007

Have till 09-07-2007 to file Defence.

05-07-2007--Note that Acknowledgment of Service been Filed on 29-06-2007.

Have 28 days from date of Service to File Defence.

07-07-2007--Offer from Halifax.

09-07-2007--Rejection letter sent to Halifax. Next day delivery.

10-07-2007--Money put in Account:mad:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just one question please.

If you put the M&R reason in the POC , could we then put the account of profit argument in the Court Bundle. Could we change things by doing this?

I would say no - the court's are not stupid. Although I suppose it may be possible if the defence has not previously addressed the interest section of POC.

 

Before people get carried away, its not just a matter of asking for an account of profits in your POC. I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that account of profits is an equitable remedy which relies on a fiduciary duty. Asking for a remedy is one thing - the hard part is establishing why you are entitled to it.

 

Therefore if you want to go down that route you must base the interest claim in equity. Compound interest is not available at common law or in statute. See Westdeutsche v Islington.

And no i dont understand the account of profits part yet either, Hopefully a MOD can confirm how to claim on that basis and give us a template.

This is the problem and its why none of us advocate claiming compound interest anymore. Its not about sticking in a template and hey presto you'll all be able to claim 'contractual' interest again. If you want to embark on complex and potentially risky legal arguments you must at least research and understand them yourself first - and be prepared that you may have to argue it in court.

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote:'This is the problem and its why none of us advocate claiming compound interest anymore. Its not about sticking in a template and hey presto you'll all be able to claim 'contractual' interest again. If you want to embark on complex and potentially risky legal arguments you must at least research and understand them yourself first - and be prepared that you may have to argue it in court.'

 

Thank you GaryH for clearing this up, i knew it wasnt quite as simple as putting in a template and claiming it, but more of a basic template of how to claim on the grounds of account of profits.

Suppose this closes the CI argument for now, tis a pity cos i had eventually got my head around the R & M argument :???:

 

Back to drawing board i suppose

 

Thanks Gary

 

CM

Templates Library

 

GE Capital Won

Capital 0ne Won

Northern rock Claim stayed working on negotiation

HSBC personal claim 1 ''WON''.

£1800 plus full stat interest plus costs.

Claim started 14/02/07 offer 3/07/07

 

Next:Coming soon to a thread near you! :)

HSBC personal Part 2 'return of the Celicaman'

HSBC business 1 ' my empire strikes back' N1 claim POC in progress after usual offensive offer from bank

HSBC business 2 'attack of the Celicaman'

HSBC business claim 3 'bank account menace'

HSBC business 4 'Revenge of the CAG Member' the final insult ....................... 'Maybe'

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for the reply Gary.

 

It wasnt something I was contemplating doing . I was just wanting to know cause a freind of mine said she thought it might be possible as she wanted to try. Rather than tellin her I did not think she could ,( dont regard myself knowledgable enough about the subject). I thought Id pose the question on here first.

 

Regards :)

30-12-2006--Requested statements from Local Halifax.

02-02-2007--Statements Recieved.

18-04-2007--Prelim sent.

20-04-2007--Reply , Thanks , give us 8wks letter.

02-0502007--Sent L.B.A. & Schedule of Charges

11-05-2007--Recieved reply ,still investigating.

17-05-2007--Sent Amended L.B.A. for Contractual Interest this time.

14-06-2007--Received standard Bog Off letter.

13-06-2007--Took N1 to Local Courts.

26-06-2007--Copy of N1 from Court, issued 21-06-2007. to Halifax, Deemed Served 25-06-2007

Have till 09-07-2007 to file Defence.

05-07-2007--Note that Acknowledgment of Service been Filed on 29-06-2007.

Have 28 days from date of Service to File Defence.

07-07-2007--Offer from Halifax.

09-07-2007--Rejection letter sent to Halifax. Next day delivery.

10-07-2007--Money put in Account:mad:

Link to post
Share on other sites

well in my poc I stated that I'm claiming CI "on the basis of mutuality of contract AND unjust enrichment, at bank's unauthorised borrowing rate of 28.8%".

 

As others have already stated, the mutuality argument is currently dead.

 

What about the unjust enrichment angle? Potentially, HBOS have profited in credit card interest by unlawfully taking monies from your bank account: that money is not available to pay towards your credit card account. No idea how or if that could be argued.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Halifax (current accounts, credit card, old mortgage, secured loan)

thread here

 

MBNA (three credit cards)

thread here

firstdirect (a current account, two mortgage accounts, old loans, old credit card)

they've sold my current account. thread here.

 

Royal Mail

Claim issued by former employer Royal Mail, thread here.

I counterclaimed and won. They paid in full.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gary

 

Perhaps it would be worth starting a discussion under 'general' on account of profits to thrash out our (joint) understanding

Good idea. Perhaps you could start a thread and link it from here?

 

As others have already stated, the mutuality argument is currently dead.

 

What about the unjust enrichment angle? Potentially, HBOS have profited in credit card interest by unlawfully taking monies from your bank account: that money is not available to pay towards your credit card account. No idea how or if that could be argued.

It could be argued, but not on its own. You need to establish a fiduciary or other trust duty first. As per my last post, compound interest is only available in equity.

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

FWIW

 

AoP is NOT (oops, nearly forgot the most improtant word) reliant on a fid duty, AG Vs Blake i believe.

 

Re the 'precedent' has a transcript or formal account of the case been published as of yet? The reason for asking is that a precedent is only a precedent when its heard before a high court, as far as I know this was a county Court judgement which is far from binding.

 

Secondly, until we know what arguments were put by both parties the value of this 'precedent' is in question.

 

JMHO

 

Glenn

 

Edit PS whats to say that the bank dont owe you a fid duty?

Kick the shAbbey Habit

 

Where were you? Next time please

 

 

Abbey 1st claim -Charges repaid, default removed, interest paid (8% apr) costs paid, Abbey peed off; priceless

Abbey 2nd claim, two Accs - claim issued 30-03-07

Barclaycard - Settled cheque received

Egg 2 accounts ID sent 29/07

Co-op Claim issued 30-03-07

GE Capital (Store Cards) ICO says theyve been naughty

MBNA - Settled in Full

GE Capital (1st National) Settled

Lombard Bank - SAR sent 16.02.07

MBNA are not your friends, they will settle but you need to make sure its on your terms -read here

Glenn Vs MBNA

Link to post
Share on other sites

ah-help

 

cci or not cci????

 

i have a claim with lloyds-just ready for submitting n1-charges + stat 8%-no probs

 

crap one-theyve acknowledged claim and going to defend-i've asked for 28.9%apr cci or stat at the courts discretion.this is a credit card claim.presume they will offer stst and i should settle for that

 

welcome-ppi and charges-gone as 2 seperate claims with cci but only just sent lba-if i file should i just add stat and drop the cci claim??

 

please help-i'm not thick -just bamboozled with the arguments for claiming cci

lloyds S.A.R -sent 04/04/200

statements received 11/05/2007

prelim-14/05/2007 -£4987

lba-30/05/2007

n1-20/07/2007

 

Co-Op prelim sent-20/04/2007-£136.50

settled in full

goldfish prelim-27/06/2007

 

capital one -deemed served -01/07/2007

settlement without cci offered 17/07/2007

halifax prelim-17/07/2007

 

aqua--prelim-13/07/2007

 

welcome-prelim-30/06/2007

lba-14/07/2007

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...