You should file the Acknowledgement of Service without delay in order to obtain the full 28 days to complete and file a counterclaim. Before the 28 days are up issue a counterclaim for the amount of the charges that you believe are owed. Use an N9B, from here http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/HMCSCourtFinder/GetForm.do?court_forms_id=659 If you do not know how much the charges owed are then you may ask for the case to be stayed until Barclays have provided you with the information you need to raise the counterclaim. This could be a good tactical move for you as it will delay any court date until you have been provided with details of the charges or alternatively it may make Barclays back off altogether if they feel they are going to be forced to reveal their costs in court in order to pursue your Mother for this alleged debt. If you have not already done so, send off the S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) letters and begin to compile the information on precisely how much your Mother has been charged.

Congratulations Calm1, very well done!

Issue a claim against Abbey for non-compliance with the DPA Look here for details. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/6971-data-protection-act-non.html Abbey can and will ignore you, but get a court order and see how long they ignore that.

In order to clarify the point regarding full and final settlements or claims by Halifax, or any other bank for that matter, that they will not pay any subsequent claims you may make, for any agreement to be binding in English law each party to the agreement must provide what is termed 'consideration'. This simply means something of value in the eyes of the law. When we agree to accept a payment in full and final settlement our consideration consists of a promise not to sue for the remainder of the charges. However, the bank does not provide any consideration because they are only giving back what in law belongs to us. The law does not enforce onesided promises. In order to establish that they have provided consideration the bank would have to prove that the charges were lawful and we know that that just is not going to happen. Therefore, any agreements made that state they are full and final and confidentiality agreements are not worth the paper they are printed on unless they are made by deed. You may file as many claims as you wish, but do be aware that Halifax reserves the right to withdraw your banking services or even close your account should they feel that your banking relationship has broken down irretrievably

Well done Black, congratulations!

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/33060-basic-court-bundle.html All the instructions you need are here, please read this page carefully and ask anything you are unsure of.

Do not wait for the court, you must enter a Judgement in Default as the defence has been struck out. To enter Judgment in Default you will need to obtain a Form from the court, this is known as a "Request for Judgment" Form. The form you need is an N225, here http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/H...forms_id =465 Complete this and file it with the court where you filed your claim. The court will send an N30 [Judgment for Claimant (in default)] and when you receive this judgment has been granted. This can then be enforced, by issuing a warrant of execution. In order to do this you will need to file an N323 (request to issue a warrant of execution) but let us not get ahead of ourselves, this may not be necessary. File the N225 as soon as you can and obtain the judgment first.

No, they can apply for a stay without informing you and the first you will know about it is when you are required to attend a hearing for the set aside of the original judgment. However, it is up to you to enforce the judgment that you have obtained, you need to manage your claim and therefore, in your position I would obtain warrants and enforce the judgment as your deadline has now expired. If you continue to wait they will continue to ignore you, however, they would have more difficulty ignoring a High Court Enforcement Officer.

On the larger of the two claims, you will have to enforce the judgment with a writ of Fi Fa as County Court Baillifs cannot collect sums over £5k. Have you writtent them the letter from this link? http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/faqs-please-read-these/25457-guide-reclaiming-bank-charges.html?garpg=13 That page also gives you details of what you must do in order to issue a writ of fieri facias in the High Court.

A writ of Fi Fa can be very expensive and should the writ fail for any reason - for example if they should be granted a stay (and they can do this ex parte, without your knowledge) then you may lose any fees you have paid. How much is your claim and how long ago did you get judgment?

Calm1, have responed on your thread, which is here. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/lloyds-bank/102599-bank-will-only-cover.html

Hi Calm1 I have asked that this thread be moved into the Lloyds forum. The Data Protection Act 1998 has no time limit, you may and indeed should request all data that the bank hold on you and this should form part of your claim provided that it contains details of unlawful charges. Lloyds are intending to rely on their interpretation of the Limitation Act 1980 and that any charges levied more than six years ago cannot be reclaimed. The limitation period runs back from the date of issue of the claim. From then there is a four month period in which you should serve your claim. How much beyond the six years were these charges that Lloyds argue you cannot include? Regarding their assertion that "...they will set aside [your] claim and we will lose in court..." I wonder who made them all Judges and if they are not Judges but they can predict the future with such certainty, maybe they could pick me six numbers between 1 and 49 for tonight? They cannot have your claim set aside without a hearing and I doubt they would want the hassle and expense of one. Continue with your claim and always keep in mind that they have a great deal more to lose that you do.

Do you have your own thread on this, so as out of courtesy to jshtr3, we do not hijack this one? None of what you have written above should concern you overmuch however.

Bob - send them letter #3 from this thread. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/6986-data-protection-act-non.html On the 9th day after you post it (7 days + 2 days for service) then you complete and file an N1 with the Particulars of Claim from this thread. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/6971-data-protection-act-non.html Do this and stick to your deadlines - otherwise do not set them. By my reckoning, you should be filing your DPA SAR non-compliance claim at your local County Court no later than 10th July. Nat West cannot ignore a court claim, but as they have amply demonstrated thus far, they can ignore you and will continue to do so until you issue one.

Well Done Regis! Congratulations. Of course, I did predict this in post #4.....

Excellent! I shall be watching this with great interest.

Ok, you are on the right track, but use the form 4.1 on that site, you are not intending to make an individual bankrupt, you are issuing a Statutory Demand prior to issuing a winding-up petition against a company. To answer your questions; 1. Yes. 2. Yes, that should be sufficient, but I would be tempted to elaborate, if only for effect. 3. n/a Use form 4.1 4. It must be served on the Registered office of the company, see below. You may use a Process Server or you may of course serve it yourself and it must be served on Lloyds at their registered office. Correct service of the Statutory Demand is critical. In your case the statutory demand is served by leaving it at or posting too the registered office of Lloyds Bank. In Re: A Company (No 008790 of 1990) [1991] BCLC 561 Morritt J held that a statutory demand sent through the post to a company’s registered office had been properly served. In this case the demand had been sent by registered post and was acknowledged by the company. Morritt J. stated that it made no difference whether the act of leaving the demand at the registered office was carried out by the creditor personally or by the postman. All that was required to be proved was that the demand was left at the registered office. It would appear that proof of posting alone would not have been sufficient, so do make sure that you send it via at least recorded delivery - although, if this were me, I'd be sorely tempted to make the trip to 25 Gresham Street personally.... If Lloyds dispute the debt and wish to prevent a petition being presented, they should obtain your agreement to set aside service of the demand. Alternatively they may apply to a court to obtain an order to restrain you from issuing a petition, however Lloyds will have difficulty persuading a court that the debt can be disputed and the demand ought to be set aside. After all, you have already obtained a judgment and they have already issued a cheque. Any application by Lloyds is only likely to be granted if they establish that the debt is disputed in good faith or on substantial grounds - the problem here for Lloyds is that not only is the claim almost impossible to defend against under the Bills of Exchange Act 1882 due to their stopping of the cheque, you also already have a judgment against them. If no application is made for a restraining order, or an application is made but is unsuccessful, you can proceed to issue a petition at court to obtain a winding up order to force Lloyds bank into insolvency. In your case you are absolutely certain that they owe you the money and the debt is crystallised, not only that, Lloyds certainly do have the money and it is pretty clear that they will pay rather than risk your issuing a petition. I almost wish they owed me the money now, instead of you!

You have a judgment already and they issued a cheque which they subsequently countermanded - this is sufficient for you to issue a Statutory Demand - do this instead of writing any more letters.

I would be inclined to serve them with a Statutory Demand as the cheque was not returned with “refer to drawer” (which means that there are insufficient funds in the account) and the fact that issuing a winding-up petition is complex and expensive. The threat of being wound-up is a serious one and this should prompt them to react quite spectacularly. It would be very difficult for them to dispute this debt because they have already issued a cheque for the full amount and then countermanded it. A statutory Demand will usually make them realise that, as the debt is due, the best course of action for them is simply to pay. Winding-Up Petitions are normally treated with great caution by those receiving one, but should also be treated thus by those issuing due to the serious consequences of a wrongly issued petition which may result in an injunction against you, the issuer and a sizeable order for costs. Lloyds are onto a loser here on so many levels and they would find this difficult, if not impossible to defend. It is a well settled principle of law that a petition founded on a disputed debt should be dismissed by the Court. The test often applied is whether the debt is disputed in good faith and on substantial grounds. If this is the case, the petition will be dismissed as of right because the petitioner will not be a creditor with the standing to present a petition. However, it is also a well settled principle of law that a cheque is to be treated as cash (Nova (Jersey) Knit Ltd v Kammgarn Spinnerei G.m.b.H [1977). Once issued the party who issued the cheque is not entitled to argue that there is a failure of consideration for the payment, nor can a counterclaim be used to avoid payment. (Isovel Contracts Ltd (in Administration) -v- ABB Technologies Ltd [2002]) Send them a Statutory Demand and I am sure you will not have to wait very long for payment after that.

Do not wait for the bailiffs to act - there is plenty you can do right now. You can now sue the bank again for the full amount of the cheque, plus interest and costs under the Bills of Exchange Act 1882 and there is virtually no defence that they can use. Under the Bills of Exchange Act 1882, cheques are contracts in themselves. As such, they are a promise by the drawer of the cheque that the person to whom it is addressed will be paid the money as stated on the cheque. This is the case irrespective of the purpose for which the cheque is paid and there are only very limited exceptions. If there are insufficient funds in the account to meet that promise or if the drawer of the cheque stops payment, the cheque has been dishonoured and the contract broken. You need only give notice to the bank that the cheque has been dishonoured and then you are entitled to sue them on the dishonoured cheque, get judgment and enforce it. The only exceptions to this situation are a failure of consideration, duress or if the transaction was illegal. A cheque is like a bill of exchange and is as good as cash in the hand. In your case the bank are not entitled to argue that there is no consideration for the payment, nor can they use a counterclaim to avoid payment. The bank is therefore is required to make payment of the sum of the cheque without delay. Under law, when you write a cheque to someone (or as in this case, the bank writes one to you) you effectively promise that the cheque will be honoured and if, for whatever reason, the cheque is not honoured you imply that you will compensate that person in full. So as this cheque has not been honoured you can immediately sue the bank and there is virtually no defence that the bank can raise to that claim. In this case, you may claim not only the amount of the cheque, but also interest on that money and payment towards the costs you incur in chasing up payment. If you wanted to go further still, you could have some fun with this one. As the bank are a company, you can write to them demanding immediate payment and if they do not then pay up, you can start winding up proceedings against them at once. There is no need for you to serve a separate and formal statutory demand on them which is the normal pre-requisite to commencing winding up proceedings. Let's see how they like them apples.

Contact Yorkshire Bank and ask to speak to the person dealing with your claim - then ask them, politely, firmly yet apologetically, to agree to an adjournment of this case. Give them a good enough reason and they should agree. Then, write to the court and request an adjournment and inform them that the Defendants have consented to an adjournment. Where an application to adjourn a hearing by consent is received by the court at least 14 days before the date set for the hearing, no fee is payable so make sure you do this as soon as possible. In some instances, the court may ask you to attend on the day originally fixed for hearing in order to make a formal application for adjournment. If this happens, make sure that you do attend, otherwise the court may refuse your application and determine the case in your absence. When an adjournment is granted, the court will give written notice to any party not attending when the order was made. I would suggest that you request a date at least 40 days hence, Yorkshire Bank have not surprised anyone with their ability to comply with SAR's much before the statutory 40 days and in many cases, much later still. Finally, stay here from now on, keep away from sites that tell you it's ok to estimate claims - it is not and never has been. The onus is on you, the claimant to prove your claim, it is not and never has been on the bank to disprove it.

You need to sue them for non-compliance with the Data Protection Act. The details for this are in the template library here. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/6971-data-protection-act-non.html However, send them a warning letter first, based on the letter at post #3 on this thread http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/6986-data-protection-act-non.html

Well done Katei!

Your friend is not entitled to statements per se, the inclusion of statements in the SAR letter is a convenience for the banks, not a right of the data subject. However, your friend is entitled to a copy of all the data that Lloyds hold on her that falls under the auspices of the DPA - and if she feels that she has not bee supplied with this then she should look at taking steps to ensure that she receives it. Look in the template library for details of what to do next regarding DPA non-compliance.

These are the details I used, with success, in my claim against Halifax. HBOS PLC Legal Services - Retail Division Trinity Road Halifax West Yorkshire HX1 2RG Tel: 01422 391895 Fax: 01422 333453