incidental application

[rory32]

The reasons are contained in the decision of the Crossan case (paras 43 to 53). I'll try and put these into some sort of order and bullet points for you to use later.

 

The bank will argue that this case is to do with the arrestment of benefits and a bank charge is not a form of arrestment but you will counter argue that the case is also to do with the special nature of state benefits when they are identifiable.

[luckyj]

thanks i will take notes from that. I have also downloaded from each of the gov.uk sites for each benefit, the methods of payment for each benefit recommended. I hope that I can find a straw to clutch

[luckyj]

by the way , should I refrain from mentioning the crossan case ? or does it not matter as the banks lawyers have a copy from me?

[rory32]

I think that you should mention the Crossan case as it's a Sheriff Principals decision which is binding on the lower courts.

[luckyj]

this is to let you all know that I attended court this morning, and after a long wait ( 9:50 - 11:37), I was finally called. I was asked by the sheriff to speak first and give reasons to recall my sist, then the banks lawyer defended his reason and said in his view the circumstances of my case had not changed at all and the sist should be upheld. The sheriff then said that he wanted time to read over the tax credits act and the social security act , the info on the crossan case and would re-convene in 15 minutes. On his return he stated that I had misinterpreted the acts and the crossan case as the charges described by both of them was refering to (in his opinion) a creditor freezing a bank account and not bank charges . the decision to recall the sist was denied. I would be grateful for any thoughts , opinions or advice on this matter.