Blueskies v Barclays - **WON**

[cazibeli]

Hi Blueskies,

 

Just to let you know that it isnt a good idea to have your court claim number published on a website, anyone can use that info down at your local court i.e to cancel your claim!! All anyone would need to prove your identity is a bank statement!!!! :o

 

I work for the County Courts and I strongly advise you to remove it from you previous post.

 

Anyway, enough about that, good luck, and keep us posted.

[blueskies]

Thanks cazibeli I have temporarily removed the claim number and referred the issue to others as all our claim numbers are on the site.

 

Claim number reinstated

[Janet-M]

Hi Blueskies,

 

Just to let you know that it isnt a good idea to have your court claim number published on a website, anyone can use that info down at your local court i.e to cancel your claim!! All anyone would need to prove your identity is a bank statement!!!! :o

 

I work for the County Courts and I strongly advise you to remove it from you previous post.

 

Anyway, enough about that, good luck, and keep us posted.

 

Are you saying that you work for the county court and believe that a solicitor or a bank would DARE try this ? If not then how else would you say someone is going to get someones bank statement or other means of ID ?

[BankFodder]

Hi Blueskies,

 

Just to let you know that it isnt a good idea to have your court claim number published on a website, anyone can use that info down at your local court i.e to cancel your claim!! All anyone would need to prove your identity is a bank statement!!!! :o

 

I work for the County Courts and I strongly advise you to remove it from you previous post.

 

Anyway, enough about that, good luck, and keep us posted.

Thank you for your warning. However, we really do feel that the chances of this happening are so negligible as to be not worth considering.

 

The publication of claim numbers gives credibiility to people's claims, it shows any banks or representatives or their lawyers that the claim is serious - and also the claim numbers are extremely useful when making other related applications to the courts.

 

In fact two applications have recently been made using information from the Litigation concluded section and it wojld not have been possible to rely on this data without the claim numbers.

 

I would encourage everyone to let us have their claim details including claim number. It does no one any harm and in fact has cotributed to the success of The Consumer Action Group and the thousands of people who have recovered their money frm the banks.

 

If a fraudulent application was made in the way that you suggest, the poolice would quickly be involved, suspicion would focus very quikly on the banks thus increasing the pressure on them to start changing their behaviour.

[blueskies]

Barclays defence arrived in the post this morning, like Bookworm noted in her thread Barclays appear to have a new trainee for us to play with. Adrian St John, although he hasn't got his own email address yet so he must be sat on Mr KJ's lap being shown what to do.

 

• The Particulars of Claim do not provide details or particulars of the account in question and / or the precise charges alleged to have been unlawful, or the date thereof. Notwithstanding the claimant?s failure to correctly identify and particularise an account held with the Defendant, it is admitted that the Claimant has two accounts, numbers xxxxxxxx and yyyyyyyy, both of sort code xx-xx-xx. However, to the extent it is alleged that the Claimant incurred bank charges on his accounts for unauthorised borrowings (whether unpaid fees for returned cheques, ?paid referral fees? or any other such fees), the Defendant put the claimant to strict proof of each charge and the date thereof.
  
• The Defendant is entitled to charge the Claimant for unauthorised borrowings by reason of its standard terms and conditions. The Claimant accepted the same when the account was opened, including (in particular but without limitation) the following terms and conditions (which aresummarised)
  • The Defendant?s right to charge a ?paid referral fee? where the Defendant pays an amount (either by compulsion or election) which causes the account to become overdrawn – £30 per item (previously £25).
    
  • The Defendant?s right to charge an administrative fee if any cheque, standing order or direct debit cannot be paid because of insufficient cleared funds in the account - £35 per item (previously £30).
    
  • The Defendant?s entitlement, if the Claimant becomes overdrawn without an overdraft limit, to charge interest at the unauthorised borrowing rate on the excess balance.

  [*]The Defendant?s standard terms and conditions give the Claimant a fair and transparent view of those terms and the charges applicable for unauthorised borrowings (including where the accounts are overdrawn without an overdraft limit or where the Claimant exceeds his authorised overdraft limit).

  [*]If and to the extent it is the Claimant?s case that the failure to make necessary payments and/or failure to remain within authorised overdraft limits and/or failure to arrange an authorised overdraft constituted a breach of the terms applying to to the accounts and that the contractual entitlement to debit charges from the Claimant?s accounts constitutes a liquidated damages clause, the same is denied. The charges constitute payments the Claimant agreed to make by reason of the terms and conditions of his accounts and were consideration for the Defendant advancing credit to the Claimant, which the Defendant was under no obligation to advance. The Defendantwas entitled to impose such charges and interest when the Claimant incurred the overdraft.

  [*]Accordingly, it is denied that the legal principles related to liquidated damages clauses and penalty charges are relevant or applicable to the facts set out above. Further or alternatively it is denied that any such charges constitute unlawful penalty charges or are in breach of S.4 of the Unfair (Contracts) Terms act 1977 (or any other provision), or are unreasonable within the meaning of s.15 of the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 (or indeed any other provision).

  [*]Therefore, it is denied that the charges were unlawfully debited from the accounts.

  [*]If and to the extent the Claimant incurred charges on his account, this was caused by the Claimant having gone into overdraft without having agreed with the Defendant an authorised overdraft facility and / or to increase the overdraft facility and / or his failure to make payments to bring the balance of the accounts back into credit.

  [*]It is averred that the said charges and interest are and remain lawful and enforceable and that the Defendant was entitled to debit the same.

  [*]The Defendant denies that it is liable to the Claimant for the sums claimed and interest as pleaded by the Claimant or at all.

As you can see no real surprises and there was no counterclaim.

[KERRYLOUISE75]

Blueskies

 

Have just read your posts and wish you all the luck in the world! It has given me the strength to pursue my own claim.

[blueskies]

You will find the help on here incredible. I wouldn't have got this far without help from others. If I can help let me know

[sarahwarren]

I feel so sorry for the new trainee.........

 

Do you think he has any idea what he has let himself in for ?!!

 

Good luck with it all...I'm not that far behind you so will be watching your thread closely in anticipation!!!!

[cazibeli]

Good evening all,

 

Yes I do work for a court and I would never put up my claim number on a website, I am not saying a solicitor or a bank would use the information, but who knows who else is reading the forums???

 

 

Identity freud is a growing concern, and yes I have seen people come into court claiming to be someone when in fact they are not.

 

You do not have to take my advice, its up to you, but please remember that these claims are concerning money, and people do strange things where money is concerned.

 

As for the replies I got to that post, thanks for knocking me everyone, I was just trying to help someone out, seeing as I have seen this happen in the courts before I obviously dont know what Im talking about.

[CrispDust]

cazibeli

Thank you for your contribution and advice. I don't think anybody was knocking you but it does raise serious questions about data security at the County Courts!!

[cazibeli]

cazibeli

Thank you for your contribution and advice. I don't think anybody was knocking you but it does raise serious questions about data security at the County Courts!!

 

exactly my point! all it takes is someone that works at the courts to have that number and you can find out where that person lives and all sorts of things.....

 

Unfortunately not everyone that works for the courts are as nice as me

 

With that number I could go into work tomorrow, find out where that person lives, go to there home and find some sort of identification (im not saying that the orginal poster would be throwing out stuff I could use for this) take it to the court and pretend I was them.

 

The people at the court can only do so much to keep data safe!!

[blueskies]

Cazibeli I don't think anyone is trying to be nasty towards you but the only people who would have an interest in impersonating me at the court would be the Defendant in my case. Who else would benefit from it?

 

The claim number forms no form of identification outside of court so I don't think there would be an identity theft issue there. Anyone who wants to impersonate somebody else has far easier ways of doing it than going on to a courts computer system (and risking detection). All they need to do is search through a few bin bags outside somebodies house (very few people shred even now).

[cazibeli]

Blueskies...its up to you whether you take my advice....either way it affects me not.

 

Good luck with your case.

[blueskies]

I need a little bit of help with the AQ, specifically section G - Other information.

 

In the Case guidance notes HERE, (it's in the FAQ's that I keep nagging people to read!), there is this.

"· That a senior and highly respected member of the banking industry – Peter McNamara, said on BBC Radio in 2004 that the charges were used to fund free banking for all personal customers. (This argument is especially useful for claims against Lloyds as he was head of personal banking at Lloyds). You should produce a CD of the interview along with a CD player. Give the bank an advance copy about 21 days before the hearing(recorded delivery)and warn them that you will be producing it in court. Warn the court as well."

 

Firstly is this still current advice, given that is dated 23rd February 2006?

 

Secondly if it is, surely this is something that will affect the management of my claim (for time).

 

Also is it worth putting something in about asking the defence for a break down of their charges (although they deny liquidated damages, they say their charges are reasonable under s15 Supply of Goods and Services Act).

[jonni2bad]

I'm really not too sure about the McNamara evidence, but you could include it just in case. I think you could offer evidence from your great aunt Ethel, and they still wouldn't see you in court.

 

Place details in Other Information if you intend to use it. I wouls still put 1 HOUR as the likely hearing time.

 

Do you have the N149 or N150?

 

As discusses on another thread;

 

If you have the N149, under section G (Other information) you should ask that the court orders Standard Disclosure

 

"I would respectfully ask that the court in this case, not withstanding allocation to the small claims track, order standard disclosure. I understand that it is in the courts discretion to do so. I believe such an order would bring a rapid end to this litigation."

 

The same can be entered in Section F of the N150.

 

It will not force the judge to order it - but no harm in trying.

[blueskies]

Thankyou for that Jonni. For the record I have form N149 so will putting the text in. I know Barclays aren't going to appear in court in a month of Sundays but just in case.

[blueskies]

Just a quick update. I dialled the number on the form to speak to Adrian St John o assess the possibility of a negotiated settlement. When I finally got through to him he told me that the case had been passed back to Keith Jeremiah. I have left a message for Keith Jeremiah to call me back and was told it would be today. No call yet. Will call him tomorrow.

[jonni2bad]

It's up to you, obviously, but I wouldn't be chasing them around.....

[blueskies]

Thanks for the advice but for the next month I have so much going on that I would prefer to know whether they will settle or press forward with the charade that they want a court case. Could do with not spending £100 AQ fee Friday but will do if no luck tomorrow

[blueskies]

Just to let everyone know the telephone call went in my favour and I have now settled with Barclays. It wasn't quite a 100% settlement but was in excess of 90% and due to current financial postition decided to accept (thinking of three week holiday that starts on Thursday with only £200 spending money as would have to pay £100 AQ fee Wednesday). No mention of confidentiality with Mr Keith Jeremiah today and WILL NOT (under ANY circumstances) accept it in the document he is sending me to sign. Also informed him that I WILL NOT stop court action until the deal is finished.

 

I have got 100% of bank charges and court costs back so the only amount I will have lost out on is some of the 8% interest.

 

I wish I could of held out for the full amount but this wasn't possible at this time.

 

DPA SAR for Barclaycard and Captial One going out his evening. New threads will be started for these.

 

I know the score - Survey - Donation to CAG - Celebrate with lots of beer!

 

A special thanks has to go to Don Quioxte for the help shown above and many times more encouragement (and telling off for being too soft) by PM (hope he doesn't think I've been to soft by setlling for less than my total claim).

 

Thanks also to Vampiress for the spreadsheet and moral support by PM and at the CAG party, Bankfodder, Dave and all the mods and helpers, and all those at the CAG party.

 

Onward and upwards!

[barracad]

Congrats!!!!

 

[Bookworm]

CHEAT!!!!!!

 

(Oh, all right, congratulations then....)

[blueskies]

Sorry Bookworm

 

Are you going to try the phone call? KJ is very nice and may be more amenable to your French accent?

[Nightstar]

well done Blueskies, PS thanks for your advice.

[Guest Mumofthreeboys]

Very, very well done - excellent news.

 

I was beginning to wonder whether there would ever be any more winners against Barclays / Woolwich!!! Apart from Abbey are they the most stubborn? I'm at AQ stage, I sent Mr Jeremiah a fax telling him this was his last opportunity before I submitted AQ - nothing.

 

But again, well done you and I hope you have a lovely holiday xxxx