Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the 02/01/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the 19/05/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, 02/06/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
    • Monika the first four pages of the Private parking section have at least 12 of our members who have also been caught out on this scam site. That's around one quarter of all our current complaints. Usually we might expect two current complaints for the same park within 4 pages.  So you are in good company and have done well in appealing to McDonalds in an effort to resolve the matter without having  paid such a bunch of rogues. Most people blindly pay up. Met . Starbucks and McDonalds  are well aware of the situation and seem unwilling to make it easier for motorists to avoid getting caught. For instance, instead of photographing you, if they were honest and wanted you  to continue using their services again, they would have said "Excuse me but if you are going to go to Mc donalds from here, it will cost you £100." But no they kett quiet and are now pursuing you for probably a lot more than £100 now. They also know thst  they cannot charge anything over the amount stated on the car park signs. Their claims for £160 or £170 are unlawful yet so many pay that to avoid going to Court. When the truth is that Met are unlikely to take them to Court since they know they will lose. The PCNs are issued on airport land which is covered by Byelaws so only the driver can be pursued, not the keeper. But they keep writing to you as they do not know who was driving unless you gave it away when you appealed. Even if they know you were driving they should still lose in Court for several reasons. The reason we ask you to fill out our questionnaire is to help you if MET do decide to take you to Court in the end. Each member who visited the park may well have different experiences while there which can help when filling out a Witness statement [we will help you with that if it comes to it.] if you have thrown away the original PCN  and other paperwork you obviously haven't got a jerbil or a guinea pig as their paper makes great litter boxes for them.🙂 You can send an SAR to them to get all the information Met have on you to date. Though if you have been to several sites already, you may have done that by now. In the meantime, you will be being bombarded by illiterate debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors all threatening you with ever increasing amounts as well as being hung drawn and quartered. Their letters can all be safely ignored. On the odd chance that you may get a Letter of Claim from them just come back to us and we will get you to send a snotty letter back to them so that they know you are not happy, don't care a fig for their threats and will see them off in Court if they finally have the guts to carry on. If you do have the original PCN could you please post it up, carefully removing your name. address and car registration number but including dates and times. If not just click on the SAR to take you to the form to send to Met.
    • In order for us to help you we require the following information:- [if there are more than one defendant listed - tell us] 1 defendant   Which Court have you received the claim from ? County Court Business Centre, Northampton   Name of the Claimant ? LC Asset 2 S.A R.L   Date of issue – . 28/04/23   Particulars of Claim   What is the claim for –    (1) The Claimant ('C') claims the whole of the outstanding balance due and payable under an agreement referenced xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and opened effective from xx/xx/2017. The agreement is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 ('CCA'), was signed by the Defendant ('D') and from which credit was extended to D.   (2) D failed to comply with a Default Notice served pursuant to s87 (1) CCA and by xx/xx/2022 a default was recorded.   (3) As at xx/xx/2022 the Defendant owed MBNA LTD the sum of 12,xxx.xx. By an agreement in writing the benefit of the debt has been legally assigned to C effective xx/xx/2022 and made regular upon C serving a Notice of Assignment upon D shortly thereafter.   (4) And C claims- 1. 12,xxx.xx 2. Interest pursuant to Section 69 County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from xx/01/2023 to xx/04/2023 of 2xx.xx and thereafter at a daily rate of 2.52 to date of judgement or sooner payment. Date xx/xx/2023   What is the total value of the claim? 12k   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? Yes   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? N/A Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After   Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online   Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes, but amount differs slightly   Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. DP issued claim   Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Not that I recall...   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Not that I recall...   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Yes   Why did you cease payments? Loss of employment main cause   What was the date of your last payment? Early 2021   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No   -----------------------------------
    • Hello CAG Team, I'm adding the contents of the claim to this thread, but wanted to open the thread with an urgent question: Do I have to supply a WS for a claim with a court date that states " at the hearing the court will consider allocation and, time permitting, give an early neutral evaluation of the case" ? letter is an N24 General Form of Judgement or Order, if so, then I've messed up again. Court date 25 May 2024 The letter from court does not state (like the other claims I have) that I must provide WS within 28 days.. BUT I have recently received a WS from Link for it! making me think I do need to!??
  • 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
      • 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

Office Of Fair Trading Test Case


Guest Wild Billy
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5841 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

it seems to me that the Consumer Action Group should consider applying for an injunction to prevent the banks applying these charges while the matter is in court.

 

And to force the banks to process claims pending the outcome.

 

I presonally have got around £15K in court with Abbey & Barclies, now I have to wait 2 bloody years to ge tthat back. That's if the ruling goes against the banks, and I think there are now a lot of people now coming to terms that this just may not happen

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Just a thought but has anyone thought to start a petition on the No 10 website to claim that the FSA decision to waiver complaints but still allow the banks to continue to charge is fundamentally against consumer interests or similar, hey if I was a lawyer I would have alot more money and less charges ;-/

 

Is there nothing in th Human rights can prevent them doing this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

And to force the banks to process claims pending the outcome.

 

I presonally have got around £15K in court with Abbey & Barclies, now I have to wait 2 bloody years to ge tthat back. That's if the ruling goes against the banks, and I think there are now a lot of people now coming to terms that this just may not happen

 

No court would order that:x

 

Ach, life sucks:)

i will be off site for the next month or so. if you have any problems, feel free to report the post so a moderator can help you.

 

I am not a qualified or practicing lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

it seems to me that the Consumer Action Group should consider applying for an injunction to prevent the banks applying these charges while the matter is in court.

 

 

Think thats a very good idea - obviously the establishment aren't going to look after the interests of the consumer here - this is all about big business and ensuring their fat cat multi million pund bonus keep coming in.................. and we are all just supposed to take it:x

You may receive different advice to your query as people have different experiences and opinions. Please use your own judgement in deciding whose advice to take.

 

If in doubt seek advice from a qualified insured professional. Any advice I have offered you is done so on an informal basis, without prejudice or liability.

 

If you think I have been helpful PLEASE click the scales

 

court bundles for dummies

Link to post
Share on other sites

it would be interesting to see how many court cases today conclude.maybe there should be a general thread for feedback

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

CI has already been decided at precedent setting level last month. Anyone who has managed to get it after that was just very lucky that the judge or the defence were not aware of it.

 

That was CI on the basis of mutuality and reciprocity. There remain other grounds on which it may yet be claimable - ie unjust enrichment as quoted in the Sempra case - though I appreciate this would be far from straight forward.

 

Take a look at this thread, especially the last three or four pages...

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/halifax-bank-bank-scotland/97691-contractual-interest-precedent-lost-17.html

... be that as it may, this is not the place for an argument about the merits, or otherwise, of asking for CI. Let's, for the sake of argument, assume that there is a case for it. In those circumstances, what effect might this test case have on anyone who was asking for it?!

 

Fred_Funk

NatWest: seeking unlawful charges + interest incurred as a result of those charges of £4,292.82 and contractual interest (compounded) of £4,559.41. Court claim issued 16.01.08; acknowledgement of service filled by Cobbetts on 30.01.08

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a quote from the BBC news website relating to the announcment"

However, the banks will still need to make a note of any claims lodged, and will have to honour offers to settle that were made before the test case and FSA waiver were announced"

Surely like in my case when Lloyds have filed to file and serve a counter schedule which was ordered by the Judge they cannot ask for a stay as although the judgement is not due to be heard on Monday they have not complied with a Judges orders so should win by default. I know it would be different if you were going through the court process and both claiment and defendant are up to date withthe info they have been ordered to supply.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the BBA's reaction:

 

 

 

 

Banks join OFT in test case to establish legal clarity on overdraft fees

 

26/07/2007

 

 

Tomorrow morning a number of banks and financial services organisations(1) are taking the initiative, working jointly with the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) and the Financial Services Authority (FSA), to ask the UK courts to clarify the legal position regarding bank overdraft fees.

Court process

 

Banks believe the fees customers pay for unarranged overdrafts are fair and clear. However, this is clearly an issue where customers, as well as the banks, would welcome legal clarity. This is why banks have joined with the OFT to approach the courts for a ruling on this issue. It is unclear how long the case will last as that will depend on the court process.

Working together

 

The banks have approached the Financial Services Authority (FSA) and the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) to agree a way forward to handle existing customer complaints. The FSA has agreed to issue a waiver(2), with immediate effect, to suspend the handling of customer complaints on this issue pending a decision by the court. Other banks who are not party to the court action will be applying to the FSA for a waiver and as such will be bound by the outcome of the court case.

What this means for the customer

 

The FSA has agreed that all existing or subsequent customer claims for refunds of bank charges will be recorded by the customer's bank or building society but any decision about potential refunds will be put on hold until the outcome of the court case. Offers which have already been made to customers will be honoured if the customer chooses to accept.

Banks will be writing to the UK courts requesting a stay(3) of all claims pending the outcome of this test case. The banks will be writing to customers with outstanding complaints advising them personally of their position.

Angela Knight, chief executive of the British Bankers' Association (BBA), said:

"Establishing legal clarity on the issue of bank charges is of paramount importance, not only for the banking industry, but for all customers now and in the future."

"The banks have always been firmly of the view that the fees they charge customers are fair and clear. The court case will clarify these points and provide certainty for customers and banks alike."

 

 

 

For further information, please contact:

Press Office (020 7216 8970 )

Out of hours contact (020 7216 8888 )

 

 

Notes to Editors:

(1)The BBA's members involved in the legal action are: Abbey; Barclays; Clydesdale; HSBC; HBOS; Lloyds TSB; Royal Bank of Scotland/NatWest; and Yorkshire banks; and Nationwide Building Society.

(2) The FSA this morning issued a press release announcing the details of this waiver. This can be downloaded from the FSA website (see link below).

(3) Banks will apply for a Stay of Proceedings on all current and pending cases to the Master of the Rolls for England and Wales, to the Attorney-General for Northern Ireland and to the Sheriff Courts in Scotland.

 

Related Links

 

FSA website (External Link)

OFT website - questions & answers (External Link)

Are these ok for printing off for court?
Link to post
Share on other sites

Are these ok for printing off for court?

Do we think The banks will post a request to courts or could they do it via fax? I only ask as i was due to receive judgement this Monday after Lloyds failed to serve to me and file at court a counter schedule by Monday just gone. Hopefully being the weekend the court would not have received any request from the bank before my District Judge looks at my request

Link to post
Share on other sites

The media reporters should let people know that The OFT has in affect let the banks carry on with their regime of charges and delayed (at best) any consumer recourse .

 

This is just another nail in the coffin of this country's regulatory framework , just as Energy Suppliers running a muck with peoples accounts and Comms companies arguing over TV channels, competition can be seen as healthy to the consumer but in England it is becoming clear who the consumer watchdogs are in the laps of, lets face it it starts with the attitude of the Chancellor of this, oh no wait a minute, Prime Minister!, of this country.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do we think The banks will post a request to courts or could they do it via fax? I only ask as i was due to receive judgement this Monday after Lloyds failed to serve to me and file at court a counter schedule by Monday just gone. Hopefully being the weekend the court would not have received any request from the bank before my District Judge looks at my request

 

I would suspect, but I am no expert, that they use a closed courier system same as Solicitors etc I hope you get the judgement you want though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

spoke with my local court-not allowed to advise but obviously once you pay the fee your in the system-no going back so no refund.aaaaaaaaaagggghhhh

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

just spoke to Brighton County Court and Barclays filed their defence today.The woman said now it's the allocation questionaire and a stay would be up to the judge... grrrrrrrrr

 

Seems like all we can do is keep on fighting and pray the money-god has mercy on our broke souls... ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would suspect, but I am no expert, that they use a closed courier system same as Solicitors etc I hope you get the judgement you want though.

Well at least the Court is closed over the weekend and i will keep my fingers crossed my matter is dealt with by the judge before the court receives any requests:mad:

Link to post
Share on other sites

if the banks decide each case on its own merits as they always say then surely they can't on mass apply for all court cases in the system to be stayed at once.......can't there be a legal challange on this point?........they should apply for a stay on each case at a time??

Link to post
Share on other sites

if the banks decide each case on its own merits as they always say then surely they can't on mass apply for all court cases in the system to be stayed at once.......can't there be a legal challange on this point?........they should apply for a stay on each case at a time??

Good point. Every claiment is not at the same point. If it is true that Banks are going to honour promises they made to settle out of court i can't see how in my case they can ask for a stay when they have failed to comply with the "Orders" a judge gave and i have requested judgement. I hope it is on individual cases ask i stand a better chance

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately cases are stayed pending high court decisions sometimes for years and there is nothing we can do about it.

 

A recent example is where people sleeping in their cars under the influence of alcohol who were up for drink driving went to a test case and all cases were stayed for 2 years!

Link to post
Share on other sites

it seems to me that the Consumer Action Group should consider applying for an injunction to prevent the banks applying these charges while the matter is in court.

 

Agreed. Can this be done?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...