Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • love the extra £1000 charge for confidentialy there BF   Also OP even if they don't offer OOC it doesn't mean your claim isn't good. I had 3 against EVRi that were heard over the last 3 weeks. They sent me emails asking me to discontinue as I wouldn't win. Went infront of a judge and won all 3.    Just remember the law is on your side. The judges will be aware of this.   Where you can its important to try to point out at the hearing the specific part of the contract they breached. I found this was very helpful and the Judge made reference to it when they gave their judgements and it seemed this was pretty important as once you have identified a specific breach the matter turns straight to liability. From there its a case of pointing out the unlawfullness of their insurance and then that should be it.
    • I know dx and thanks again for yours and others help. I was 99.999% certain last payment was over six years ago if not longer.  👍
    • Paragraph 23 – "standard industry practice" – put this in bold type. They are stupid to rely on this and we might as well carry on emphasising how stupid they are. I wonder why they could even have begun to think some kind of compelling argument – "the other boys do it so I do it as well…" Same with paragraph 26   Paragraph 45 – The Defendants have so far been unable to produce any judgements at any level which disagree with the three judgements…  …court, but I would respectfully request…   Just the few amendments above – and I think it's fine. I think you should stick to the format that you are using. This has been used lots of times and has even been applauded by judges for being meticulous and clear. You aren't a professional. Nobody is expecting professional standards and although it's important that you understand exactly what you are doing – you don't really want to come over to the judge that you have done this kind of thing before. As a litigant in person you get a certain licence/leeway from judges and that is helpful to you – especially if you are facing a professional advocate. The way this is laid out is far clearer than the mess that you will get from EVRi. Quite frankly they undermine their own credibility by trying to say that they should win simply because it is "standard industry practice". It wouldn't at all surprise me if EVRi make you a last moment offer of the entire value of your claim partly to avoid judgement and also partly to avoid the embarrassment of having this kind of rubbish exposed in court. If they do happen to do that, then you should make sure that they pay everything. If they suddenly make you an out-of-court offer and this means that they are worried that they are going to lose and so you must make sure that you get every penny – interest, costs – everything you claimed. Finally, if they do make you an out-of-court offer they will try to sign you up to a confidentiality agreement. The answer to that is absolutely – No. It's not part of the claim and if they want to settle then they settle the claim as it stands and don't try add anything on. If they want confidentiality then that will cost an extra £1000. If they don't like it then they can go do the other thing. Once you have made the amendments suggested above – it should be the final version. court,. I don't think we are going to make any more changes. Your next job good to make sure that you are completely familiar with it all. That you understand the arguments. Have you made a court familiarisation visit?
    • just type no need to keep hitting quote... as has already been said, they use their own criteria. if a person is not stated as linked to you on your file then no cant hurt you. not all creditors use every CRA provider, there are only 3 main credit file providers mind, the rest are just 3rd party data sharers. if you already have revolving credit on your file there is no need to apply for anything just 'because' you need to show you can handle money. if you have bank account(s) and a mortgage which you are servicing (paying) then nothing more can improve your score, despite what these 'scam' sites claiml  its all a CON!!  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 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
      • 160 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

Court Date 1st November!! - but I'm confused


fruitbat13
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6060 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

I realise that the queries I have have probably been answered for other people, but I've tried to find some answers and just go more and more lost!

 

We have received 2 letters in the same envelope.

 

First letter

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Case No: XXXXXXXXX

 

The above matter is now proceeding as a defended claim.

 

Allocation questionnaires have been dispensed with, but as the amount exceeds £1500.00 and allocation fee of £100.00 is payable.

 

Please forward your remittance for this amount to the court by 2007. Cheques should be made payable to H.M.C.S.

 

Yours faithfully

 

 

 

Second letter:

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Case No: XXXXX

 

Please find enclosed a copy of the defendants defence.

 

Yours faithfully

 

 

 

Right, here's my confusion. In the first letter it states that the allocation questionnaires have been despensed with. My understanding is that this means they won't be issueing them at all, so why do I have to pay the £100? We were told we are excempt from the court fees so surely this amount shouldn't apply anyway.

Also, whoever the admin was who sorted this letter out, they forgot to put a date in stating when it was payable by, so how do I know if we are late or not and if we are late, could I use this as leverage?

 

The next query I have is the 'Abuse' letter. I was reading someone elses thread a while ago (can't remember who he was, but he was moving whilst dealing with his Abbey claim - really nice bloke by the sounds of it too! :D;) ) and he mentioned something about sending this 'Abuse' letter to the court once he received his court date. Should I send this now, or do I wait a while?

 

I really hope someone can help me - all this seems so daunting and I'm terrible at this sort of thing.

 

 

:confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Fruit, firstly don't worry, there are a lot of people on this site and all they want to do is help.

 

Some courts have dispensed with the AQ, but the fee is still payable (usually within 14 days), others still issue the AQ and payment request!

 

It sounds like you aren't going to get an AQ, but still have to pay the fee (killer, I know)!

 

To be on the safe side find the number for the court and ask, they're usually very helpful.

 

Good Luck and Keep Us Posted x

Ladymuck x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ladymuck, thank you for you encouragement.

 

I called the court earlier today and they told us that they have a backlog of paperwork (wonder if there's loads of bank claims!). They also explained that if we were initially exempt, that it would probably be the case again.

 

Took details down there late this afternoon and showed them and guess what? We're exempt from the allocation fees aswell. There's still some nice people out there afterall! :D

 

She told us all we have to do now is wait until our court date. Not going to leave it that long though. Printed out all the 'Court Bundle' stuff already and am going to work on the updated charges bit tomorrow.

 

Does anyone know if I need to copy all the stuff that the court has sent me and include it in the bundle or should I just do it just in case?

 

I'm hoping that if we get our stuff organised and sent asap, that shabby will realise that we mean business and decide to settle way before 1st November (we're hoping to get a conservatory built and need the money for a deposit) :oops:

 

Also, although we haven't been issued an allocation questionnaire, should we still use the Abbey abuse order letter? I'm wondering if keeping the pressure up would also help for an earlier settlement or would it annoy the court as they have a backlog of paperwork?

 

Hhhhmmm, just dreaming about sitting in my lurvely new conservatory with a vodka coke in my hands :rolleyes::cool: . Only thing is, garden is a mess. Ah well, perhaps I should pursue shabby for our other account. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Fruit, good news about the fees x.

 

Its good to organised, it shouldn't do any harm to keep sending nudge letters. Read on here that someone was sending the letters every 10 days, until they settled, no reason not to persue the shabby for the other account!

 

Good Luck x

Ladymuck x

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

:mad: :mad:

 

Really, really not happy. We had a letter from Abbey which we initially thought was a kind of scare tactic, however, it turns out it wasn't.

 

Apparently:

 

"Abbey, (along with six other banks and a building society) has become involved in legal proceedings with the Office of Fair Trading ("OFT") in relation to unauthorised overdraft bank charges. We believe this will resolve the issues regarding the fairness and legality of your unauthorised overdraft bank charges.

Pending the outcome of this test case, we are asking the County Courts to stay all claims relating to unauthorised overdraft bank charges.

....

Given the Court case, we have asked the Financial Services Authority ("DSA") to suspend the normal timetable for dealing with the bank charges complaints, and the FSA has agreed to this request subject ton conditions that protect complainants' rights."

 

AARRRRGGGGHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

We have since received a letter from our local court stating that our case has been stayed!!.

 

I'm completed baffled by this now. I understand that our case is on hold until after the test case is finished with Abbey and the other banks/building society.

 

Do we just literally sit and wait for someone else to decide our fate now?

 

The letter from the court:

 

" IT IS ORDERED ON THE COURT'S OWN INITIATIVE THAT:

1. The hearing on 1st November 2007 is vacated.

2. The case be stayed pending the final resolution (being the judgment in the action or of the final appellate court, whichever is th later) of the case brought by the Office of Fair Trading in respect of the matter of bank charges.

3. The Defendand shall within 21 days after the final decision in the case referred to above at Court and serve on the Claimant:

(a) a case summary of not more than 500 words setting out the effect of the final decision in the said case on this action: and

(b) their proposed directions in this action

4. Upon receipt of the documents set out in paragraph 3 above the file shall be referred to a District Judge to consider further directions

5. There be permission to either party to apply to vary this order Provided that such application is filed within 21 days after the service of this order on the party so applying.

Dated 10 August 2007"

 

 

Has anyone else had anything like this?

I'm really flumoxed, was hoping that this would all be done and dusted before Christmas, but now it looks as though it's going to drag on - also with the possibility that we won't get anything in the end.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

most cases in the pipleline (or submitted since the announcement) have been, or are expected to be stayed. See the following threads

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/cases-stayed-pending-oft/

and

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/abbey-bank/107573-oft-test-case-what.html

 

I think we all realised that the recent situation couldn't continue and most people (I think) welcome the test case and are confident that fairness will prevail. Its just been very shoddily handled by the authrorities who have obvioulsy had little regard for consumers like us. I'm a week or 2 behind you and kicking myself for not starting sooner but hey ho!

The case is due to start in October but best guesses are that its unlikely to be resolved before next April and even then could go on to appeal and further so potentially could take years. This is why we need to keep the pressure on the government to make sure its not drawn out and that the little person is considered in all this. Theres a petition in Zoots sig at the bottom of the 2nd link.

Good luck, and try to think of the interest stacking up....

Ellie

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...