Agreed Pete, at this moment I think we should all be going to HEARING of applications against stays - just posted same on Cardiff News thread - because although the details have changed, our strength is still that we are so many and have right to be heard in court system. ....

Hey guys....this is all a new situation..and I think we need to find a way to get on the offensive again..so...what if all of those that were due in Cardiff on 14th apply for a hearing of the application for removal of the stay? I know it is an extra £30, (though maybe courts will waive this as they did the £35) It seems that a hearing is one-to-one before the judge, but if many claimants request a hearing the courts will be forced to do same as they planned for the Directions hearing and put us all in at the same time..strength in numbers from our point of view...adn would the banks have to be present at that hearing? Seems to me like the rules of engagement have changed, ....but .....we are still vast numbers, and have rights to have our cases heard.... that is the way we win ....Any opinions?

Update: reference to Hickinbottom going ahead was from 27th July, so probably now changed. ..but ... if we are all going to put in objections to the Stays ( hopefully), I think we should all go for a hearing of the case - extra £30 I know, but at least that puts us on the offensive again, putting pressure on the courts to hear our cases...

Hi Noddy, I like your thinking. Seems to me we have abeen a bit slow here in all this. Blanket stays are NOT acceptable...so we have to challenge. I am in Cardiff..with several hundred others,....seems to me that everyone paying up the extra £30 for a hearing of the application to remove stays would put us back on the offensive again ... and for those at this stage already, we must have loads of evidence that the banks were never intending to contest, (no contact, no AQs submitted etc etc), We need to take the initiative again

Jenny ..found it at last - hope you can read this...It was Gertty who phoned court on 27th.... BEFORE the announcement of the High Court case I think ...sorry to have got your hopes up ....:o 27th July 2007, 13:15 #98 (permalink) gertty vbmenu_register("postmenu_1037069", true); Basic Account Customer Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: caerphilly Posts: 23 Re: Cityguy V HSBC hi cityguy23 i've just managed to get through to cardiff court and the prelim hearing for 10.30 on the 14th of august are still going ahead the man says all paper work to be in 7 days before the date. might see you there gertty(debbie)

Nice idea HK, but unfortunately I think you have to send NI to your local court.... but maybe a mod could correct me ??

oh..that was dated 31st July

Jenny manicblonde vs HSBC post 65: "And we have confirmation on Cityguy's thread that the good Judge Hickenbottom is going ahead with the hearing so they either offer or loose " For Search option go to top of any thread, blue bar First header is "User CP" go along from there

Hiya Sha The Master of the Rolls refused to give the 8 banks a blanket stay - they have to apply for a stay for each individual case....that's 800 at last count for Cardiff on Tuesday. I got a latter from DG - there's a first - saying they would be applying for a stay, but nothing yet from court. Will phone them tomorrow. But there a reference to Judge Higginbottom going ahead on Manicblonde's thread , post 65...but can't find Cityguy's report yet....Confused !!

I cant find Cityguy...will have to ask Pete (Castlebest ) tomorrow maybe - will keep you informed ..... let me know if you find it

Witsend, I would certainly include all references and evidence to show that DG/HSBC had no intention of negotiating or defending ( lack of correspondence with you? / did they file AQ ...on time or at all? list of other cases settled before court date etc Just my view, but I am in same boat as you,,though still awaiting letter from courts. Have you seen manicblonde's thread, psot 65, reference to Judge Hickinbottom going ahead ??????

Jenny Take a look at this ! Haven't read it my self yet but .......... Manicblonde' s thread, post 65...reference to Judge Higginbottom going ahead.........

Hi Manic Have you had a letter from the courts yet saying a stay has been requested? I had a letter from DG, solicitors from HSBC (the only time they have ever written to me ! ) saying they are going to apply for a stay, but nothing yet from courts. AM going to phone courts tomorrow, and then submit the N244 - cost is £35 without a hearing , or £65 is you request it with a hearing I think, but will check with courts tomorrow

HI smutley If I were you I would give the court a call asap to see if they have had an application for a stay from the bank. They can give you advice on when you need to put in an application for a stay. It's difficult to put in an applicationBEFORE the stay has been ordered if you see what I mean.

Hi Steven Is your case a Hearings case ? And it is still going ahead.? I had a letter from DG solicitors on Sat saying they had applied for a stay on mine. no news from courts yet but as soon as I get something I will be opposing it ..and will be there on 14th

HI FL. I am down for Cardiff on 14th, and awaiting letter re stay. I don't see how they can make a blanket decision to stay all claims though, considering the ruling from the master of the rolls to judges ( quote below from MSE site) that they decide on a CASE BY CASE basis. So we have several hundred appeals on 14th...and the courts get an extra £35 x hundreds !!! Nice one !! "Following a request from the OFT and the banks to put a stay on all Bank Charges cases (i.e. to halt them until the test case is finished); the Master of the Rolls decided not to issue an order staying all outstanding cases. Instead he asked the Deputy Head of Civil Justice to write to all Designated Civil Judges, (which he has done) inviting them to consider staying outstanding claims on a case by case basis as appropriate. Designated Civil Judges are the senior circuit judge responsible for a group of courts. (S)he may agree arrangements with the district judges sitting at each individual court. Therefore whether as case is stayed or not is a matter for the Judge in the individual case."

I agree Mouse.....(if my French serves me correctly!) I think it is important to put in application for removal of the stay - after all the Master of the Rolls did NOT direct all judges to apply stays, - only asked them to consider them on a CASE BY CASE basis - so we should insist on being heard INMHO

Pete, Given the fact that the master of the rolls did NOT order all judges to stay applications, but to consider them on a case by case basis, ( according to MSE site quote below), do you think we have an angle here? .... I guess the banks will put in generic request for all stays in a particular court..maybe we can contest a general application for a stay?....so, several hundred hearings against stays on same day in Cardiff ??? Could be fun !! " Following a request from the OFT and the banks to put a stay on all Bank Charges cases (i.e. to halt them until the test case is finished); the Master of the Rolls decided not to issue an order staying all outstanding cases. Instead he asked the Deputy Head of Civil Justice to write to all Designated Civil Judges, (which he has done) inviting them to consider staying outstanding claims on a case by case basis as appropriate. Designated Civil Judges are the senior circuit judge responsible for a group of courts. (S)he may agree arrangements with the district judges sitting at each individual court. Therefore whether as case is stayed or not is a matter for the Judge in the individual case." Sorry if I'm hijacking Shel

Nice work Noddy. Will keep you informed of Cardiff situation. On a general level, I think it is important that claimants are aware that the courts have NOT been instructed to put a stay on ALL claims, but to deal with them on a case by case basis - this from Martin Lewis site: Following a request from the OFT and the banks to put a stay on all Bank Charges cases (i.e. to halt them until the test case is finished); the Master of the Rolls decided not to issue an order staying all outstanding cases. Instead he asked the Deputy Head of Civil Justice to write to all Designated Civil Judges, (which he has done) inviting them to consider staying outstanding claims on a case by case basis as appropriate. Designated Civil Judges are the senior circuit judge responsible for a group of courts. (S)he may agree arrangements with the district judges sitting at each individual court. Therefore whether as case is stayed or not is a matter for the Judge in the individual case." All the more reason for everyone to put in an objection IMHO

Pete I agree. Surely the courts have to now accept some responsibility..Who is going to pay for our loss of earnings having booked days off for the 14th... If we do get a hearing on 14 for the objections to stays it seems to me that what would be important is the history of lack of communication from the banks, no AQ submitted (in my case, and many others I guess), their history to date of settling before court dates etc Even if things are not entirely satisfactory in the OFT case, can any outcome be made retrospective? What about all the claims that have already been paid out? But maybe we should try to get some legal expert to argue the case against the stays as this one in Cardiff could turn out to be significant ...

Yes, I will copy to DG, together with a letter informing them of the extra interest they will have to pay me if they delay an offer until after OFT hearing, (this is the only positive - think of the extra interest ! ), plus a reminder that I will pursue them for wasted costs...

Hi Shel.... I am going to use Alanfrom Deby's letter ..post 2 here as it refers to human rights issues Application for removal of a stay - UPDATED TO ACCOUNT FOR OFT TEST CASE... ....what is N244? .... I have not received anything in post yet about the stays but am thinking of visiting court manager on Mon to discuss issue and ahd stuff in then.

Well Pete, I had suggested that we all turn up anyway on 14th, but got admonished by a mod saying that a 'mob' would not help our cause.......seems to me if we follow the legal route but if carpet if going to be whipped out from under us at last minute we should at least show we are not happy with legal system's capitulation.....

i agree Lattie, we all need to put in Removal of Stay letters as a minimum,and demand right to be heard on the date set - 14th. We all have ample evidence that they just want to delay things, and if the courts collude in delaying our right to a hearing then they are denying our Human Rights as per EU charter.

Appreciated PD ...but we won't take it lying down