Abbey Court Date Monday 20th August

[shembu]

Going to court on Monday, Abbey sent me the standard "applying for stay" letter, checked with court who told me no such thing had been granted and case was still going ahead..

 

Abbey has not even bothered to submit a bundle of any kind, nor made any offer...

 

My bundle was submitted on time...

 

Monday should be interesting..

[ohoh4312]

Hi Shembu

 

Just wanted to say good luck for Monday.

 

Have you got your argument against a stay ready? And the non-compliance? This will be great ammo against the possibility of them requesting a stay at the hearing.

 

Hope it goes well for you - fingers crossed!

 

Best regards

 

Jo xx

[shembu]

Hi Jo and thanks for the support...

 

I'm getting ready, preparing all arguements....

 

Will submit a post to outline outcome, whatever it may be

 

S

[psm]

Good luck for monday shembu, I was in court Friday just gone, had part of the claim stayed and part adjourned for 28 days with directions compelling the abbey to disclose how charges are calculated!!!. Full report on my thread.

[TUTTSI]

Good Luck for Monday......

IMHO -I would go prepared in case Abbey have made an applcation for a stay. I would take with you the details for setting aside a stay. Zoot has one in the stickys in the Abbey forum.

DS

[shembu]

Thanks dsilverstein, I'm working on that...I'm so sure that they are going to be playing that card on Monday....

[psm]

In the defence Abbey sent you did they say that you were "in breach of Contract"?

[psm]

Hi shembu

 

As i said I was in court on Friday. The Solicitor acting for the Abbey turned up about 10 minutes b4 the case was to start. She came over and spoke to us like we were children, explaining all about the OFT test case. She asked us if we understood, and went on to say that she would be asking for a stay on the case. She asked me and my husband if we were going to object to her request, to which we replied yes. At this the solicitors demeanour changed, she asked what our objections would be and my husband briefly outlined them, we had printed off 3 copies of the zootscoot objections 1 for ourselves, 1 for the defence and one for the judge we also said that we had applied for a judgement against the defence for non compliance. We were ushered into the court and the defence began the proceedings. She explained why she was there, and then began to give the to apply for a stay, and then began to give the out the reasoning behind it. The main crux of her arguement was the complex nature of the legal arguements relating to the case and that the claimant and all other bank customers would be better served to let the greater legal minds argue these complex issues in the higher court. The judge then explained to us, as if we were children, the OFT case and its implications and asked if we objected to a stay being issued on our case. We said we did object and we handed the judge, via the usher, the printed zootscoot objections. We also informed the judge that we had written to the court and completed a form requesting judgement against the defendant for non compliance. To my amazement the judge seemed to be unaware of this fact, and promptly moved on. (It might be a good idea to check with the court office that your application will be dealt with at the same time) The judge glanced at the sheet and said that she had seen it in other cases of this nature. We also said that we were concerned that the defence might not be in a position to try the case if the judge decided to refuse the case. At this the judge asked the defence if they were ready to try the case in such an event to which the defending solicitor replied no. The judge rebuked the defence for being so presumptious in assuming that a stay would be automatically granted, much bowing and groveling the ensued. Luckily for us the judge actually read our bundle and spotted the "breach of contract" arguement. she stayed part of the claim relating to UTCCR act but said that the breach of contract arguement was simple and could be dealt with NOW..... The

[shembu]

Thanks for the information psm, it is most helpful...

 

I do have the "breach of contract" arguement in the defence/correspondence from Abbey; I have copied the arguements you used from your thread and will be taking that with me too...

 

I have also used Gary's template on applying to have a stay removed.

 

Thank you so much; the points you raise are brilliant and all the best on your case...

 

S

[Robdblynd]

Just wanted to wish you luck tomorrow .... I hope you get a good result.

[ukaviator]

Good luck tomorrow ...

 

Uk

[shembu]

Thanks guys!!!!

 

Gearing up.......

 

S

[glad]

Good luck for tomorrow.

Hope it goes well.

[KnellyK]

Just adding my good luck wishes!

 

Don't forget to report back!

[shembu]

Hey KnellyK, thanks!

 

Will definitely report back......

[Night Owl]

Good luck shembu.

Fingers crossed for a good outcome.

Night Owl

[katiec]

Best of luck for tomorrow, will be keeping everything crossed for you!

 

Please, please report back and tell us how it all went.

 

Katie x

[kopw]

Go on, Give 'em HELL !!! :)

[shembu]

Hey guys,

Here as promised is a report of what happened at my hearing today:

In a nutshell, the case was stayed.

The judge did her best to deliver a persona of fairness by being quite stern with Abbey’s representative, telling him that she basically needed no schooling in the facts or reasons for requesting a typical “stay”; she expected, however, that the rep explain to her how the reasons for the stay were relevant to the specific details of my case.

I basically watched as she chided him like a school child for repeating facts she was already aware of and the general attitude of reps who tend to come in expecting an automatic nod from the judge.

The rep was reading word for word from a document he had been given by bank’s solicitors; a document she was quick to note had not been sent to me at all. There seemed no satisfying her, until he mentioned several articles in the document which, she explained to me later, covered all the points that my case would raise if it was heard today, in the OFT test case; which was enough for her to grant the stay.

I went very well prepared indeed; but once she was satisfied with the rep from Abbey, she shot down all the points I attempted to raise, i.e. that the crux of Abbey’s defence was a BREACH OF CONTRACT one and could be addressed in the hearing today, Abbey’s slip shoddiness in not responding to the order of the court to send me their bundle, etc..

The judge used the blanket “…it is difficult for lay people to understand how the law works” statement, which I found totally patronising, then went on to explain how her hands were tied by her knowledge that the test case was going to cover all the elements of the case (as provided in the statement read by the rep); that the test case with the OFT was not just about the UTCCR Act and how it relates to banks’ Terms and Conditions; she made it impossible for me to air any other objections by raising the point that if she was to hear the case and make a ruling, the bank would immediately appeal on the grounds that it has proven in documentation submitted to the court that every point to be considered in my claim will be covered by OFT test case and that it is better for all parties that we wait for the test case ruling.

She did press the rep for details (apparently for my benefit) of exact dates of when the test case would be heard to avoid any further prolonging the case and ordered that after the judgment, the bank be given a maximum of 14 days to officially inform myself and the court of the result and it’s proposed course of action (and time frame) in fulfilling what the High Court might order; should it go to the appeal courts, the bank would have 7 days to inform and propose a course of action once the appeal is concluded.

To be honest, I had kind of switched off at this stage because it was obvious that today’s hearing was all about the STAY. It seems to me that whatever aspect of the case would get heard in small claims, rulings would be appealed on the grounds that the court did not concern itself with all the details of the case.

Nonetheless, I did walk away feeling angry at what I considered a waste of time; why go for a hearing when a letter would suffice (I’m referring to the stay)? Apparently, I am one of the slightly more inconvenienced ones because the agreement on trying the test case was only made on the 27th (I think) of July which means that the stays have to be applied for individually until or unless a blanket ruling staying all claims for penalty charges against the banks is made.

 

The odd point or two above is just personal opinion and my perception of how my case was dealt with today...

 

...that said, I couldn't help but be amused during the proceedings; I do have a tendency of looking like I've just left college, I look a lot younger than I actually am; I could have slapped her for for all the effort she was putting to explain what "law" was and how the legal system works - she must have thought I walked in with my mum having done my homework!!!!

[shembu]

I would like to thank you all for your support; I walked in that room today as ready as I could ever be thanks to all your help and messages...

 

Sx

[psm]

Makes you wonder that follow their debacle in Woolwich on Friday they have better prepared their stay applications. Although the judge at woolwich had read the outline of the OFT test case and thought differently to your judge. I am gutted for you shembu and can understand your frustration. I am wondering now if the abbey can appeal the result in my case. Nothing would surprise me now. It sounded like she had her mind set before you walked in and the rest was just for show, so that justice could be seen to be done. But hey, you gave it your best shot and did yourself proud.

[shembu]

Hey psm,

 

I am inclined to agree with you; what was very apparent to me today was how easy it is to forget that the courts are seeing hundreds of these cases on an almost daily basis; there is no arguement that the judge is not aware of and any order made is purely discretionary..

 

I'll be very intrigued to find out if anyone manages to not only remove the stay and get awarded damages....has anyone?

 

I also agree that there was a "performance" element to today's proceedings; the judge kept interrupting the rep until he said the "magic words"; then she started nodding after which she turned to me to say that she was satisfied that the stay was applicable to my case; all before I even opened my mouth...

 

Obviously she has heard all the arguements and the "hearing" was just a matter of formality; actually it felt more like she was a school teacher testing the rep "student"

 

Thanks for all your help psm...all the best on your case..I'm very curious to learn the outcome...

 

S

[psm]

The judge in my case and the rep in yours seemed to have a great deal of detail regarding the format of the OFT test case. It is apparent that we are at a disadvantage if we do not have access to this detail. It will make it almost impossible to come up with a coherent arguement against an application based on this detail. Is the detail of the issues to dealt with in the OFT case in the public domain yet? If not we can only hope that someone can write down the points made by the defendants rep in their application so they may be studied with abit more time. Until then it looks like claimants will have to take notes at the time and try to counter the arguements as they relate to their individual case.

goodluck for the future shembu and I will keep you posted on developmets.

[Lady E]

Well done, you did your very best by all accounts but it looks as if the odds were stacked too high against you. I totally agree with you as to why they could not have just sent a letter saying there would be a stay instead of wasting all this time. I have my case on 23rd August , I have to put my 2 boys into childcare and hubby is taking a halfday to come with me as moral support. Thanks for the report , really helpful

[Night Owl]

Well done for arguing your case so well.

I can't think of anything more nerve racking!!!

Such a bummer that really, as you said, it was a waste of time and you could have been informed by letter about the stay.

Well done too for recording your account of the day.

Night Owl