MT sorry I was unable to log on yesterday so couldn't reply to your queries and sorry for misunderstanding the status of your judgment. Well done for having a go even though you got shafted by the judge. It is ridiculous that they can sympathise with poor old bank who yeah, had NO warning of the 1000s of cases they would have put to them. I am gutted for you and hope more than ever (if that were possible) that test case goes the RIGHT way

MT yes it will be heard in a court room but if you haven't been in one before, that's not as glamorous as it sounds. It will be a grey civic building room with you, the judge and NatWest barrister (more than likely). As it is NW's application, they will take the judge through their evidence first, no doubt laying it on dead thick. You will not be allowed to interrupt but feel free to make theatrical snorts of derision (I normally do). Then the judge will ask you what you say in response. You probably don't have time now to prepare a witness statement to file with the court beforehand but I would write down in detail all the points you make above. If you ask the judge, I'm sure he won't mind letting you refer to your notes. If you have time, simply prepare it in the format of a statement, then you can offer to hand him a copy which he can read while you are talking. Start with a chronology of the case. ie put the heading of the action on a black piece of paper, then in the middle 'Statement of Claimant in response to Defendant's Application to Set Judgment Aside'. Then write numbered paragraphs. Give the sequence of events early on ie - write down the date and event date - claim issued date - defence filed date - allocation questionnaire. C filed his, D did not date - claim struck out etc etc What you need to drive home to the judge is that if Nat West can't be bothered to deal with litigation, that's not your fault, considering the resources they have available and that until the test case was commenced, their behaviour to the courts was vexatious in that they were filing defences they had no intention of testing at trial. They now have the advantage of the test case but this will cause massive hardship to you as you expected a resolution ages ago. They did NOT issue the application promptly (a matter of a couple of days is the usual timeframe expected). Do EMPHASISE that they refused to tell you the grounds until very late in the day also er and reinforce that this was NOT a default judgment - they already had ample opportunity to get their house in order and comply with the Court's orders with the vast resources at their disposal and yet they did nothing and that is why the claim was struck out. (they mention their defence but the issue of whether or not that has a good chance of success are more relevant to default judgments where they have not had a chance to put their case already). don't know if that helps at all and sorry it's rather late in the day but Good luck

Pantheman and Digger - CONGRATULATIONS!!! very very well done. another to add to the tally of successes including mine, since the test case was announced

oops sorry I left out a zero there, it should be 0.00022 !

Interest from date of claim should equal the daily rate of interest x 21 days (ie since your amended claim was served, which I am assuming included an up to date figure for interest?) Period from 9 August to 30 August Rate - give the daily amount I'm sure you know this but an easy way of working out the daily rate is to multiply the amount of your claim by 0.0022

oh I SEE!!! sorry, my fault - I misread that you had actually had an appearance before the judge. well - CONGRATULATIONS!!!!! Yes - definitely get the form from here (or court service website) and send it off. The moderators here advise people to wait a week after a default to apply for judgment because banks have been applying to set them aside. It would seem that your PoC were probably (hopefully!) served on 9/10 August so your bank probably had 14 days from say, 12 August so are a good three days outside time now. Get that form in and get your judgment!! very good news:)

Hi everybodiesmum, sorry I have indeed been on holiday. You won't receive a new notice of issue from the court, just serve (ie post to your bank's solicitors) your amended Particulars of Claim. The 14 days for their Defence will start from the day they receive these. I gather you had a hearing on 14 August along with many others which has now been vacated ? The Order in your case however doesn't say your claim is stayed so serve your amended POC as soon as possible and see what the bank does. They will probably apply for a Stay then. Commiserations - it sounds like Cardiff claimants are getting a really raw deal

Thanks OF! Sarah Apples won her case against Lloyds yesterday in almost identical circs http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/show-post/post-1082140.html so not all bad news though frustratingly high number of stays despite people opposing them in the same way as Sarah and I did

wow - my opinion of him just got even lower... hope it does not spoil your weekend, nor Kenny's (think she's probably left for the V festival now so prob not!)

Marcelle..... so sorry for your wasted time, wasted efforts, and for generally being mucked about. How DARE the judge be so dismissive of 'all these bank charges cases' ....that's what the court is there for!! for people to get redress when they have been RIPPED OFF like we all have It's sickening. You would think that judges would be impressed with the way this movement has grown from stephen hone's case a mere 18 months ago to thousands upon thousands of cases and millions reclaimed by people using the law themselves. they should be there to support us, not tell us that another few months won't hurt. makes me so cross. while I am on holiday next week I will be composing my letter to the master of the rolls saying this inconsistency by courts and handing the advantage to the banks is so wrong The sad thing is, in the higher courts, it is just as much of a lottery as to whether you win your case or not - depending on the judge you get. Hence in my professional life we try to avoid having trials as far as we can anyway congratulations Marcelle on you and your sis doing your level best and sticking up for yourselves - let us pray that the test case goes our way and we'll all have the last laugh

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/barclays-bank/109438-court-date-next-week-2.html i absolutely think it should be used but it seems some judges are quite happy for the rest of us to be subsidising the banks use of the court system - we have to pay but they don't. how a judge can give them a stay they haven't even asked for is beyond me, and so frustrating

apart from the injustice to us as individuals, the Court fees are set for a reason to raise money for the administration of the courts by allowing banks a stay without them even asking for it and paying their fee (and bearing in mind the issues in the test case could have been decided ages ago if they had defended any of their claims), WE are all in effect subsidising the banks' use of the Court system!!!

HURRAY!!!!!!!! :D WELL DONE MT!!!!! brilliant stuff! am really chuffed for you! What does it say that it took three goes for it to be seen by a DJ who had any sense?!! I admire your persistence and tenacity! ENJOY YOUR CASH!!!!!

cheers Olden. Fingers crossed for you re your decision!

:mad: for you and also why your judge thought he couldn't go against GUIDANCE ? what a chicken. Bl**dy hell, you didn't even get your costs of going today HOW can they justify saying they will grant stays that are not even requested and not bother to tell BOTH SIDES in advance so, you incur costs of going, Barclays don't, they don't even incur the cost of applying for a stay sorry but why should they get off scot free paying charges when ordinary people have to pay to ask for the stay to be lifted? this is crazy. Mad, and frustrated on your behalf but well done for having your say and making him think twice. Sounds like you were very organised and cool and did a great job. Not your fault he was too spineless to do what was right ie consider the overriding objective