Find out here if your local court is staying claims

[abroadgirl]

update

Bank Charges Court Date Announced: 14 Jan. Plus clarity over credit card reclaiming?

hugs

abg

[Redrob]

I called Medway CC yesterday about my application to have the defence thrown out, got the usual story about backlogs, but was also told that although it is being done on a case by case basis, most claims are being stayed.

[Goooner]

Could an admin update the list please as Eastbourne CC are staying all Credit card cases.

[Goooner]

Also Hastings CC

[BankLover_not]

Oh Jesus Christ!,

 

Have you seen the new fee structure for small claims/fast track, on first sight it looks as though the fees have been reduced but then comes the new............'Hearing Fee'. That's right you now two fees even before you get to the allocation questionnaire stage, that's if you have to pay AQ fee. How do I start a new thread on this? This is just unbelievable. See below.

 

Old system:

 

Claim value £300 or under = court fee - £30

Claim value £301 - £500 = court fee - £50

Claim value £501 - £1000 = court fee - £80

etc, etc

 

New system:

 

Claim value £300 or under = issue fee - £30, hearing fee - £25

Claim value £301 - £500 = issue fee - £45, hearing fee - £50

Claim value £501 - £1000 = issue fee - £65, hearing fee - £75

It gets worse obviously the more you claim, this is

D IS G U S T I N G!

[legalpickle]

These are "trial" fees, which are charged when a date for hearing is given which is AFTER the AQ is filed.

They are refunded or partially refunded if the claim is settled, depending on when it is settled and when the Court is notified. The reason is because of many parties settling 5 minutes before the hearing which is a clear abuse of Court time.

Obviously the more your claim the more you have to spend, it's always been the same. For people who get settlements just after the AQ stage, it is a clear reduction in cost. I don't consider it "DISGUSTING", I consider it very reasonable. HMCS released a consultation about it, if "BankLover_not" thinks it was disgusting then this is sure one case where you should have remarked about it. It was made public enough!!!

[BankLover_not]

Hi Legalpickle,

 

Before i continue airing my grievance at the new fee system, maybe i have got something wrong which perhaps you can clear up for me. Before the 1st October 2007 was there a 'hearing fee' for claims under £5000? Because i'm pretty sure there wasnt, but i could be wrong. I am fully aware of the Allocation Questionnaire Fee and pre-trial checklist fee for higher claims.

 

BankLover_not

[legalpickle]

"BankLover_not",

1. The AQ fee started and still does start from above £1,500. This fee has gone down to £35 for Small Claims.

======================================================

2.1 On the claimant filing an allocation questionnaire; or —where the court dispenses with the need for an allocation questionnaire, within 14 days of the date of despatch of the notice of allocation to track; or—where the CPR or a Practice Direction provide for automatic allocation or provide that the rules on allocation shall not apply, within 28 days of the filing of the defence (or the filing of the last defence if there is more than one defendant), or within 28 days of the expiry of the time permitted for filing all defences if sooner: (a) if the case is on the small claims track and the claim exceeds £1,500£35

======================================================

2. So overall - IF the case proceeds to trial, BUT IF it doesn't then there is a reduction in fees.

 

I don't think this can be classed as disgusting. HMCS ran a full consultation on this. The aim is to try and get rid of the stupid ones who settle a few minutes or a couple of days before the hearing when realistically they could settle a month or two before the hearing, that way the hearing date is available for other cases. The aim is to get rid of the cases that are anyway going to be settled before a hearing and thus don't warrant a hearing.

 

legalpickle

[BankLover_not]

Legalpickle,

 

Firstly let me explain that what I am trying to say is that you will need to consider, way before the Allocation Questionnaire stage, whether or not you can now embark on litigation, which if it concludes with a hearing as many do, whether you can afford to pay the newly revised court fees. Surely you are aware of how many cases the banks have pushed for a full court hearing and you know that claimants (and claimants who may still have to pay more court fees once the test case is resolved) will now have to pay the new 'hearing fee' as well. I have done the maths on this and unless I am missing something the court fees have increased substantially whilst acknowledging there has been a minor reduction in the issue fee and AQ fee for small claims.

 

Old System:

 

Claim value £3001 - £5000 = Issue fee - £108, AQ fee - £35.00, hearing fee - £300, therefore grand total is now £443

 

Old System:

 

Claim value £3001 - £5000 = Issue fee - £120, AQ fee - £100, therefore grand total was £220

 

You reckon this is fair do you legalpickle? Unless you believe this will put banks off pushing for a full hearing then i'm afraid more claimants will now be put off claiming altogether because they can't afford these new fees. Regarding the consultation period as usual I found out about this after the event as with most of these so called 'consultation periods'. I don't know of one person who even knew of a consultation period for county court fees.

 

If we move on to the revised fees for the fast track division of the County Court system then it gets much worse for the claimant who doesn't have the odd £1025 lying around. I will discuss this in my next post but let you reply to this one before I do.

 

BankLover_not

[car2403]

I don't know what this has to do with the title of the thread? Sounds like a decent discussion to have, but maybe on a new thread and not on this one.

[monkeymax]

here, here

[photoman]

I've not looked into this myself, so not aware of what the situation is.

 

However, if there has indeed been a change, then it is something that needs looking into and be discussed.

 

Banklover, perhaps you would like to start a new thread on the subject, and once you have done so, post a link to it on this thread, so it can be discussed properly?

 

PM

[BankLover_not]

Hello Photoman,

 

I did actually ask how to do this on my first posting about this issue but I didn't get a reply. I will gladly start a new thread on this topic as I think it needs examining and more contribution by other memebers on what their thoughts are about the new County Court fee structure. Sorry to sound dumb but can I ask you how do I start a new thread please?

 

Thanks.

 

BankLover_not

[car2403]

Excuse the term "dummies", but this link will help you BankLover_not;

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/welcome-consumer-forums/107001-how-do-i-dummies.html

[photoman]

Banklover,

Looks like Michael Browne has already started a thread on the same topic, and it's already been made into a sticky. Perhaps you (and anyone else interested in the subject), would like to take a look and make any comments ?

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/112076-new-county-court-fees.html

 

PM

[BankLover_not]

Thanks Photoman that is an excellent link where I can pick up this argument there.

 

I still haven't had a response from you yet Legalpickles but do not respond here go to the link that Photoman has just posted above and we'll continue there.

 

Thanks again Photoman.

 

BankLover_not

[mousemat]

Hereford court are staying everything, I have appealed on hardship grounds, awaiting responce.

[susan1972]

Hi,

 

My claim with Abbey at the Worthing County Court has been stayed as from 1st October 2007.

 

Nice.

[shinchan]

Croydon County Court - small claims case stayed today pending outcome of OFT case. Judge was quite friendly and explained that in Croydon they were predominantly granting stay applications due the the Wilson v Robertson case and generally only refused a stay if you are receiving benefits...which I'm not.

[johnnyroper]

i was in weston super mare court yesterday and was told by the judge that a high court judge ruled all cases are to remain stayed until outcome of the test case.she was very friendly and said her hands were tied as it was a judge higher up than her that had made the ruling,apparently it is to have parity between all courts.

[legalpickle]

"BankLover_not": Sorry for the delay in responding, I was away from my computer for a few days.

1. I know a lot of people who were aware of the consultation. If you don't look you will never find.

2. If you really cannot afford the court fees then you should be able to get a remission or exemption.

3. You should ALWAYS consider the action you are taking before taking it.

4. The banks don't push for a full hearing, they drop out at the last minute, and then reimburse the court fees - if it gets to that stage.

5. It is only more expensive if it goes to hearing - fair's fair. For example; if I take a company to Court and they settle immediately, why should I have to lay out the same as somebody who takes 6 months through the court system and ends up in a hearing???

 

Under the new system if it is settled more than 28 days before the hearing, you end up spending £143 which is £77 cheaper than the old system.

 

I think it's entirely fair. If you want to turn it political, then let's look at it this way. Some courts have been losing money because many people have hearings booked which are cancelled at the last minute and thus they have wasted a booked slot. They still have to pay the Judge's wages and the other cases get delayed. Now they will get paid by hearing as well, but they have lowered the fees for the jobs that are easier. The result will be more independent courts, less money invested into Civil cases by the Government, and more money for the NHS and good causes.

 

Those people who honestly cannot afford the fees will end up getting fee remissions or taking loans for a few months from a friend.

 

I think it's very fair and very logical.

 

legalpickle.

[dutch1979]

subscribing. Will also let all know about what happens at my Prelim at Croydon Court at end of October. :|

[jewson34]

I went to Walsall County Court on the 28th September and my case was stayed.

I believe the judge had already decided to award a sty before I even went in but he said if he heard the case and I won Barclays would appeal and it was highly likely that I would have to pay their legal fees if/when I lost. He said it would cost me more than i am claiming and i should get proper legal advice before i considered appealing against the stay.

[AbbeyMan]

Hi folks, just heard today that my case has been stayed at Salford CC. They said they have done this for all cases pending the OFT case.

[jeffince]

i was due to 'win' my case v natwest at wigan county court as they did not respond before the deadline set by the judge, then i received a letter from nat west saying they were staying until the outcome of the OFT, which was confirmed by the judge!! how can they state that if a bank does not respond before the deadline the claimant will win, then go back on this?