Office Of Fair Trading Test Case

[LMJ143]

here you go, thanks for your help

Stay_July_30.pdf

[Mister Twister]

Well that did not take long -

 

"Lord Justice Moore-Bick has written to Designated Civil Judges on the issue of how to manage live Bank Charges cases. It is understood that he considers that in most cases it would be appropriate to stay proceedings pending a decision of the OFT action."

 

Guess all bank charges cases will be stayed!

[Fat.Controller]

here you go, thanks for your help

 

 

That looks to me like an application for a stay.

 

FC

[LMJ143]

Everyone listed today at the Cambridge County Court (over 50) was given that info - didn't matter which bank they were claiming against

[Bookworm]

FM BW

A wise man once said - 'The start of a long journey begins with the first step' who knows what the judge will order - he may decide to hear it all himself regardless of the OFT case.

 

I know you cannot judge tone from responses so I'm going to assume that you meant your comment to be informative rather than yet another negative response on this thread.

 

It meant precisely what I said.

 

TB was suing for exemplary damages, which, despite the flag waving and general cheering of people hailing his case as some breakthrough, was anything but, and had little, if any, relevance to the case the OFT is starting against the banks. Furthermore, the case as was being decided today was quite simply to decide whether he would be allowed to proceed with his case or not, which is even less relevant to the OFT case.

 

Factual is not negative. It is factual.

[Destinyofsouls]

Can someone kindly provide a list or links to the petitions that have been raised in respect of this new development. At least we can make a start by protesting with our keyboards and signing petitions wherever they are, this way we can make our voices heard enmasse. Ministers are put into parliament to serve the people and not the other way around.

 

Common sense should make sense to all those that appear common. The FSA decisions does not represent common sense to delay money claims of those that appear common. Money is useful to the banks, but not above members/individuals in society that are in need of it the most.

 

There is a petition on the downing st site to overturn this crazy legislation. It takes 5 days to appear which will make it Thurs/Fri this week. Any other petitions like this one will be rejected as a similar one.

I will send the link when I know it is up.

[Destinyofsouls]

here is a small list of courts that are continuing. Although I still beleive it is too early to tell, it may help someone.

 

Reclaim Unfair Bank & credit card charges

[LMJ143]

Is it possible to request a transfer to any of the courts that are still operating?

[pward33]

I didn't even get as far as the judges chambers. The Barrister met with all the Barclays complainants as a group.

 

she had been there all day as was presenting people with the Stay, and saying the judge wasn't seeing anyone as it was a waste of time.

 

Am I the only one who finds this utterly extraordinary? What the barrister was handing out was a skeleton argument outlining the Defendant's reasons for applying for a stay.

 

They were entitled to apply for a stay, of course, and it was always likely that they would do so and would be granted one, but surely the Claimant is entitled at least to argue their case against the application before the judge before a decision was granted?!

[Destinyofsouls]

I understand you can transferr proceedings to any court within the juristiction where you live

[LMJ143]

Am I the only one who finds this utterly extraordinary? What the barrister was handing out was a skeleton argument outlining the Defendant's reasons for applying for a stay.

 

They were entitled to apply for a stay, of course, and it was always likely that they would do so and would be granted one, but surely the Claimant is entitled at least to argue their case against the application before the judge before a decision was granted?!

 

I think they were banking on mugs like me not knowing what to do...

if anyone has any ideas, I'd be most grateful!

[Fat.Controller]

Am I the only one who finds this utterly extraordinary? What the barrister was handing out was a skeleton argument outlining the Defendant's reasons for applying for a stay.

 

They were entitled to apply for a stay, of course, and it was always likely that they would do so and would be granted one, but surely the Claimant is entitled at least to argue their case against the application before the judge before a decision was granted?!

 

 

I fully agree. I think the Barclays Barrister was "pulling a fast one".

 

My understanding is that the Claimant should have been given the details of the application to stay and invited to counter. Then, and only then, should the judge make a decision.

 

FC

[LMJ143]

OK, so now what do I do?

 

(frustrated here, this has been going on since February - I am CERTAIN they held things up so that I had to wait!)

[bjones26muk]

I was in the courts today at my preliminary hearing. I got to sit with the judge, but it does look like the decision to stay is pretty much automatic - he listened to the Barclays legal rep's argument for a stay, and then entered this into his computer before I was able to speak - saying that these cases were taking up so much of the legal system that a verdict was needed one way or another and that it wouldn't be possible to decide my case until this verdict was given.

[crfx250]

It meant precisely what I said.

 

TB was suing for exemplary damages, which, despite the flag waving and general cheering of people hailing his case as some breakthrough, was anything but, and had little, if any, relevance to the case the OFT is starting against the banks. Furthermore, the case as was being decided today was quite simply to decide whether he would be allowed to proceed with his case or not, which is even less relevant to the OFT case.

 

Factual is not negative. It is factual.

 

The clue is in the So?

 

So? is negative

 

This is desperate...head in hands...

[Bookworm]

I was in the courts today at my preliminary hearing. I got to sit with the judge, but it does look like the decision to stay is pretty much automatic - he listened to the Barclays legal rep's argument for a stay, and then entered this into his computer before I was able to speak - saying that these cases were taking up so much of the legal system that a verdict was needed one way or another and that it wouldn't be possible to decide my case until this verdict was given.

 

Which court was it? It might be a good idea to start keeping track of which does what.

[elsinore]

'So?' is a question. Rhetorical maybe, but still a question. Nothing negative about it.

 

Els

[crfx250]

'So?' is a question. Rhetorical maybe, but still a question. Nothing negative about it.

 

Els

 

 

Really? How about this one:

 

''Yawn. One can only hope eventually, you'll get bored.''

[pward33]

OK, so now what do I do?

 

You have two weeks (I think it's two) during which you can apply for the stay to be set aside. Hopefully a moderator will help you construct an argument to support your application; I wouldn't feel sufficiently competent to advise you on precisely what to say.

 

Best of luck.

[Sanman1]

Halifax had until the 25th July to respond to my claim, they didn't so I've handed in my request to ask the court to enter judgement by default (27th July). I'm waiting to see how Lunatic flea gets on today but as the Halifax failed to respond to my claim within the 14 days, I'm assuming that the judgment by default is independent of the OFT test case. Is anyone able to clarify?

[everyman06]

Hi,

 

just received a'general form of judgement or order'. Sauer v.Barclays

 

Before District Judge Fawcett sitting at Brighton County Court

Upon the Courts own motion.The court has made this order of its own initiative without a hearing.If you object to the order,you must make an application to have it set aside,varied or stayed within 7 days of receiving it.

 

IT IS ORDERED THAT

 

All claims for repayment of bank charges are stayed until such time as the High Court has determined the application by the Office of Fair Trading for a declaration that such charges are unlawful.

 

So,what do I do now?

 

How do i apply to set aside? I am a drama student and work only part time? Surely i coulsd argue hardship??

 

All help welcome!!

[Lunatic Flea]

Halifax had until the 25th July to respond to my claim, they didn't so I've handed in my request to ask the court to enter judgement by default (27th July). I'm waiting to see how Lunatic flea gets on today but as the Halifax failed to respond to my claim within the 14 days, I'm assuming that the judgment by default is independent of the OFT test case. Is anyone able to clarify?

I wish i could be celebrating but it is still on hold.

The court manager told me to call at around 2pm to see if it had been heard. When i called back she told me that due to the high number in court today the Judge may not get through the whole list today. She told me if it did not my file would be passed to the court in Lincoln court who would look at it this Friday. The problem is with my court is it only looks at bank charges every Monday. The thing that worries me is as of today my court have not received any application for stays. However if i find out that on Friday the bank has contacted the courts and my case is put on hold i will not be a happy fella:evil:

However i do feel that i should be in a strong position as Lloyds failed to comply with the Judges orders before any OFT announcement.

I feel so frustrated and angry thast i am so close yet so far. I did include a supporting letter with my request form for judgement. It included the letter Lloyds and several other Banks had placed on their website. I did highlight that the request for a hold was at the judges discretion. I also said how frustrated i was that Lloyds throughout the claim had failed to enter into any negotations. I also said it makes me wonder if the banks failed to serve and file a counter schedule as they were aware of the OFT announcement due on the Friday:-)

Not too sure if it would do any good. In my eyes as soon as the failed to serve and file a counter schedule then they have no right to ask for a stay.

[kog]

Confirms much of whats been said on here

 

It's Vital You Still Claim Your Bank Charges - 30/07/2007

[pward33]

Confirms much of whats been said on here

 

It's Vital You Still Claim Your Bank Charges - 30/07/2007

 

In the advice on this link, claimants are being advised to make a REQUEST to the court that their claim is stayed

[shane5408]

In the advice on this link, claimants are being advised to make a REQUEST to the court that their claim is stayed

 

 

 

this article talks about the 6 year rule, i thought that claimants were no longer restricted to 6 years?