Well that was a waste of an afternoon. Stay has been granted. I must admit, if you excuse the expression, I was bricking my pants. Anyone battling Abbey, don't hold your breath at St Helens court, it just felt like the judge there had made his mind up on what the outcome of the sitting was going to be. Well, it was to be expected really. Roll on 14th January, eh?

thank you chelli! is there any point be complaining about the missing bundle, will it force a judgement? Just doing final preparations now. 2pm is the time to start praying!

is it the way I ask? lol. Anyone... please.

and just for clarity. The bundle I should have got 14 days before the court date is not the same as "the defence" that abbey sent to me when I first applied through MCOL. Sorry about all the posts but I'm very nervous and feel quite lost and alone in a sea of threads and templates. I just want to be sure I have everything that applies to me vs abbey.

It's the Reka vs Abbey letter I'm hanging my hat on at the moment. Can I request a judgement if I have not received Abbeys bundle?

Due in court tomorrow and thoroughly expecting a stay. Just a couple of things: 1. Although I have sent my bundle to court and to Abbey, I have not received a bundle back. I should have had one by now surely. Reading through some other posters threads, am I right that this is Abbeys want as they are sure to get the stay and do not have to prepare like the rest of us laypeople? 2. Is there any point submilling a challenge to the stay, given their non compliance above? Could one of you nice people advise me what to expect tomorrow, whether it is worthwhile handing in a non compliance letter to court and the abbey or whether I should save my nevrse and just await the outcome of the OFT decision?

Thanks gyzmo. I'll check out the link. I did threaten to close my account. The guy told me because it was after 30 days there would be a fee to pay for closing. This is where I said he was in breach because the terms were not as agreed over the phone. He would not budge.

I got caught in a bit of a tizz earlier. I have had a cable telephone line for years and just over two months ago had a cold call asking me to upgrade to the £30 package so I get the television and broadband package. It was verbally agreed over the phone that my existing direct debit would be used to cover all the services. I got a letter this morning suggesting that I had not been paying for my broadband and television and that they were charging me an extra £10 for non payment. I telephoned to dispute this. They said the direct debit had not been set up for the broadband and the television. They agreed to take off the £10 charge, but when I told them that the the agreement between Virgin Media and me was to have one direct debit payment, once a month, so they should just cancel the offending bill and add it to my existing DD, they advised they could not do this because if the "Direct Debit Guarantee". I have to make a card payment then they can cancel the extra bill and have one DD as originally agreed. I suggested that I had done nothing wrong and that they should be able to cancel the extra bill and add the cost to the direct debit. The chap I spoke to was quite patronising and I got angry, it suddenly became a challenge to get them to change the billing to suit my convenience and to be as originally agreed. Should I just pay the bill and put it down to a bad experience. I was told that my problem was a rare occurence and that they have over 7m customers so mistakes can be made. Are they in any breach of contract? I have had no problems with the television, broadband or phone, only with the offence of the standard penalty charge letter, the inconvenience of speaking to a robot with attitude for forty five minutes and my inept technique when it comes to complaining. What do members think? Am I being over sensitive?

Found it.

I'm going through my witness statement now and preparing my court bundle. I never asked for this, or if I did using a template letter, I can't find reference to it. Do I just take out this paragraph 23(as well as paragraph 220 and renumber?

Thank you ICY!!! That is what I suspected but didn't want to leave to chance. Mine did indeed say "without prejudice", but I didn't read too much into that as I thought it was like saying "my statutory rights are not affected" Finance Glossary : Without prejudice Just pulled the above from an on line glossary. If it cant be used in evidence, is that an indication that they wont be using that defence in court?

Do members need more information to help? Please advise. I'm not sure whether I'm running out of time. That is my worry at the moment.

Bump. Please?

After reading through the FAQ I'm slightly more confident than I was last week. Presently, I have received the defence from the bank, which will have been sent to Northampton (MCOL). Am I now waiting for a court date to be sent via MCOL? Do I need to download the AQ, or will that be sent to me in due course? Thank you, I am finding it daunting because it has been a bit easy up until now. I am still reading this forum, so if the answers are obvious to the longer standing members, please leave links to the appropriate sections.

as my safety net bank, should my bank The Abbey decide to ask me to close my account. I am looking to take them up on their offer to match my overdraft. A&L terms and conditions ask for "previous credit must have been in credit for two days that month, have incurred no unpaid item fees and not have been unauthorised overdrawn". Not sure about you lot, but I have been caught out and I have recently been unauthorised overdrawn, albeit due to charges I'd incured that month. Does that mean that A&L will deny me the overdraft limit matching? If I send a months statement which I have not gone over my limit, will that be acceptable? All information greatfuly accepted.