well done ! I really thought that the other solicitor would not turn up. Dont give up now please - As you say most of the time they have settled before court anyway - you have paid your court costs anyway and if it is all over in a couple of hours wont it be worth it? Personally ( and Only from my perspective ) if I was where you are now I would maybe give them one chance to settle -to cover the full charges and bank cost - less the 8% -if they refuse then go for it . I am sure you will get loads of help from the site. as far as I understand the only ones that have failed did not have the correct paperwork and the last one the guy did not even turn up for court. Keep reading lots to keep up with how other peoples cases including other banks are going. Obvously if things change before the court date you can re-consider. Also keep watching for successful cases in each forum -it might boost your confidence. Only my opinion as I say - and I know its difficult as this seems to take over your life for a while. But well done again for today!! jansus:D

was just checking in my lunch hour how you were. will look for news later jansus:-|

if you go to FAQ there is a step by step instruction section and example letters in the libary. A&L have not yet closed my acount yet and i am at MCOL stage. but they have closed other customer accounts after paying claims. jansus:)

be thinking of you tomorrow- hope the other replies have been helpful to you. jansus:)

have only just found your thread - wishing you luck I used to work for the Halifax many years ago - before mergers -in the arrears department -as far as I can remember there were rules governing fair sale of a property even then - I can not understand why they would not reveal the names of the valuers as it was important to prove/show they were independant in the case of problems such as yours. As far as i know the property had to be marketed for a certain amount of time - then could be put up for auction. the halifax did not own or was associated with any estate agents in those days. Also they should be able to show you were aware of the mortgage guarantee insurance as you would have paid for this. I know many people were not clear about the fact this only protected the building society in the event of the house being sold for less than its value - not the borrower.but as it was a standard charge even way back in 1987 - they should have had no problem providing this evidence. I am afraid that there was a lack of explanation about this charge in many cases.Sorry if I have repeated things you already know - but it is a long thread. I can only say I am sorry you have had this experience as in my day at my branch we really tried to help people who had problems and posession was a last resort. unfortunately when someone starts getting into problems the speed at which the interest starts accumulating as interest on interest etc each month is frightening and sometimes if the property is not sold promptly everybody looses out. It would seem fairer to freeze the position when someone is in genuine need of help. I genuinely hope you are successful in your fight. Jansus

The standard rejection letters are on here i think under step by step instructions - why not just do both at the same time - I have just filed by MCOL and found instructions by Michael Browne very useful. Check other threads but I think that if you reject the offer they will take things right to the line anyway so you might as well go ahead with the claim . I am no expert though so keep reading:D jansus

no - I didnt get a reply from anybody here and the only correspondence I could find on the site referred to defaults which mine are not. So I have left it for the moment. I am annoyed about them though as all my other accounts are all little green blobs which mean the A&L ones show up like a sore thumb and it has reduced my credit rating to fair from good. jansus:mad:

My colleague went to the tax office and took his passport to prove who he was - and it turned out that the name and DOB were correct but the address had been changed without his knowledge. Although he had to take in a whole ream of proof to get it changed back the tax office could offer no explanation about how it had been changed in the first place - or for what reason. But seems to be sorted now. Jansus

Done it - filed MCOL at last - thanks to the thread by Michael Browne it was quite straight forward. Just a waiting game now Jansus

will be thinking of you - best of luck - i am sure that they will allow for you being inexperienced - I bet it wont be half as bad as you think . have you been contacted or pm a moderator to check exactly what happens? jansus:)

blimey! thats what i love about this site -you learn something new every day. jansus:)

and i thought you were a practising pope!! sfo (shocked from oxfordshire)

being ancient and a forum novice - does lol mean - lots of laughs or lots of love? it can change the whole tone of the post? i need to know - somone might say it to me ( i should be so lucky!) jansus:confused:

why move to wales?? will she be cured?? or is there some freedom of prescription charges act?? jansus:confused:

there is I believe a section in FAQ and the step by step instructions where you can insert a clause about the default if it is caused by the charges on the account- hope that helps. I think you mention it in the First or secon letter. jansus

Well done - great result jansus:D

I think the reason you have had some heated replies (not at all unususal for this site) is that comments such as those above are taken as a critisism of the way the site is advising people. The fact is that the banks have every opportunity to put the same arguments as you in court - they have experienced legal departments and obviously huge financial resources - but have chosen not to.Why? Why are they employing solicitors to intimidate people but not appearing in court? If these charges as you say are not penalties then the banks could have crushed the argument immediately. They fact that this site has been so successful and is growing all the time is surely evidence that we are trying to move forward and get the charges reduced .The method/wording on this site has worked so far - so why start questioning it now? I think you will find on many other threads that the majority of people would be quite happy to claim accept charges if they were fair and reasonable - and if this is the ruling in the future - from which ever organisation sees fit - then this will all end. jansus

a work colleague called the tax credit office about a query to be told they could not give out the information as his NI number name and address did not correspond. He was reading it from their own letter and also checked all previous correspondence regarding tax etc and it is correct- they implied he may be a victim of identity theft - but would not confirm this. I was always under the impression that your NI number would not change so how could his number be allocated to a completely different name? What can someone gain by using his NI number? benefits? illegal employment? I have told him staright away to do a credit history check to see if there has been any activity - but as it is a bank holiday I think he is going to worry over the weekend what is going on. any advice welcome. Jansus

having seen your other posts- i have read your thread-it is so sad- I wish I could help more but it is so long sice I left my Building society that I am out of date with current rulings. I do know there were regulations in my day about how the property should be marketed and I think it had to be on the market with a minimum of three agents for a certain amount of time before they could consider auction. But to be honest at my office we rarely went to possesion- it was a very last resort. Did you not get help from social security with your interest payments at the time?- were the charges all additional interest charges as the payments were not paid - or were there penalties as well? Wish I could help . jansus

have a look under bank forum - general - judge thomas at rhyl court- interesting. how are you - still worried? jansus

in fact i might even like to quote this to my lovely local judge with words such as " with all due respect to your importance perhaps you would consider the judgement of his honourable judge Xxxxx of Rhyl and make a similar ruling so you can prevent a waste of your courts valuable time" if we had the figures relevant to each bank about cases brought to court and not defended as well maybe this could snowball!!

wow ! what a judge - may be all the others could follow his lead and stop having their time wasted:D jansus

right behind you - doing my claim at the weekend - about the same amount. see who gets there first! jansus:rolleyes:

lloyds victory a view of the judgement - this thread makes good reading in this respect

1) if the answer is this simple - why has not one bank appeared in court to put this defence:confused: 2) Every time they increase the charges should this not be regarded a new contract to give you the oppurtunity to sign and agree to the charges and move banks (oh no they all charge about the same costs!) I think we all understand that the charges in principle are not disputed - but there is something in the small print from the financial institutions themselves that the charges should be a relection of costs and in proportion - as we are trusting them to operate our accounts in a fair way. 3)Also I have seen threads on this site where the banks have sent letters themselves using the word "penalties " in black and white. so maybe someone should tell them they are not. Sorry about my simplified explanations - wanted to study law but never quite achieved my ambition:grin: jansus