Sharp v Bank of Scotland plc (http://govanlc.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/unfair-bank-charges-update-from-glc.html). To quote from that link: The case of Sharp v. Bank of Scotland awaits a fresh hearing date.

Presumably the arguments he is using in these cases he is running are based on what he developed after the Supreme Court decision and which was published on MSE. Obviously they may now be further refined, and that would be the interesting thing to discover. As Caro has said, and contrary to Ford, I hope more and more cases come to light that have been settled out of court. This would then return us to the position we were in prior to July 2007 and the OFT sticking their oar in, that is with the banks settling as a goodwill gesture before reaching court, possibly even before a claim is issued.

Hello there, It sounds as if in 2010 when those payments were missed, and possibly subsequently to that as well, that Welcome have added a vast bundle of charges to your account. These would have then attracted interest, and hence the possibility of the term of loan ending up extended. However, I would concur that 3½ years into a 7 year loan it is galling to find that you won't be finished paying for 8 years! Since you say you have a file of documents Welcome sent you under a SAR you should have a good transaction history. Plus, of course, you are supposed to receive annual statements. From these you should be able to piece together where the inflated outstanding balance has come from.

Personally, since it is difficult (but not impossible) to cancel the continuous card authority in favour of Roxburghe, I would cancel the direct debit you have set up in favour of Lewis Group and write a letter addressed to all 3 parties explaining your position (the same letter to them all), asking them to communicate with each other and come to an agreed position and to let you know what that is. In the meantime do some more research on continuous card authorities, I do believe you can get rid of them somehow. Also, when you have reached an agreed position I would suggest never setting up a direct debit with a debt collecting agency, instead insist on paying them by standing order.

Hello AJS, just wondering how you are getting on with Lowell?

Here is a link to a BBC news story today http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17670803. It contains a link to a PDF of the judgement.

Hello again FS, How close are you to the point at which the current account has a zero balance? (I presume NatWest are moving your payments from the loan account to the current account internally?) In other words, how close are you to the point at which you stop paying anything at all to NatWest (despite their assertion that you should still pay them!)? For, of course, it is not until then that the statue barred clock starts. Also, and I realise it is a somewhat opaque question, since I presume your correspondence with NatWest comes from CMS Telford, has a /ARCH/ appeared in their reference in the most recent letter from them?

The thing to add to this, which I hope will give good comfort to your aunt, Maureen, is to search for the recent (March 2012) Santander v Mayhew judgement.

Thank you M1, makes for very interesting reading. With costs I note, so I guess the claim must have been above the £5k Small Claims Track limit?

Well in that case you need to be telling Lowell the deficiencies of what M&S sent you in March 2009.

Well I realise that I'm speculating and guessing, but the silence would suggest an agreement that was satisfactory to Tex, accompanied by a gagging order. Does anyone know anything that they're allowed to share?

Interesting, in my case M&S are still apparently searching their archives for my agreement! I take it their letter was their response to you sending them a CPUTR letter? In that case, what did they send you in March 2009? Are you like others on this thread who have have an M&S Chargecard turned into an &More Mastercard? Or is your situation more recent and you actually have an agreement that relates to the credit card? What you do next does depend on your specific circumstances.

I meant to log on early today and wish you luck Tex, but forgot, so by now you'll be in the thick of it. I do hope you did get the nice lady judge you got first time round. After all it was her, if I recall correctly, who strongly suggested to Irwin Mitchell that they should make this whole business go away, so I would think she would not take kindly to their intransigence. I really do hope you come back reporting a couple of favourable decisions today.

Hello Almond (and anyone else). Here is a link to P1's template letter http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?317447-Request-for-confirmation-of-documents-under-CPUTR-2008&p=3531398#post3531398. And here is a link to his other thread on CPUTR http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?291468-Fighting-back-with-CPUTR-2008....

Yes, we do seem to have been assigned to Lowells don't we? Like you I intend to use the CPUTR approach to make them realise they've bought a pup!

DoH, intesting you say there is case law and it has been to the Court of Appeal and the High Court. I was unaware of this. Please can you post links, or citation numbers, or names of parties so I can go and take a look? Thanks.

I think Mr Mould would disagree with you there DoH. Hopefully he will see these posts and comment. I am sure it us somewhere further up this thread, but unfortunately haven't got time to go looking just now. Campari2, you should start your own thread and put a link to it in here.

Hello Lexis. Good to see you still around! I'm coming up to 3 years out of 6 in March this year, how are you doing? It does seem to have gone strangely quiet in Co-op land, my last 2 letters to their "Risk and Investigations Team" over the course of last year have been pointedly ignored. The only fly in this particular ointment is that although the CRAs were showing my account as defaulted for a period, at the back end of 2010 it went back to permanently 6 months late again (and that was the last update).

Just wanted to wish you good luck for tomorrow Tex (and Mr Tex). I hope you are finally able to put this matter to bed (apart, of course, from the pending wasted costs!).

Hello FS, I notice earlier on in your thread you stated that you did not wish to rock the boat by altering the account the payments were going to, since NatWest had frozen interest on the (overdrawn) current account. Presumably, if you had wished, you could have instructed CCCS to pay directly to the current account, rather than the loan account, but have chosen not to do so? I also note that you state it is your intent to stop paying them when the balance of the current account is reduced to zero, and the payments would then come off the loan account, since by their own admission they do not have an enforcable agreement for the loan account. That being the case I would suggest you accept the situation as is. Admittedly it pushes further into the future the date when the loan account debt will be statute barred. However since I presume the loan account is showing as defaulted on your credit report, it will have dropped off long before becoming statute barred anyway. Alternatively if it is important to you to start the statute barred clock sooner, then instruct CCCS to pay the money to the current account forthwith.

Further to the above post I have found this thread where someone seems to indicate a similar problem with the 1.0 litre engine: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?303402-Corsa-engine-failure-after-garage-replaced-timing-chain

Hello Lesley, Unfortunately (for you) a camshaft is not the same for all vehicles. Each engine would have its own unique camshaft design. Certainly the discussion above relates only to 1.2 litre and 1.4 litre engines. I suggest you take a look around for vehicle specific forums to see if there is any history of this problem on the 1.0 litre Corsa. It may well be that you are just unlucky to have suffered a rare failure, rather than being the victim of a systemic fault.

Hello Mitch, Firstly I would have expected Payplan to let your creditors know on your behalf, since don't they handle all the correspondence with them on your behalf? Anyway that aside, since your creditors all accepted the DMP put to them by Payplan in the first place, and you are paying at a rate that seems to suggest the plan will (only) run for 4 years (by comparison mine when initially set up had a 12 year duration), I would have hoped (expected) that the creditors will accept one month of lower payments without any adverse reaction. I do hope you are looking forward to being debt free in January 2015 (as it will now be).

Hi there NoDefaults, thanks for your response to my questions. Certainly much food for thought there. Apologies, I was being a little lax with my words in my original post. I meant a full and final settlement offer paying only a part of the total outstanding balance (hence the use of the word 'partial'). I do take your point.

How about a secured loan with a legal charge? Just signatures on an ordinary piece of paper, no seals involved? Would that be 6 years or 12 years?