I have exactly the same situation with the alliance and leicester except that after totting up £60 in so called under funding fees they withdrew my overdraft and starting charging £5 per day and when it reached £250, they wrote the charges off, closed my account and sent late monthly status codes to the CRA's which crippled my otherwise good credit rating. I have now received all my back statements and the only activity on the account for the last 18 months is their charges. I issued proceedings in the county court on Saturday for an order that they remove the default against my file. I would advise you to dispute your charges formally especially if you do not want an adverse mark put against your credit file. I do not see why these charges would not be refundable, they will be subject to scrutiny by the Oft in due course. If you can afford to, it might be worth paying up now and close the account. Depending on the outcome of the test case you may be able to claim the charges back later, but will limit the damage if you cant. i will post my progress with the courts on the site. Good luck

Hi Rip Welcome to the forum This is your lucky day. It is pretty obvious what the solution is here Rip. why dont you move your account somewhere else and pay this balance off, it must make sense. Well it makes sense to Marbles / HSBC because the agreement is probably unenforceable and they are trying to push you over the edge before you find out. Because now you have found out, you need to read other threads and send off for a copy of your agreement and this will start you on your way to writing off this debt. You are best to start you own thread - 'Marbles I need help' or 'I need to lose my marbles' or something to draw in help. Good luck I will keep an eye open. ps If someone gives you good advice click on the scales it thanks them. Pedross

i think it was pinky 69

Courtesy of X20 x20's post I have prepared a draft bill of costs for detailed assessment and draft notice of commencement. Both are attached in pdf format. In drawing the bill I have tried to keep it as uncomplicated as possible whilst seeking to demonstrate how to maximise the amount which might be allowed. The documents may be of general application in litigation to include for example, dealing with a costs claim after successfully obtaining an order setting aside a Statutory Demand, after making all such necessary modifications to suit. The bill begins with a narrative dealing with the nature of the case and the complexity of it as I imagined it may have appeared to the LiP. My imagination should not be treated as a statement of how the complexity in truth appeared to the LiP. Next is a chronological statement of the steps taken in the case as they will appear on the court file. I have not bothered to go through the entire thread to establish what occurred on what day. The LiP will have to do that. I have included provision for time spent which has been charged at an hourly rate of £9.25 in accordance with The Litigants in Person (Costs and Expenses) Act 1975. I can not stress enough that where time is included this is only a statement of time for the purpose of demonstrating how the figures would appear in the bill. My statement of time is not an estimate of time. Only the LiP can say how much time was spent and my statement of time may be an under- statement or an over-statement, I would not know. It is worth pointing out however that the court will recognise that a LiP will most likely spend more time in a case than a solicitor. The relevant Rule is CPR 48.6 with guidance appearing in The Supreme Court Costs Office Guide (COG) Practice Direction at CPR PD 48 COG 22.4 and .5. The question for the Judge considering the bill is if this case had been conducted by a solicitor, what would that solicitor’s reasonable total charge have been for doing that work? Having arrived at that hypothetical figure, the costs judge will assess the bill but disallow whatever the total bill comes to from exceeding two-thirds of the hypothetical figure. It seems to me the hypothetical solicitor may have spent say 6 hours dealing with all the work set out in the bill from beginning to end. At an average charge of £150.00 per hour, that produces a hypothetical figure of £900.00. In other words therefore, if the Judge held my view about what the hypothetical solicitor may have charged, the amount to be allowed to the LiP ought not to exceed £600.00. As you will see, my draft works out at £573.50. What to do Next Complete the bill adapting the narrative to your personal experience in terms of actual work done and actual time spent. Feel free to add to it where I have not imagined work which you actually did. Insert the dates and sign and date the bill. Next complete Form N252 available from the HMCS website here. You will ned to complete the court and party details in the box on the RHS. The draft N242 I have completed gives the position as if my figures were used. Where the total used in the bill is to be different, put that figure in the first figure box where N252 says: ‘The bill totals £xxx.xx’. (figure [1]) Next, add £300.00 to figure [1] and put whatever this figure in the next box where N252 says: the full amount payable (including the assessment fee) will be £xxx.xx). (figure [2]). Next insert a date in the box before which is written: ‘You must serve your points of dispute by’. This date will be a date being not less than 21 days after the date on which your opponent receives the bill and the N252. In practice, add 25 days to the date on which you post the bill out to your opponent. If that date should fall on a Saturday or Sunday, insert the date for the following Monday. Next fill out the box which provides a name and address at which the opposition may deliver any response to the bill of costs. The response will be entitled ‘Points of Dispute’. I don’t imagine one will arrive and if one does, how to deal with it will be dealt with in a later advice. Next, leave the box beginning: ‘I certify that I have also served’ blank Next, at the very end of the bill is a third figure box before which is written ‘If I have not received your points of dispute by the above date, I will ask the court to issue a default costs certificate for the full amount of my bill (see above*) plus fixed costs and court fee in the total amount of £’ . In this box take the figure [1] and add £45.00 to it. This is the figure which goes in this box (figure [3]). Print the N252 off, sign and date it. Next, send the bill and the N252 off to the opposition’s solicitor. After Having Sent the Bill and N252. Make a note when the 25 days will be up. I would expect the opposition to make contact with you in an attempt to settle the question of your costs. So as to avoid hassle and heartache, I would be prepared to settle at anything which came to about one third rather than two thirds of the hypothetical solicitor’s bill. On my example, that would be around £300.00 plus the court fee. You may want to settle at something less just to be shot of it. If any offer comes in which is wildly below £300.00 post to this site for advice. I would imagine the opposition will be very keen to settle since objecting will tie them into expense they will wish to avoid and any savings will soon be wiped out by employing a solicitor to deal with the objections. When the cheque comes in, make a donation to CAG. If you have not heard from the opposition by when the 25 days are up you will be entitled to apply to the court for a default costs certificate. When that moment arrives, post here. Any queries, just ask. x20 Attached FilesDraft LiP bill of costs for detailed assessment.pdf (56.6 KB, 202 views)Draft Notice of Commencement.pdf (29.9 KB, 146 views) Regards Andy

terms and conditions are not a prescribed term althoug should be supplied. all they would need to do is supply t and c's at that time. you can certainly write back and ask for t and c's but this itself would not make the actual agreement unenforceable ida x

I answered you twice on MSE(lol, I get about a bit ).

Direct to Halifax.

The only area of confusion over SOGA and the EU legislation is the period of time covered by the guarantee. However, both periods do indeed exceed the 12 months manufacturers warranty. If you have Googled the error code you mentioned then you will have seen quite clearly that there is an inherent manufacturing defect with this model PS3. In some cases this fault appeared fairly soon after purchase in other cases, as in yours, the fault did not materialise until some time later. You certainly do have a claim against HMV in respect of SOGA and, if you paid by credit card you also have a claim againt the credit card company in repect of the Consumer Credit Act Section 75. Both companies are liable. You should write to both HMV and the credit card company (if applicable) at the same time and send by recorded delivery. Letters should give the companies 14 days to respond and should contain the phrase "time is of the essence". You will find template letters here Consumer Direct - Making a complaint you need the first and second templates (the second only if you bought on a credit card). However go back to HMV first and tell them what you intend doing. Explain that it is their problem not Sonys. Speak to the guy at the top not a salesperson.

Useful comments and template from pt2537 towards the end.

MJC, Covering letter to DCA, for you to edit or alter to your circumstances. Vint Ref Account xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Dear DCA, I refer to your letter of xxxxxxxxx, the content of which is noted. No debt to your client is acknowledged. On xxxxxxxxxxx I made a formal request to your client pursuant to s.78(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. They have failed to comply within the statutory time limit, or at all. It should not be necessary to have to remind You or Halifax that the provisions of s.78(6) now apply. This account entered into dispute on the xxxxx( 12 days + 2 )xxxxxxx and a further response sent to Halifax xxxxxxxxx. These letters are enclosed. In the circumstances, you and your clients threat of legal action would appear to be a breach of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 and the Office of Fair Trading Guidance on Debt Collection and your attention is drawn to this guidance document. Your attention is also drawn the ICO on Data protection, as passing details on to a third party while an account is in dispute is contrary to the Data Protection Act. I have previously issued letters to Halifax under s10 of this act. You may wish to advise your client of the implications of ignoring the Data Protection Act. With regard to the threat to obtain a Charging Order on any property that I may own, I would draw your attention to the OFT’s current investigation into such practices. Should you or your client bring proceedings, they will be robustly defended, and the Court's attention drawn to the above statutory breaches . Furthermore, I reserve the right to bring the conduct of your client to the Court when the issue of costs is being considered. I therefore suggest that you immediately return this matter to Halifax Plc, for them to deal with. Yours Enc: Letters to c.c.

Going by forum reports they will not wait for 3 months of non-payment. Just one month of non-payment and they would often send out the DN. The DN is a legal final warning, which if not remedied by the deadline will enable Egg to close the account and demand the balance in full. Egg do not have to close the account, but in practice generally do. The general impression is that Egg Tower does not house a bank of telephonists to ring delinquent cardholders nonstop. Egg prefer to let DCAs do it, while their lawyers rattle the sabre. I can see the regulators leaning on Egg to reduce the interest rate due to a debtor's hopeless situation, but stopping interest altogether on an ongoing account by negotiation, I very very much doubt that. If Egg do it for you, you spread the word then Egg will have to do the same for everybody. If you dread the mounting interest more than court action and CCJ, then might as well give up time-consuming correspondence, just provoke Egg into immediate escalation. E.g. you could declare an intention not to pay. Egg will then issue DN (often not sending it to the cardholder), close the account, stop the interest, and commence legal proceedings if they are convinced the DCAs will not worry you. It is entirely your case to run at your own tempo. Have you considered turning up at Egg Tower to speak to a big manager in person? The higher the paper-pusher the better chance of a discretionary arrangement, but I would not bank on it. Good luck.

That'll work

and if when you go payg with the same number, they start sprouting crap about having to have another simcard & they cannot make your current one payg must now pay £15. tell 'em thats rubbish. sadly myself and 3 others at work got stung by this until i got ahold of a supervisor in retentions dept. excuse was the 'script' on the callcentre operators screen was wrong! we got all the £15's refunded and a £20 vouncher each as a sorry. dx

Hi AA:) My OH had exactly the same letter at the beginning of July. We sent a formal complaint reminding them that he had responded to their previous letters and that the account was in dispute because of mis-sold PPI which is currently being dealt with by the FOS. Despite this 10 days later he received a DEBTOR'S NOTICE with a bold red heading - oooh scary stuff:eek::eek: - asking for payment within ten days or legal action may be taken. We responded with a further formal complaint that they are breaching OFT guidelines on debt collection. So this is what you will probably get next! We haven't heard anything since they received this about 10 days ago. The FOS has been in touch saying MBNA are prepared to repay the PPI but will not accept liabilty for mis-selling. I believe it will be taken off the balance, but at least that way it reduces it a little. My biggest fear is the charging order scenario as we own our house outright - at times like this I wish we didn't! Will continue subbing to see if you get the same letter next;) Regards, Landy x

just a quick word of warning not that im disparaging attempts to help however ive had a look, samels customer service doesnt have an email address and signet.co.uk is a hosting site.... ill ask a mod to look at it as i may be wrong

I think what has happened here is they "suspended" your benefit rather than ended the claim. If this is the case, then they have either concluded the investigation or a decision maker has reconsidered your entitlement to the suspended benefit, possibly as a result of the Crisis Loans. A Crisis Loan should never be awarded where benefit money is due, it is quite possible that they requested your payments be reinstated until the investigation was complete and a decision maker has reconsidered entitlement as a result of such a request. The only way you can know for certain is to call the benefit delivery centre that processes your benefit. You will also need to ring the council to see if your housing benefit./local housing allowance can be reinstated, as they are a seperate entity to DWP

on 5th April 2006 the CEO of the OFT set a limit of £12 for credit card penalty charges. If the cards did not comply he "did not rule out taking legal action against them." He gave the cards an action deadline of 31st May 2006. However Egg being a cyber bank managed to persuade the OFT they were a special case in that fewer of their cardholders incurred Overlimit and Late Payment charges because they had a scheme of compulsory DDs for all their cardholders. The OFT gave Egg a special dispensation of £16 instead of £12. The OFT at no stage said £12 or £16 charge was fair or lawful. For praqmatic reasons the OFT will not take action to lower the bar at this time, but in no way has the OFT ever ruled £12 or £16 as lawful. The Egg story is pure fantasy and misrepresentation. Repeatedly the OFT said the legality of charge level is to be determined by the law court. Ignore Egg's template letter and reclaim the entire charge -- 105 cardholders did. In particular reply along the lines of CAG template letter by moc1982 dated 30 APR 2007. There will be a ritulised exchange of 2 or 3 letters. After which Egg are under instructions to refund -- or face impossible questions before a judge in court. Good luck. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/egg/53376-e-day-victory-over-5.html

Looks like there are some weapons in the CAG arsenal you could deploy :- Form N268 - notice to prove documents at trial (in relation to any disclosure under CPR 31.14) - just click the link below - it works for me The requested resource (/HMCSCourtFinder/tiles/Her Majesty's Courts Service -Forms and Guidance) is not available Court of Appeal Case Law : Judge Wrong to Refuse to Vacate Trial where Party Awaiting Disclosure Gilbart v Graham (A Firm) [2008] EWCA Civ 897 (24 June 2008 ) The Court of Appeal held that, having regard to the overriding objective, the judge had been incorrect to refuse to grant a defendant’s application to vacate a trial. The Appellant had realised that specific discovery of certain documents had not occurred and applied to the court on the basis that the Respondent had not given up the documents that were pertinent and required. The judge had held that the parties could comply with the discovery requests before the commencement of the trial. The appeal court disagreed, noting that there was a substantial sum of money at stake and that the Appellant would need to instruct an expert following receipt of the disclosure.