D5T - Brilliant - it looks like you were pretty cool as a cucumber under pressure (water notwithstanding)- I am still waiting for my darn SAR from GE M and I trust you will have had a few drinkies on your winnings even before I get there I think the grapevine must be on fire - all professions have a grapevine - and if they really think they are having the pi55 taken they will start moving up a gear - well done!

Seawall - regardless of the recent hiccup (thats how I see it) Office of Fair Trading Test for Excessive Redemption Charges Gives us "A term in a mortgage agreement which requires the borrower to pay more for breaching the contract terms than actual costs and losses caused to the lender by the breach (or a genuine pre-estimate of that) is likely to be regarded as an unfair penalty and to be unenforceable both at common law and (in a consumer mortgage) under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations. A redemption charge may be regarded as a penalty even if it is expressd as the price for exercising a right rather than a consequence of breaking the agreement." Now that is from the OFT and it isn't chopped liver So I think this alone is enough to show there is a case to answer All the usual denials (I know nothing about law etc) - but Good luck with GeMoney - I am about to have to enforce data protectiona ct on them and have two ERCS to get stuck into best FNC

Bump

Well LBA notice has expired So I phoned Customer services as I have the N1 form in my mitts ready to go last chance i thought. They said then you must go ahead I said but surely you are wasting members costs (as a BS( He said but what we are doing "may be unlawful" but that is untested and meanwhile statistically we expect you to drop out because its too much effort for most people and so in our interests I pointed out that they were hiding behind the court process and he agreed! I argued that this was surely wrong - he said that is our policy. Guess where my N1 is going with a court fee tomorrow!!!

Hi mollymoo C & G Chief Office Barnett Way Gloucs GL4 3RL Have recieved a response today which seems to confirm address is ok

Hi Rbrears Can I ask for clarification here If i follow your argument the key issue is - is there a breach? So If a contract said 1) Party a gives party b a fiver in payment for the loan of toys for an hour 2) As a promotional bonus on entering the contract b gives a an irresistable freebie promotional sweetie of value £0.50 3) If the toys are returned early there will be a pro-rata refund, less sum of £1 costs and less £0.50 p (the value of the consumed sweetie). 4) £1 is a liquidated cost - estimated at time of contract as costs of extra admin Regarding 3) Which of the following best describes your position (if either) The £1 is ok - it is compensation the 50p is ok because it anticipates non completion of term of contract (so there is no breach) or The £1 would be ok but the 50p is a penalty (it is unrelated to liquidated costs as the 50p freebie was a sales promotion) - so clause 3 is a penalty term for breach and is unenforceable Sorry to be thick - but the above is effectively the wording I have on my contract - the "Freebie" was in my case a 2% Cash "GIFT" returnable if terminated within 5 years many thanks for your time FNC

Hollow words of comfort Nevos - One could excuse Jamorgan for being less than comforted and Nevos - what would you say bank charges on overdrafts for example "they they lent you the money, you happily borrowed it, before you signed on the dotted line you would have had lot's of bit's of paper telling you what your in for and what it will cost you to get out from under." So in conclusion Nevos - if you aren't backing the CAG position - have the honesty to declare yourself - failing that goodbye

JaMorgan This is an example of what everyone dreads and I feel for you. On the positive side, this is absolutely fundamental to everyone at CAG and so you can be sure that everyone will be concerned (not only out of sympathy for you of coarse but also in light of the bigger picture). It may be hard to see the big picture at the moment, but it is clear to everyone who has rehearsed these arguments that you have a strong (at least answerable) position and so it should be heard All the best FNC

Good luck Morgy Harsh letter indeed - give em what for!

Martin I would love nothing more for lloyds to remortgage for me at a good price - especially if there was a big erc - I would do it for the pleasure of taking advantage of the deal then I would back out paying my erc - then I would wait 12 years and go back at them for the erc plus compound interest just for the pleasure of giving them a taste of their own medicine

Hi Martinhw Wishing you good luck and letting you know I am slightly ahad of you with C&G so you might like to follow my thread http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/mortgage-companies/55694-fnc-c-g-erc.html I have sent prelim for ERC of 1420 plus 8% statutory interest Contractual interest compounded actually works out lower for me because I didnt have a current a/c with them so there was no unauthorised borrowing rate - just the mortgage - so ignore that detail on my thread In terms of what you can claim I would suggest you pm a moderator because I am not clear on this. Obviously the ERC and Home visit I would think - The sealing charge and referral fee - it might be worth a letter to C&G to give them a chance to clarify in case they are legit (some chance) Anyway best luck and stay in touch

Suhari - I am no expert but I would think that under g) above if it went fast or multi-track it would set precedent (which surely someoone must do at some stage) Precedent would I think clean out the whole nonsense that the courts are clogged up with and would effect all lenders not just your defendant So there could be a danger at some stage of costs - on the flip side if the lenders are held to be hiding behind the court process (intimidating people top drop out) then there is an argument for punitive damages (a court might consider £millions would be appropriate) - Warning no one else on this site has taken up the cry for punitive damages yet - so maybe Im being daft but I think this is exactly what they are for see http://www.lawcom.gov.uk/docs/lc247.pdf As Lord Diplock said in Broome v Cassell, To restrict the damages recoverable to the actual gain made by the defendant if it exceeded the loss caused to the plaintiff, would leave a defendant contemplating an unlawful act with the certainty that he had nothing to lose to balance against the chance that the plaintiff might never sue him or, if he did, might fail in the hazards of litigation.

Jamorgan If anyone else has picked up on this do please ignore me (also I have no legal background - just comparing things i have read on the site in different places) but (maybe Zoot could comment?).... The above seems to me suggest that (by implication) the fee indemnify Kensington against risk in offering us a reduced interest rate in order to attract custom - Therefore is also contrary to s.4 Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977. This is probably unreasonable under s.11 UCT as Kensington is in a far better placed position than consumers to bear the risk If i am talking bol***x Sorryto waste your time (gl it the hearing)

Just some simple entertainment In my Statements the ERC was annotated as "ERC Cash Gift" Someone ought to let C&G know that it is better to give than to deceive

13th January Sending Prelim Am claiming Contractual Interest or Statutory in alternative Total Comes to something short of £2K Have suggested early settlement would be in their interests

Dolly Thanks for that doh

D5Tweddle Not in a position to help you because as they say "I know nothing", but am sure some advice will be forthcoming (you have two weeks) and Zoot seems to be following you nicely - GL

Can anyopne see if the recent order Post 15 on the below thread could be applied together with this allocation questionaire - If I am stating the obvious sorry - it just seems to me they are very similar concepts One says you wont defend so we will call your bluff the other says you dont defend - so bog off http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/lloyds-bank/20752-kazzaw-lloyds-asset-card.html

Excellent well done - Could this somehow be put in front of judges as a suggested order to speed process kind of like standard disclosure Hurrahh 4 Kazzaw

Hi readers, I am wondering about exemplary damages http://www.lawcom.gov.uk/docs/lc247.pdf Summarises current law in section 4 This last sentence seems to be just what we want ZootScoot asked in another thread (which I had rudely hijacked sorry) In answering these my start point is below but would welcome thoughts regarding the following Disclaw Publishing - Employment Law, unfair dismissal, redundancy pay gives a BASIC POSITION In response to Zoot So the tort has to be a legal wrong for which legal damages have been awarded pre 1964 I guess there has to be loads of case law on misappropriation of funds or failure in fiduciary duty or whatever - no idea I would need help to research a suitable case The second point is I think we have covered in spades (calculation, profit motive are clear following OFT statements and has affected a large number of people) Higher Court fee will I hope be covered by one of the earlier smaller PCs I am claiming (will have to see) - but I want to get these blighters into court somehow, and this claim will be substantially above £5k anyway (maybe I could argue for cost limitation vs large corporation due to nature of exemplary claim) whats the procedure here- Unlimited costs eeek - but someone sometime has to put neck on the block or this could go on ad infinitem - all it takes for evil etc etc (they dont have debtors prison now do they This means I am possibly exposed to costs if I lose so I am wondering if I can claim Exemplary damages of a very small amount say £10, or in the alternative a figure to be determined by the court. (its not that I want the money of the exemplary damages, but it could be a strong campaigning tool) NOW Either I win the Exemplary claim, they settle exemplary damages out of court ???, or I lose in court - but hopefully then I can at least establish precedent on the unlawful charge count As I see it all three possible outcomes open the flood gates totally - unless we are wrong on unlawful charges which is I understand is exactly the purpose of exemplary damages the third hurts me a lot (however small the claim open the flood gates - ) - A loss - "He who dares - is probably an idiot" - I would need to understand the issues and risks (and probably stump up for some legal support to have any chance at this - but what better a thing to do on a tuesday afternoon) As Lord Diplock says It is only if there is a prospect that the damages may exceed the defendant’s gain that the social purpose of this category is achieved - to teach a wrong-doer that tort does not pay

Apologies Zoot/ D5Tweddle - Will keep to myself in future- please feel free to delete my rude interjection I will follow up in my GE Money-ERC thread (linked above)

Barracad If you are starting again can I suggest if there is any danger of this going to Fast Track etc that you at least consider CCR and Exemplary damages. This might scare them off - it could be a huge award & could set precedent. and as far as my birdbrain is concerned the comments below speak for themselves. There are also somwhere??? r eferences to Exemplary damages being appropriate to multiple claimants and where tort feasor is "fleeing from the law" - ie exactly what they are doing http://www.lawcom.gov.uk/docs/lc247.pdf Categories test for exemplary damages - wrongful conduct which has been calculated by the defendant to make a profit for himself which may well exceed the compensation payable to the plaintiff The second difference is that exemplary damages may be awarded even though they exceed the amount of the gain made by the tortfeasor. The effective pursuit of punishment may require awards of exemplary damages to exceed the restitutionary measure: they are concerned with punishment and not simply with stripping away the fruits of the defendant’s wrongdoing. As Lord Diplock said in Broome v Cassell, To restrict the damages recoverable to the actual gain made by the defendant if it exceeded the loss caused to the plaintiff, would leave a defendant contemplating an unlawful act with the certainty that he had nothing to lose to balance against the chance that the plaintiff might never sue him or, if he did, might fail in the hazards of litigation. It is only if there is a prospect that the damages may exceed the defendant’s gain that the social purpose of this category is achieved - to teach a wrong-doer that tort does not pay

They certainly can Read the Step by stap guides to reclaiming penealty charges ERC are just a slightly special case (the step by step guides point out where you need to go) Good Luck

Hi I'm also after nationwide (amongst others) They are reputed to be closing accounts - So open up a "parachute" account - any account that will let you go about your normal business and let them go ahead. You can find details of parachute accounts on Best credit cards, cheap mortgages, personal loans, savings accounts, house & car insurance - The Motley Fool UK BTW I am also charging all my charges dd returns and Overdraft fees at their unauthorised overdraft rate of interest ie 24.9% AER - There is a principle of mutuality or reciprocityu that allows this (they took my money, I didnt authorise it - they charge me 24.9% if I ever go overdrawn - we are equal in the eyes of the law so i can do the same to them) It seems ott but actually it simply increases the chance that they will back down cos if they lose it sets a worse precedent. Bear in mind they are like buffalo tormented by mosquitos - they only need to try and win one case - but which mosquito :-?- so far they havent found one they think they can swat good luck read up loads and loads

Cant add much to above - but am watching good luck FNC PS Thread Jigack sorry but vs Gemoney - Anyone had thoughts on Exemplary Damages - I might make a claim for £1M or so with thruppence or courts discretion in the alternative to show I am not profiteering (watch GE Money choose to defend that one) http://www.lawcom.gov.uk/docs/lc247.pdf Categories test for exemplary damages - wrongful conduct which has been calculated by the defendant to make a profit for himself which may well exceed the compensation payable to the plaintiff The second difference is that exemplary damages may be awarded even though they exceed the amount of the gain made by the tortfeasor. The effective pursuit of punishment may require awards of exemplary damages to exceed the restitutionary measure: they are concerned with punishment and not simply with stripping away the fruits of the defendant’s wrongdoing. As Lord Diplock said in Broome v Cassell, To restrict the damages recoverable to the actual gain made by the defendant if it exceeded the loss caused to the plaintiff, would leave a defendant contemplating an unlawful act with the certainty that he had nothing to lose to balance against the chance that the plaintiff might never sue him or, if he did, might fail in the hazards of litigation. It is only if there is a prospect that the damages may exceed the defendant’s gain that the social purpose of this category is achieved - to teach a wrong-doer that tort does not pay