Ashwall V Lloyds TSB

[havinastella]

I take it this is your front page

 

Edited August 14, 2008 by havinastella

[Aterlatus]

Ahh, slight difference in our claims which might explain the different defences. You're after statements as well - I just want my money back. Got copies of the statements from their own website which I was assured are sufficient evidence. Odd that mine's longer when yours is asking for more though! lol

 

If you don't mind me asking Ashwall, are you North or South Wales? If it's North it'd be nice to know someone's working near to the same dates as me relatively local. I didn't hide the court from my docs (merely the really identifying data) - just off the North Welsh border

[havinastella]

Ash, might want this if it gets to court

 

http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/library/data_protection/practical_application/subject_access_-_guide_for_data_subjects.pdf

 

 

JOgs

[Ashwall]

Jogs,

Yep mine is identical, even down to the way they refer to you as a her in paragrpah 5!! Lol

[Aterlatus]

I'll pop this in your thread Ash even though it applies to Jogs too...

 

Have you had no luck getting statements off internet banking? Mine went wayyyyy back to 2001 on there and I was told they'd be fine for court purposes

 

Put my AQ in on Friday so if all goes to pan I'll be needing them soon!

[havinastella]

Oh, I could easily get my statements online, but I have paid £10 for them to do it, they have failed to, so it'll cost them a vist to court

[Aterlatus]

Oh god that's the perfect response. I admire your perseverance

 

Hats off to you

[Ashwall]

Update:

Have Court date for 27th October 2008, Documents to be delivered to Court and other party by 19th September.

 

Still no statements from Lloyds even after their letter stating they would be with me by the 12 August 2008!

This is going to be some defense! I just cant see how you can defend something that is so blatantly undefendable!

 

A little help on a court bundle would be great and also do i need to move this over into the legal forum now?

[Aterlatus]

I'd still see it as TSB (any anyway - I'd forget to check it if it was in another forum, lol).

 

I'll note it in my diary and throw you well wishes on the big day Ash

[Ashwall]

bump

Some advice on what to submit as a court bundle would be great as docs need to be in by Friday 19th

Thanks

[Rooster-UK]

Hi Ashwall,

I suggest that you have a look at the following link from the templates library.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/33060-basic-court-bundle.html

 

Use that as the basis, then add anything that is pertinent to your own case.

 

Regards, Rooster.

[Ashwall]

All my docs went off in time, have not had anything from Lloyds TSB does this mean they wont be submitting any papers to court? And if so can i go for a strike out?

[steven4064]

When is (was) their stuff due in?

[Ashwall]

Hi Sreven4064,

Thanks for your help and quick reply.

In answer to your question..

It states " Each Party shall deliver to every other party and to the court office copies of all documents ( including experts report ) on which he intends to rely at the hearing no later than 19 September 2008.

 

On that basis i can only determine Lloyds dont intend to rely on any documentation at the hearing (which will be on 27th October 2008 at 11 am).

As to date i have received no corrospondance from Lloys TSB since their last letter dated July 8th 2008 stating they would have my statements to me by 16th Aughust 2008.. needless to say they didn't arrive either.

 

Whats my options now? Your advice would be much appreciated

 

Thanks again

Ash

[Ashwall]

Sorry am having keyboard issues today

[havinastella]

Hi Ash, looks like the Solicitors will have to get from Wales to Gatwick in 30mins as I have them on the 27th at 1130

[Ashwall]

wow! hehehehehe ... we have been doing this at the same stage together and our hearings are within half hour of each other on the same day! Awesome.. I hope they got a Tardis! Lol

[steven4064]

I doubt whether they will turn up at either. Ash, as they have not complied with the court order, you should ask for their statement of case to be struck out under CPR Part 3.4(2)©

The court may strike out a statement of case if it appears to the court –...

 

© that there has been a failure to comply with a rule, practice direction or court order.

[Ashwall]

Steven4064.

Thats great news, need a litle help with that if you can?

Could you send me a link for the docs i need to go ahead and seek a strike out?

Your help has been much appreciated Thank You once again

[Ashwall]

bump

[42man]

Apologies....wrong letter Ash !!!

Edited October 2, 2008 by 42man
wrong letter...

[steven4064]

I think you will need to make an application using a form N244.

 

You should ask for an order to strike out their case under CPR Part 3.4(2)© "The court may strike out a statement of case if it appears to the court –...

 

© that there has been a failure to comply with a rule, practice direction or court order." on the grounds that they have not complied with the order of the court (specify which).

 

You should also ask for a wasted costs order. Estimate your costs as follows: 20-30 hours at £9.25/hour (that is the official rate for litigants in person), copying, stationary, printer ink, etc (say £50), cost of N244 (£75) - total about £400.

[Ashwall]

Thanks Steven4064, you have been fantastic, thanks to everyone who has helped me out so far, Lets see if we can get this struck out and costs awarded.

[Ashwall]

APPLICATION NOTICE

 

Part 3. I ask for an order to strike out this case under CPR Part 3.4(2)© "The court may strike out a statement of case if it appears to the court –...

 

© that there has been a failure to comply with a rule, practice direction or court order." on the grounds that they have not complied with the order of the court.

 

I also ask for a wasted costs order.

 

Part 10 What information will you be relying on in support of your application?

Selected The Evidence set out in the box below.

 

I, the Claimant, refer to the claim as detailed above and specifically the order made by Deputy District Judge ***** ****

I wish to inform the court that the defendant has not complied with the order in that it has not served upon me the evidence, or any such documents, upon which it intends to rely at the forthcoming hearing.

I can confirm that my documents were filed on 18 September 2008 and served to the Defendant on 18 September 2008

It is submitted that the Defendants non-compliance creates a significant imbalance between the parties in light of the forthcoming hearing, which I believe to be contrary to the overriding objective. This imbalance is particularly exacerbated by the fact that the Defendant is represented by specialist solicitors, whereas I am a litigant in person. I believe that the Defendant has behaved unreasonably in their approach to defending this claim, not least because I believe the Defendant has no intention of defending this claim at a hearing.

I also enclose a list of all cases of which I am aware in which Lloyds TSB Bank Plc are due to defend similar claims on the same Hearing date as this claim.

Accordingly, it is respectfully suggested that the court may be minded to make an order pursuant to Rule 3.4(2)© of the Civil Procedure Rules, to strike out this case or other such order as the court deems just.

[steven4064]

That looks good. You could add some extra justification for wasted costs

The Defendant’s unreasonable approach in defending a claim it always intended to settle has directly incurred myself unnecessary costs as outlined in the attached list of costs, and therefore I respectfully request that the Court consider awarding these costs, or such costs as it deems appropriate, as outlined in the Civil Procedure Rules 27.14(2)(g):

 

(2) The court may not order a party to pay a sum to another party in respect of that other party's costs, fees and expenses, including those relating to an appeal, except – (g) such further costs as the court may assess by the summary procedure and order to be paid by a party who has behaved unreasonably.