Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I'm still pondering/ trying to find docs re the above issue. Moving on - same saga; different issue I'm trying to understand what I can do: The lender/ mortgagee-in-possession has a claim v me for alleged debt. But the debt has only been incurred due to them failing to sell property in >5y. I'm fighting them on this.   I've been trying to get an order for sale for 2y.  I got it legally added into my counterclaim - but that will only be dealt with at trial.  This is really frustrating. The otherside's lawyers made an application to adjourn trial for a few more months - allegedly wanting to try sort some kind of settlement with me and to use the stay to sell.  At the hearing I asked Judge to expedite the order for sale. I pointed out they need a court-imposed deadline or this adjournment is just another time wasting tactic (with interest still accruing) as they have no buyer.  But the judge said he could legally only deal with the order at trial. The otherside don't want to be forced to sell the property.. Disclosure has presented so many emails which prove they want to keep it. I raised some points with the judge including misconduct of the receiver. The judge suggested I may have a separate claim against the receiver?   On this point - earlier paid-for lawyers said my counterclaim should be directed at the lender for interference with the receiver and the lender should be held responsible for the receiver's actions/ inactions.   I don't clearly understand that, but their legal advice was something to do with the role a receiver has acting as an agent for a borrower which makes it hard for a borrower to make a claim against a receiver ???.  However the judge's comment has got me thinking.  He made it clear the current claim is lender v me - it's not receiver v me.  Yet it is the receiver who is appointed to sell the property. (The receiver is mentioned/ involved in my counterclaim only from the lender collusion/ interference perspective).  So would I be able to make a separate application for an order for sale against the receiver?  Disclosure shows receiver has constantly rejected offers. He gave a contract to one buyer 4y ago. But colluded with the lender's lawyer to withdraw the contract after 2w to instead give it to the ceo of the lender (his own ltd co) (using same lawyer).  Emails show it was their joint strategy for lender/ ceo to keep the property.  The receiver didn't put the ceo under any pressure to exchange quickly.  After 1 month they all colluded again to follow a very destructive path - to gut the property.  My account was apparently switched into a "different fund" to "enable them to do works" (probably something to do with the ceo as he switched his ltd co accountant to in-house).   Interestingly the receiver told lender not to incur significant works costs and to hold interest.  The costs were huge (added to my account) and interest was not held.   The receiver rejected a good offer put forward by me 1.5y ago.  And he rejected a high offer 1y ago - to the dismay of the agent.  Would reasons like this be good enough to make a separate application to the court against the receiver for an order for sale ??  Or due to the main proceedings and/or the weird relationship a borrower has with a receiver I cannot ?
    • so a new powerless B2B debt DCA set up less than a month ago with a 99% success rate... operating on a NWNF basis , but charging £30 to set up your use of them. that's gonna last 5mins.... = SPAMMERS AND SCAMMERS. a DCA is NOT a BAILIFF and have  ZERO legal powers on ANY debt - no matter WHAT its type. dx      
    • Migrants are caught in China's manufacturing battles with the West, as Beijing tries to save its economy.View the full article
    • You could send an SAR to DCbl on the pretext that you are going for a breach of your GDPR . They should then send the purported letter of discontinuance which may show why it ended up in Gloucester and see if you can get your  costs back on the day. It obviously won't be much but  at least perhaps a small recompense for your wasted day. Not exactly wasted since you had a great win  albeit much sweeter if you had beat them in Court. But a win is a win so well done. We will miss you as it has been almost two years since you first started out on this mission. { I would n't be surprised if the wrong Court was down to DCBL}. I see you said "till the next time" but I am guessing you will be avoiding private patrolled car parks for a while.🙂
    • It is extremely disappointing that you haven't told us anything about the result of the hearing. You came here at the very last minute and the regulars - all unpaid volunteers - sweated blood trying to get an acceptable Witness Statement prepared in an extremely short time. The least you could have done is tell us how the hearing went, information invaluable for future users. Evidently not.
  • 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
      • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Abbey's new "no breach" defence


GaryH
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4594 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

Removed due to recent developments - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/abbey-bank/111050-abbeys-new-no-breach-4.html#post1776035

Edited by GaryH

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 88
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Anyone who has recieved the new defence please post here. I can't attach it here becouse I'm out of attachment space, but mine is 5 pages long and has 14 paragraphs. Para 3 is;

It is denied that those charges payable and that rate of interest applicable upon a customer going into unauthorised overdraft or exceeding an authorised overdraft constitute a penalty at common law. It is denied that those charges and that interest are payable on breach of contract.

Also, anyone who has recieved the old one (which admits a breach of contract) recently can you please post here with details of when it was recieved.

 

Thanks.

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Only really after details of the old one's if they were served within the last week or so - say, sometime in August. :)

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the new one - have 3 claims going through and have been served the new one with 2 of the claims. They haven't defended the 3rd yet (they have till first week of sept to do this). One of the claims looks like it will still be heard, but the other 2 are/will be stayed at MCOL.

 

Do you need a copy of the new defence?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have 2 claims with Abbey.

 

The first one is dated 21/05/07 and is the old still defence where they say I have breached the contract and the fees charged reflect and are proportionate to the defendants admininistrative expensed incurred because of this breach. It then goes on to say even if they are not proportionate (which is denied), I remain liable to pay such fees as may be found to be proportionate and I am not entitled to claim repayment of the full amount of each claim.

 

The second defence dated 08/08/07, (mine is 7 pages and has 24 points)is totally different and denies that going into overdraft constitutes a breach of contract!

I also says:-

18. An overdraft constitures a loan, not a contract "under which a person ... agrees to carry out a service" within the meaning of section 12 of the 1982 Act. Accordingly, section 15 of the 1982 Act is of no application to an overdraft.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the new one - have 3 claims going through and have been served the new one with 2 of the claims. They haven't defended the 3rd yet (they have till first week of sept to do this). One of the claims looks like it will still be heard, but the other 2 are/will be stayed at MCOL.

 

Do you need a copy of the new defence?

Yes please, to compare if its the same. Either type it up here or if its easier I'll send you my e-mail address.

 

I got this defence through yesterday for my o/h's claim. They must think we are stupid - they have defended on the basis of terms that weren't even in existance when the charges were taken. Its ridiculous! I'm applying for summary judgment, and would advise others to do the same. I'll post something up here later on.

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I also says:-

18. An overdraft constitures a loan, not a contract "under which a person ... agrees to carry out a service" within the meaning of section 12 of the 1982 Act. Accordingly, section 15 of the 1982 Act is of no application to an overdraft.

 

Now that's an interesting twist, because surely CCA 74 s77/8 now takes effect and without an executed agreement it is unenforceable.

Be VERY careful whose advice you listen too

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have 2 claims with Abbey.

 

The first one is dated 21/05/07 and is the old still defence where they say I have breached the contract and the fees charged reflect and are proportionate to the defendants admininistrative expensed incurred because of this breach. It then goes on to say even if they are not proportionate (which is denied), I remain liable to pay such fees as may be found to be proportionate and I am not entitled to claim repayment of the full amount of each claim.

 

The second defence dated 08/08/07, (mine is 7 pages and has 24 points)is totally different and denies that going into overdraft constitutes a breach of contract!

I also says:-

18. An overdraft constitures a loan, not a contract "under which a person ... agrees to carry out a service" within the meaning of section 12 of the 1982 Act. Accordingly, section 15 of the 1982 Act is of no application to an overdraft.

Excellent. The charges were taken under the same terms and one defence admits a breach and the other completely contradicts it! Its almost funny!

 

Can you e-mail me yours, please? It seems much longer than mine.

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone have a copy of Abbey's new terms and conditions? If so, when do they take effect? The ones published on their website are still the old ones.

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent - thanks. :)

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great - have you got a scanner? Who signed the statement of truth?

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes please - I'll send you my e-mail address.

 

Cheers.

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi GaryH

 

I have the new T & C's, and the accompanying letter is dated 24 July 2007. The Code on the bottom of the Abbey Personal Current Account Key Features and Price List says:

 

BANK 0018 JUL 07 DS

 

And on the actual T & C booklet it says:

 

BANK 0042 MAY 07 DS

 

Hope that helps.

 

Jo xx

Six Nations Champions 2009

Triple Crown 2009

Grand Slam 2009

:cool::-D:cool:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just read the bottom of the letter and it says:

 

"Please take the time to carefully read both of these important documents, which take effect from 10th September 2007."

 

Very interesting!!!!

 

Jo xx

Six Nations Champions 2009

Triple Crown 2009

Grand Slam 2009

:cool::-D:cool:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Jo.:)

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi.. I got a copy of the new abbey defence, cover letter dated 10/08/07

 

Do I wait for a court date now? before submitting my bundle?

 

- finding it tough wading through this :( great resource this site though - wouldnt have had the courage or conviction to stay on track without all the help n advice offered here

Link to post
Share on other sites

See post #1. :)

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...