kinkyjohnfowler v barclays

[kinkyjohnfowler]

hello to you all - first timer on this site

 

can someone help me please

 

i have recieved a letter from my local court (south shields) saying i have a 10 min hearing for the 1st august. they also state the following:-

 

1. The parties must file at the court and serve on the other party not later than 14 days before the hearing the following:-

a. copies of all documents which they wish to rely

b. statements of all witness, inlcuding the parties, upon whose evidence you wish to rely

 

The statements should be typed, dated and signed by the witness and stating that he/she believes that the facts stated in the witness statement are true.

 

2. All original documents to brough to the hearing.

 

3. Parties should note that if they do not file and serve documents and statements as set out above then the court may decide not to admit the evidence of the party in default.

 

 

is this basically the court bundle that i need to send or do i just send correspondence, my letters spreadsheets etc to both the court and barclays. I feel as though im nearly at the winning post on this claim but do not want to bugger it up.

your help is appreciated, ta kinky

[hedgey06]

Hi mate, welcome on board!

 

This is basically the court bundle which includes all correspondence, copies of bank statements, schedule of charges plus everything else detailed.

 

I'll also ask for this to be moved to the Barclays forum - you'll get specific advice and support from other Barclays claimaints over there.

 

Good luck! x

[kinkyjohnfowler]

please help i have under two weeks before court hearing and i have received a settlement letter stating the following:-

 

As you will have seen from our defence, we disagree with your legal analysis that the charges levied to your account with Barclays amount to penalty clauses and are unfair. We do, however recognise that it is not cost effective for either party to take this matter all the way trial. Therefore, in order to avoid the inevitable time and cost associated with pursuing the claim to trail, we are prepared to settle your claim upon payment of the charges applied to yout account, and any court costs, which comes to £1400, subject to the terms of this letter.

 

This offer to pay you £1400 is in full and final settlement of the whole of your claim and is strictly without any admission of liability on our part. By accepting this offer, you also agree that the existence of terms of this offer remain confidential between us.

 

Sign and send back blah de blah inform the courts of discontinue action blah de blah.

 

Should you decide to reject the Banks offer, we reserve the right to disclose this letter to the court on the subject of costs.

 

 

can anybody help, my claim was for over £4k which inlcuded contracutal interest of 27.5%, has anybody won with contractual interest lately or had a similar letter and could tell me a strategy to reply, I would settle for 80% of my full claim but their offer is 30% which i feel is total crap?

 

any help would be appreciated, the last hurdle to leap and i dont want to fall onto my face??

 

thanks in advance people.

[kinkyjohnfowler]

hiya people, approx two weeks to go to court date, ive just had a settlement letter for £1400 my claim was£4k with c.i. of 27.5%.

 

has anybody won with c.i. from barclays recently or has anybody recieved similar letter and tried to settle for a higher settlement amount ? ie haggling with litigation dept.

 

im at final hurdle dont want to fall on my face!

 

help is appreciated. thanks

[kinkyjohnfowler]

hiya people, approx two weeks to go to court date, ive just had a settlement letter for £1400 my claim was£4k with c.i. of 27.5%.

 

has anybody won with c.i. from barclays recently or has anybody recieved similar letter and tried to settle for a higher settlement amount ? ie haggling with litigation.

 

im at final hurdle dont want to fall on my face!

 

help is appreciated. thanks

[saintly_1]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/barclays-bank/62298-boba-fett-barclays-bank.html Bob didnt win the full CI but read the last couple of pages of his thread

[saintly_1]

Please dont keep starting new threads ...... stick to just 1 thread please !!

[Trucker]

A legal prescedent has been set re CCI. See below

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/halifax-bank-bank-scotland/97691-contractual-interest-precedent-lost.html?highlight=contractual+precedent+lost

[Trucker]

You should also take a look at this

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/halifax-bank-bank-scotland/97691-contractual-interest-precedent-lost.html?highlight=contractual+precedent+lost

[zootscoot]

Threads merged to help keep track of your progress

[kinkyjohnfowler]

hello

i have a copy of barclays defence that i need to do a detailed reply to, can anybody help??? im confused I have a template for defence rebuttal but its confusing me a lot.

I have a court date next wednesday and in my court bundle that i sent i only done a brief defence, I did not cover all below points. The court are willing to accept a updated court bundle but im struggling to do this defence. I have posted below their defence, anybody who has a standard defence template for barclays could they pm me it please, i am willing pay you for your help

thanks

 

1. The Particulars of Claim do not provide details or particulars of the account in question, or the precise charges alleged to have been unlawful, or the date thereof. To the extent it is alleged that the Claimant incurred bank charges on the Claimant's account for unauthorised borrowings (whether unpaid fees for returned cheques, "Paid Referral fees" or any other such fees), the Defendant puts the Claimant to strict proof of each charge and the date thereof.

 

2. The Particulars of Claim are summary in nature. Accordingly, this defence is summary in nature and the Defendant reserves the right to amend this Statement of Case in due course.

 

3. The Defendant is entitled to charge the Claimant for unauthorised borrowings by reason of its standard terms and conditions. The Claimant accepted the same when the account was opened, including (in particular but without limitation) the following terms and conditions (which are summarised) :

a. The Defendant's right to charge a “Paid Referral Fee” where the defendant pays an amount (either by compulsion or election) which causes the account to become overdrawn - £30 per item (previously £25).

b. The Defendant's right to charge an administrative fee if any cheque, standing order or direct debit cannot be paid because of insufficient cleared funds in the account - £35 per item (previously £30).

c. The Defendant's entitlement, if the Claimant becomes overdrawn without an overdraft limit, to charge interest at the unauthorised borrowing rate on the excess balance.

 

4. The Defendants standard terms and conditions give the Claimant a fair and transparent view of those terms and the charges applicable for unauthorised borrowings (inlcluding where the account is overdrawn without an overdaft limit or where the Claimant exceeds the authorised overdraft limit).

 

5. If and to the extent it is the Claimant's case that the failure to make necessary payments and/or failure to remain within authorised overdraft limits and/or failure to arrange an authorised overdraft constituted a breach of the terms applying to the account and that the contractual entitlemment to debit charges from the Claimant's account constitutes a liquidated damages clause, the same is denied. The charges constitute payments the Claimant agreed to make by reason of the terms and conditions of the account and were consideration for the Defendant advancing credit to the Claimant, which the Defendant was under no obligation to advance. The Defendant was entitled to impose such charges and interest whent the Claimant incurred the overdraft.

 

6. Accordingly, it is denied that the legal principles relating to liquidated damages clauses and penalty charges are relevant or applicable to the facts set out above. Further or alternatively it is denied that any such charges constitute unlawful penalty charges or are in breach of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (particularly but without limitation to, paragraph 1 (e) of Schedule 2)., or are in breach of s.4 of the unfair (Contracts) Terms Act 1977 (or any other provision), or are unreasonable within the meaning of s.15 of the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 (or indeed any other provision).

7. Therefore, it is denied that the charges were unlawfully debited from the account.

 

8. The claim for interest is denied. The terms and conditions set out the basis on which the account was to operate and evidenced the contract between Claimant and Defendant. The terms and conditions provided for a rate of interest rate of 1.465% to be applied to the Claimants? Account but contained no such entitlement for the Claimant to recover the same from the Defendant. Further or alternatively if, which is denied, the Claimant is entitled to damages and interest thereon, there is no basis in contract or common law for the application of this rate of interest to sums owed to the Claimant. The Defendant avers that whilst the Court has the discretion as to the level of any interest award, there are no grounds for the Court to depart from the principle that interest on any judgement, if awarded, should be at the current judgement rate.

9. If and to the extent the Claimant incurred charges on the account, this was caused by the Claimant having gone into overdraft without having agreed with the Defendant an authorised overdraft facility or to increase the overdraft facility and/or the failure to make payments to bring the balance of the account back into credit.

 

 

10. It is averred that the said charges and interest are and remain lawful and enforceable and that the Defendant was entitled to debit the same.

 

10. The Defendant denies that it is liable to the Claimant for the sums claimed and interst as pleaded or at all. In the alternative if (which is denied) the said charges are unenforceable and constituted a breach of contract by the Defendant, those charges which were applied to the account prior to 26 April 2001 are not recoverable because they are time-barred under the terms of the Limitation Act 1980 in that more than six years have elapsed since the accrual of the cause of action.

 

11. In the alternative, and without prejudice to matters stated above, if (which is denied) the said charges and interst or any part thereof are unlawful or unenforceable as alleged by the Claimant or at all, and the charges were a consequence of the breach of contract by the Claimant, the Defendant has nonetheless suffered loss and damage as a consequence of such breach of contract in allowing the account to go into unauthorised overdraft. Accordingly, in the event that the Defendant is unable to rely on its express entitlement to enforce the charges as set out above, it will seek to recover to the extent necessary such loss and damage as it actually suffered, which will not necessarily be limited to the value of the said charges, and the Defendant seeks to set off such sums against any liability owed hereunder to the Claimant.

[saintly_1]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/barclays-bcard-woolwich-successes/36692-peter-rabbit-barclays-success-2.html#post492578

[Janet-M]

4 threads merged

 

please keep to the one thread when asking questions or updating .This is in your own interest as you will get much more informed advice when people can see at a glance what you have done so far