walton v rbos

[progenic7]

Paul,

 

as usual i agree with Glenn, maybe as litigant in person you may not have had the legal knowledge or prowess of a chambers barrister, but surely a minor mistake or slight error or misinterpretation should not be dealt with in such a way !

[paulwlton]

Paul,

 

as usual i agree with Glenn, maybe as litigant in person you may not have had the legal knowledge or prowess of a chambers barrister, but surely a minor mistake or slight error or misinterpretation should not be dealt with in such a way !

 

Even has a layperson we are all supposed to know the Law. However, a layperson would not have known that a default charge was unlawful if in an agreement it states: on default we can charge £25.00 to cover our costs.

 

This is the aproach i took for the set-aside. We all should know that a penalty in contract is unlawful we cannot plead we have just found this out, but we can plead we were misled into believing the charges were lawful as the contractual provision clearly states this.

[Glenn UK]

Paul

 

I see what you mean now, it makes sense completely now.

 

Glenn

[JonCris]

I've just read now the court order is set-aside the defendant can use the Limitation Act or Latches in their defence. Can anyone verify this.

 

Yes they can but Latches & the limitation act are meant to prevent claimants bringing stale claims where the defendants might no longer have access to witnesses or other evidence.

 

You must argue that the banks actions where not a one off act but as the banks continues to impose unlawful charges then the pre 6 years charges should be included as theirs is a continuing unlawful act. Therefore the 1st unlawful penalty charges is linked by their conduct past & present to the latest penalty charge.

 

It should also be brought to the attention of the court that if the bank are willing to prove their charges as being lawful now then the pre 6 year claim also fails Therefore it's in the banks interest to present their evidence by making standard disclosure

[tifo]

good reading ....

[un1boy]

Hiya

 

Just read this thread and I must I am very sorry Paul, you have done spo much work on this....but, what doesn't kill us makes us stronger!

 

 

I am starting a similar claim and I wondered if we can work together andif I may be able to use some of your findings etc?:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=78767&goto=newpost

 

Paul, with regads to the comments u made to the judge re the defendant's costs from the small claims book u read, what were they?

[caro]

This was taken from Patricia Pearls Practical guide to small claims book.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/announcement-center-book-br-dark.html

 

I think that is the answer un1boy.

[un1boy]

Thanks Caro

[paulwlton]

Defence suibmitted to Lloyds and the court last week just awaiting a hearing date.

I believe if a term in an agreement has been misrepresented, and i claim this, then the onus would be on Lloyds to prove the term stands up to the reasonable test as per UCTA 1977.

 

Time for another shot at RBS who haven't been playing ball they have failed in their obligation to provide data under a SAR issued 16/12/2006 they have not fully complied with 2 section 77 CCA requests, i think an incorrect statement of account to the tune of £8000 and failure to provide the original agreement will not impress a district judge.

 

My application to set-aside has been submitted to Manchester County Court hopefully it will be transfered to my local court.

 

Paul

[paulwlton]

Interesting development. I wrote to RBS last week and explained by not complying with my section 77 request of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, that they remain in criminal default, and that i intend to make the Judge aware of this.

 

I have received correspondance this morning that they are in receipt of my request and that they intend to comply with it and in the meantime no further recovery action will be taken against me.

 

Paul

[Guest bong]

Hi Paul, I don't know possibly I am alone in thinking this, if so I will step back and shut up:) BUT I am having great difficulty in following your progress with this case. Would it be possible to do a summary post of the entire background to date, because I am entirely confused with all the different hearings, set asides, set-aside CCJ, non-compliance etc. etc. As I said maybe it is just me. Is anyone else confused?

[paulwlton]

Hi Paul, I don't know possibly I am alone in thinking this, if so I will step back and shut up:) BUT I am having great difficulty in following your progress with this case. Would it be possible to do a summary post of the entire background to date, because I am entirely confused with all the different hearings, set asides, set-aside CCJ, non-compliance etc. etc. As I said maybe it is just me. Is anyone else confused?

 

Hi bong, i can see why you're confused and maybe i should have started another thread to contest the court order but hopefuly i'll get a result in the very near future.

 

Paul

[paulwlton]

Interesting development. I wrote to RBS last week and explained by not complying with my section 77 request of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, that they remain in criminal default, and that i intend to make the Judge aware of this.

 

I have received correspondance this morning that they are in receipt of my request and that they intend to comply with it and in the meantime no further recovery action will be taken against me.

 

Paul

 

I have to be carefull what i say here but i beleive RBS may be edit they have sent agreements that wre never taken out just so the court order can be enforced.

 

This is the good bit. I have proof.

 

Paul

[photoman]

ooooooooooohhhhhhhhhhhh !!!!!!!!

 

will be watching with baited breath !!

[paulwlton]

ooooooooooohhhhhhhhhhhh !!!!!!!!

 

will be watching with baited breath !!

 

Can't say too much now Photoman but this as gone far beyond a bank charges claim.

No sleep at all last night, after scanning the agreements again i now know whats happend .

I will contact the relevant authorities today.

 

Paul

[chezt]

Can't say too much now Photoman but this as gone far beyond a bank charges claim.

No sleep at all last night, after scanning the agreements again i now know whats happend .

I will contact the relevant authorities today.

 

Paul

 

Good Luck Paul - Rootin for ya mate

[photoman]

Paul,

Sorry for the hijack, but you might find this thread an interesting read also. It involves various questionable practices regards Data protection and access to information.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/royal-bank-scotland/56333-big-claim-aginst-rbos.html

[paulwlton]

Hi Paul, I don't know possibly I am alone in thinking this, if so I will step back and shut up:) BUT I am having great difficulty in following your progress with this case. Would it be possible to do a summary post of the entire background to date, because I am entirely confused with all the different hearings, set asides, set-aside CCJ, non-compliance etc. etc. As I said maybe it is just me. Is anyone else confused?

 

Summary post.

 

1. In July 1998 a £9000 fixed rate personal loan and account overdraft balance of £300 was defaulted subsequently a CCJ was obtained by the bank with the court setting payments at £38.00 per month to clear the debt.

 

2. £1450 in charges were applied to the account between 1995 and account default.

 

3. In 2006 i challenged the charges by use of sec32 Limitation Act 1980 with the claim being struck out at the second hearing.

 

4. As the judgment amount in 1998 was incorect due to the level of charges on the account i beleive i should be given the opportunity to defend it.

 

5. I have just been succesful with a set-aside on the same basis against Lloyds.

 

6. I issued my set-aside application against RBS in April 2007 with a hearing on the 10th May.

 

6 At the end of April 2007 i made a CCA 77 request which requires the creditor to supply a statement of account and a true copy of the original loan agreement.

 

This is whare it gets interesting

 

7. The bank complied with my request and i received a letter on the 1st of May 2007. To my utter disbelief embodied in the the court order are 2 Consumer Credit Act Agreements dated 20th August 1998, the first is a variable rate loan of £8849 repayable over 12 months at £787.70 per month the second is also a variable rate loan of £369.00 repayable over 12 months at £32.76 with a statement of account showing £18000.

 

8. A clause in the agreement relates to breaches (if there is any breach of this agreement ) the charges on default. Interest is calculated at the rate of interest on the daily balance outstanding (both before and after any court decree or judgment) and applied in arrears quarterly.

 

9. These are fictitious agreements i have never seen these before i have never signed for a variable rate loan. Why is my name on these agreements? Why would the bank lend me nearly £9000 when they'de served a default notice on me the month before? Between 1998 and the present date how as an overdraft balance and a personal loan agreement changed into the above?.

 

10. Today i've made an application for a months stay on proceedings regarding the set-aside hearing-on advice, and i have an appointment with a solcitor next week. This is beyond my limited skills now.

 

11. It seems the fun is just about to begin because i have all documents from 1998( and i'm talking everything, sorry RBS) . The personal loan agreement and overdraft have been paid since judgment on the same account numbers these fictitious loans are asigned too now.

 

Comments welcome.

 

Paul

[photoman]

Paul,

Refer to my previous post.

I think a certain jounalist at the BBC may be interested in this story.

Not a good time to consider buying shares in RBOS !!

[Guest Battleaxe]

Paul,

 

Something is so far out, that it stinks. I think a forensic accountant is needed here to go over the RBS books. If you have all the documentation showing the monies have been paid and now RBS have come up with these agreements purporting that the loans aren't paid, begs the question, what has happened to the money you have paid.

 

I think you need an investigative journalist as well as an auditor versed in creative accounting.

 

This could blow RBS out of the water.

[progenic7]

Paul,

 

lol, things do seem to be getting quite interesting dont they.

 

cant wait to find out whats behind it all, though at this point i think you may be better off playing your hand quite close to your chest, as the element of surprise is often the far better attack. A solicitor should serve you very well here and should guide you all the way to the bank so to speak. IMHO i would stay well away from (ahhh hmmm ****** journalists as is my experience they only ever want one thing and thats very usually not your best interests) maybe after the case has been heard perhaps a little exposure wouldnt go amiss

 

Best of luck and keep us posted

 

Johnny

[photoman]

Paul,

I have PM'd you, but for the benefit of others watching this thread, I wish to post what I have said. After further contemplation, I agree with progenic on this, and I also suggest you err on the side of caution for the time being regards the Press.

Seek some good sound legal advice. I suggest also that you perhaps PM some of the Moderators, and I even think Bankfodder himself would be interested, and able to provide suggestions for the best course of action.

After receiving advice, when you do come to discuss this with the Press, I would suggest you then restrict it to the more reputable Press assoc.

[Guest bong]

Paul if these are binding agreements then presumably they would show that you had signed on the dotted line...? I am not following the CCA threads so I'm not up on these things but it seems to me they would need a signature of yours to prove that these are valid agreements?

[paulwlton]

Paul if these are binding agreements then presumably they would show that you had signed on the dotted line...? I am not following the CCA threads so I'm not up on these things but it seems to me they would need a signature of yours to prove that these are valid agreements?

 

Yes you're right bong they do need my signature,

I've studied the Consumer Credit Act and the SI 1983 regs and i have just had a cheque drop through the letter box today from a sec 85 claim, this will cover my lawyers fee next week.

 

I think i need to find out what address is on the original agreements, i phoned yesterday but they wouldn't tell me.

 

Paul

[paulwlton]

Received today from RBS.

 

 

Thank you for taking the time to contact the bank's Customer Relations Unit regarding the loan agreements that you believe are fraudulent, which has been referred to me from the Financial Ombudsman Service.

 

I know that you are unhappy with our service and i am sorry to learn of your disappointment.

 

To make sure that we fully address all your concerns i have requested background information from the areas involved. I will be in touch with you again, hopefully within the next two weeks, as soon as i have this information to hand.

 

Paul