Jump to content


Case Stayed vs Barclays- What happened in court:


magna_pearl
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6085 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

Dear All that are wondering what might happen in your hearing like i was ,

 

I am claiming about £600 and went to court today, first the barclays representative came and talked to me saying they were going to request a stay and asked if i needed any clarifications on what that meant to which i said no as i had already done my research and knew thats what they would do!

She went away and came back again saying if i was going to accept the stay i didnt need to waste time waitting and could leave...to which i said that was fine i wasnt accepting the stay...

Went in and the judge asker her to say whatever and she asked for the stay to which he went off at her for not having sent the court the application for the stay and she said she was doing that then and he kept on going off at her ...he then asked me to show the letter they sent to me and it said that they were immediatelly applying for a stay, which hadnt happened...and i stated thinking there was a light at the end of the tunnel...he asked me what did i have to say and i stated various reasons against the stay:

 

1 human rights act that states everyone has the right to have a fair hearing within a reasonable time(the expected 2-4 years for the unfolding of this case isnt a reasonalble time

barclays replied - its meant to take 4 months...blah blah OFT wouldnt allow such a long period to decide on the case blah blah

2 importance of the case to me as for barclays it is just another case and the sum of money claimed is insignificant to them

barclays replied - the case is important otherwise they wouldnt be in court blah blah

3 allowing a stay is favouring the banks that have a lot more resourses in order to defend themselves and no restrictions are being put on their activities and me as a consumer am being restricted and dont have anyone representing me but myself

Judge said he understood my points but felt it was right to allow the OFT to come with a decision before he could carry on with the case....

 

Thats it!:mad:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi MagnaP,

 

This is ridiculous. How do the Bankers get away with it - no formal application - no fee paid - no respect for the Court or its' procedure - Judge is clearly sipped off with rep - AND THEY GET STAY ANYWAY.

 

Well done Magna for trying anyway.

 

Right, sorry for the rant but I feel better now (well, slightly).

 

Slick

 

PS - Emma, I wouldn't bank (no pun intended) on your Judge doing differently.

We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...