Court cases against chanrges

[poppyd]

Hi,

I have had a case against Paragon Personal Finance "stayed" by the courts while the test case against bank charges was ongoing and have not heard from the court since.

The charges are in relation to telephone calls made by paragon (£20 a call for average 2 min duration) and letters (£10 a letter for printed "pro forma" document). I do not believe that these charges should have been blanketed under the bank charges test case, as they are significantly different, and also believe that the standard legal principle of "if the charges equal more than the cost, they are by definition a penalty charge".

Could anyone help me with the following?

a) Is my belief right and can I ask for the court to remove the stay and actually get the case to be heard - is there any additional cost to do this?

b) Would the template used for the bank actions to justify precedent still be viable - I used the template to present to the court regarding the unfairness of charges as per the forum documents - given these charges are not relative to bank charges, does this legal principle "excessive charges equal penalty" still apply in this matter, and/or should I look at changing the paperwork presented to the court to back up my argument (and if so, with what?).

The amount is small (£480 plus interest) but I would prefer to fight the case and lose, as opposed to wasting the money paid to the courts to hear the case.

Any/All help will be gratefully received and appreciated - I have also put this post in the bank charges section, so I apologise if this offends anyone.

Many thanks

PoppyD

[HomerJSimpson]

Hi,

I have had a case against Paragon Personal Finance "stayed" by the courts while the test case against bank charges was ongoing and have not heard from the court since.

 

The charges are in relation to telephone calls made by paragon (£20 a call for average 2 min duration) and letters (£10 a letter for printed "pro forma" document). I do not believe that these charges should have been blanketed under the bank charges test case, as they are significantly different, and also believe that the standard legal principle of "if the charges equal more than the cost, they are by definition a penalty charge".

 

Could anyone help me with the following?

a) Is my belief right and can I ask for the court to remove the stay and actually get the case to be heard - is there any additional cost to do this?

b) Would the template used for the bank actions to justify precedent still be viable - I used the template to present to the court regarding the unfairness of charges as per the forum documents - given these charges are not relative to bank charges, does this legal principle "excessive charges equal penalty" still apply in this matter, and/or should I look at changing the paperwork presented to the court to back up my argument (and if so, with what?).

 

The amount is small (£480 plus interest) but I would prefer to fight the case and lose, as opposed to wasting the money paid to the courts to hear the case.

 

Any/All help will be gratefully received and appreciated - I have also put this post in the bank charges section, so I apologise if this offends anyone.

 

Many thanks

PoppyD

 

 

Hi PoppyD,

 

Your case should not have been stayed in the first place as it has nothing to do with the test case the OFT lost.

 

There are more arguments to use than the penalty charge one, UTCCR Regs 5 and 6, Misrepresntation of the charges, Breach of statutory duty if they are FSA regulated, and possibly S140a and b of the Consumer Credit Act.

 

a) Yes you can get the stay lifted and have the case heard, but it depends on how you have worded your POC that will determine your chances. An application to lift the stay could also ask the court for permission to amend your Particulars of Claim. If this were granted you would submit amended POC via N244 application form and pay a fee of £40. This is added to the amount awarded against the defendants when you win.

 

b) The template used for bank charges could still work, but an amended claim would have a better chance of success.

 

It seems that there is more chance with claims that are not personal current bank account charges (such as your claim). I've followed through a claim against a finance company and won. I understand it not all being about the money, the principle of proving you were right is more than the amount sometimes.

 

I had a lot of help with the amended POCs from the site team here on CAG. I'll link you to them.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/246352-finance-company-claim-charges-3.html#post2951878

 

Theres quite a lot to read but it's quite straightforward.

 

Best of luck. Go get 'em.

 

HJS

[poppyd]

Hi HJS - Many thanks - will read and look at amending the POC.

You are right that it's not all about the money (of course this is the route reason for claim) but more about the way charges can be added ad. hoc. without any challenge and purely as a way to make even more money - even the OFT looked to have been the victim of a political judgement - the law were never going to rule against the banks when world banking was in financial meltdow!

As previously, many thanks for your help - it is much appreciated and I look forward to going to cpurt.

Have an enjoyable day

[poppyd]

Hi again HJS - Do you happen to have copies of, or a link to the court bundle you would use in court to support your (my) case?

 

If so would/could you forward - happy to send an email address to you if required?

 

Once again, many thanks!

 

Poppyd