This forum ...

[BankFodder]

Is particularly for those whose cases have been transferred to the mercantile court in London to dicuss their claims, exchange information about settlements, documetns received and any other issues.

 

People not affected are welcome to join in.

 

The announcement on the Mercantile Court recommends that letters are written tot eh OFT, FSA and your MP.

 

This action is very strongly recommended. I think that although in the past letters like this had very little effect, the fact is that things are now building up into a crisis.

I think that letters relating to the Mercantile court transfers and the continuing inaction by the OFT and FSA will now have a much greater effect.

[Number6]

I only know of the one case that was going through the Mercantile Court and that was settled out of court.

 

Are there many others then? How many are we talking about here?

 

I have to say that it would be nice to get a test case through the courts but the thought of perhaps my case being transferred to the Mercantile Court makes me a little nervous. I am assuming that if a case is so transferred then it will be heard in London, this would present serious logistical and cost difficulties for me.

 

On what grounds do the County Courts decide to transfer a case? Is it totally at the whim of the Judge? Would the claimant have any right of appeal aginst such a decision to transfer?

 

Can we please have some background information to this subject as I must admit your announcement has caught me on the hop!

 

Pete

[victimnomore]

Yes, I second that.

 

In theory this sounds a really great development in the campaign for bank charge justice. In practice though I can't help feeling decidedly "whimpy" at the thought of MY case being transferred.

 

Mind you, I bet the banks are a whole lot more scared than I am!! Eh?

[gizmo111]

I only know of the one case that was going through the Mercantile Court and that was settled out of court.

 

Are there many others then? How many are we talking about here?

 

I have to say that it would be nice to get a test case through the courts but the thought of perhaps my case being transferred to the Mercantile Court makes me a little nervous. I am assuming that if a case is so transferred then it will be heard in London, this would present serious logistical and cost difficulties for me.

 

On what grounds do the County Courts decide to transfer a case? Is it totally at the whim of the Judge? Would the claimant have any right of appeal aginst such a decision to transfer?

 

Can we please have some background information to this subject as I must admit your announcement has caught me on the hop!

 

Pete

 

No as I undersatand it some courts in Londaon ahve transfered to the london mercantile court - to my knowkedge this isn't the only mc in the country most major cities have them.

[barracad]

No as I undersatand it some courts in Londaon ahve transfered to the london mercantile court - to my knowkedge this isn't the only mc in the country most major cities have them.

 

Yes they are as follows:

 

 

Birmingham Civil Justice Centre

 

Bristol County Court

 

Bury St Edmunds Crown Court

 

Central London County Court

 

Macclesfield County Court

 

Chester Civil Justice Centre

 

Leeds Combined Court Centre

 

Cardiff Civil Justice Centre

[Number6]

Yes they are as follows:

 

 

Birmingham Civil Justice Centre

 

Bristol County Court

 

Bury St Edmunds Crown Court

 

Central London County Court

 

Macclesfield County Court

 

Chester Civil Justice Centre

 

Leeds Combined Court Centre

 

Cardiff Civil Justice Centre

 

Mine would be transferred to Birmingham then. Even that would make a big difference to me. Worcester County Court is 10 minutes by cycle from me. Birmingham is 1 to 1 1/2 hours each way by car plus £10 - £15 petrol + £5 parking. Not a lot I know but it makes a difference when you're struggling financially to start with! And the extra three hours is lost working time (I'm self employed).

 

Pete

[Number6]

Can we please have some background information here Bankfodder? How many cases? When? Why? Etc.

 

Pete

[Number6]

And another thought.

 

If a case is transferred to a higher court then the likelyhood is that every other case would be stayed pending the outcome of the Mercantile court case. If there are several Mercantile cases and they keep getting settled out of court at the last minute then all the other cases still stuck on the "fast track" could be stalled for months or even years! :o

 

Reassurance needed here!!!

 

Pete

[gizmo111]

And another thought.

 

If a case is transferred to a higher court then the likelyhood is that every other case would be stayed pending the outcome of the Mercantile court case. If there are several Mercantile cases and they keep getting settled out of court at the last minute then all the other cases still stuck on the "fast track" could be stalled for months or even years! :o

 

Reassurance needed here!!!

 

Pete

 

Yes but surely if that keeps happening and it is the same bank on a few occasions that is abusing the judiciary - higher up in the legal system somehow they will be penalised, and stop all the nonsense of defending the claims

[Number6]

Yes but surely if that keeps happening and it is the same bank on a few occasions that is abusing the judiciary - higher up in the legal system somehow they will be penalised, and stop all the nonsense of defending the claims

 

That didn't stop the courts from staying cases while the only other Mercantile court bank case that I know of was proceeding a few weeks back. It was settled out of court (by LTSB I think) but the County Court Judges were still staying cases weeks later "awaiting the result" of the settled case! No-one told the circuit judges!! It was weeks before cases stopped being stayed!

 

And you can't penalise anybody for settling out of court prior to the hearing, I don't think so anyway.

 

Pete

[gizmo111]

That didn't stop the courts from staying cases while the only other Mercantile court bank case that I know of was proceeding a few weeks back. It was settled out of court (by LTSB I think) but the County Court Judges were still staying cases weeks later "awaiting the result" of the settled case! No-one told the circuit judges!! It was weeks before cases stopped being stayed!

 

And you can't penalise anybody for settling out of court prior to the hearing, I don't think so anyway.

 

Pete

 

No I don't think you can directly - but surely if the same person/organisation keeps bringing it to the brink of hearing and settling and it is always the same issue somebody ain't gonna be happy. At the very least I would hope that claims are paid at LBA stage.

[bish]

I would assume that sooner or later something will give regarding this matter as cases are being refered to a higher court as a test case to reduce the many that are clogging up the small claims courts. If these cases are still not being heard then maybe pressure will be brought on the OFT to sort out the very organisations responsible ie the banks.

[Number6]

No I don't think you can directly - but surely if the same person/organisation keeps bringing it to the brink of hearing and settling and it is always the same issue somebody ain't gonna be happy.

 

Maybe so, but how can you force a body to actually face a judge if all they're doing is paying out claims, albeit after being pushed into a potential court situation by the claimant? You can't say "no, sorry Mr Grabitall bank - the courts don't accept your offer to pay up, you must stand trial"!

 

Maybe it would get sorted sooner or later, by OFT or Government intervention perhaps but it could easily take years for that to happen, at the very least an OFT "study" would be needed (12 months?) followed by presentation of a case for a requirement for new legislation to the Government (12 months?) followed by a Parliamentary Bill followed by an Act of Parliament (2 years?), that's a reasonably likely timescale for this sort of situation. In the meantime the County Courts could then legitimately stay cases pending new legislation which in itself would free up court time because they wouldn't have to allocate any time in the first place.

 

Pete

[gizmo111]

Maybe so, but how can you force a body to actually face a judge if all they're doing is paying out claims, albeit after being pushed into a potential court situation by the claimant? You can't say "no, sorry Mr Grabitall bank - the courts don't accept your offer to pay up, you must stand trial"!

 

Maybe it would get sorted sooner or later, by OFT or Government intervention perhaps but it could easily take years for that to happen, at the very least an OFT "study" would be needed (12 months?) followed by presentation of a case for a requirement for new legislation to the Government (12 months?) followed by a Parliamentary Bill followed by an Act of Parliament (2 years?), that's a reasonably likely timescale for this sort of situation. In the meantime the County Courts could then legitimately stay cases pending new legislation which in itself would free up court time because they wouldn't have to allocate any time in the first place.

 

Pete

 

You are probably right - but in the meantime the court is still going to have the hassle of letters requesting removal of stays to contend with, and these laws are so old on what grounds could they be amended?

[Number6]

You are probably right - but in the meantime the court is still going to have the hassle of letters requesting removal of stays to contend with, and these laws are so old on what grounds could they be amended?

 

Any law can be changed, amended, repealed by the simple expedient of a Satutory Instrument, or in the worst case new legislation. Thousands of old laws have been removed from the statute books over time and either incorporated into specific Acts or simply repealed.

 

There would be no real hassle involved either - standard response sent out by a court secretary "All cases brought in connection with unfair bank charges are stayed pending the outcome of xxxxx -v- Grabitall Bank in the London Mercantile Court". There would be no grounds to lift the stay so a standard reply is all that would be needed.

 

My ramblings here may well be extreme and off-beam but I don't think this scenario is impossible by any means if what BankFodder says is true. That's why I'm desperate to see some supporing information and there doesn't seem to be any at the moment.

 

Pete

[Number6]

OK, see here:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/mercantile-court/31466-sarajane-barclays-mercantile.html

 

Pete

[Number6]

I have to say (as you can probably tell from my previous posts) I'm seriously unnerved by this development!

 

Pete

[Number6]

This refers to the earlier case that was eventually settled out of court by LTSB:

 

Bank refunds put on ice by court | This is Money

 

Pete

[gizmo111]

This refers to the earlier case that was eventually settled out of court by LTSB:

 

Bank refunds put on ice by court | This is Money

 

Pete

 

Oh I knew about the old one - and they settled out of court, also somewhere on site is the fact that welsh courts - Cardiff area have been staying them. There is a los a couple more in Lambeth. Any change in legisation as far as I am aware is not retrospective - so we just sit tight and clock up the 8% - annoying but in the end we will win - do you know anything about the eurepean court of human rights? One of the articles is right to fair trial and if this goes on too long then maybe research in that area is our next step?

[JonCris]

This site represents thousands of consumers.

 

Therefore I strongly believe the site should right to HMCS & each those CC's that have stayed pointing out again that the claimants are reclaiming these unlawful charges in the main because of financial hardship & to stay matters will make matter worse for them by placing many in dire financial straights. Also they need to be told that whilst we are quite willing to have matters heard the banks refuse to allow any court to hear the claim always after taking it to the brink settling before a hearing.

 

I do not think we can state the position often enough until the message gets through to these judges to stop playing the banks game

[gizmo111]

This site represents thousands of consumers.

 

Therefore I strongly believe the site should right to HMCS & each those CC's that have stayed pointing out again that the claimants are reclaiming these unlawful charges in the main because of financial hardship & to stay matters will make matter worse for them by placing many in dire financial straights. Also they need to be told that whilst we are quite willing to have matters heard the banks refuse to allow any court to hear the claim always after taking it to the brink settling before a hearing.

 

I do not think we can state the position often enough until the message gets through to these judges to stop playing the banks game

 

Hello stranger,

 

I quite agree - and then the whole issues will be opened up for more people to request refunds.

[Number6]

I know that the normal County Courts cannot set a precedent but a judgement in any court must be more than helpful to one side or the other? One way to short circuit all the prevarication by the banks would be to set hearing dates as quickly as possible following AQ and then start pursuing the banks for contempt if they keep taking cases to the brink.

 

By transferring to the Mercantile Court can the Judges not see that they are simply giving the banks more time to stall as they can argue a greater case complexity. The banks will continue to push it to the wire and then settle out of court but they will be able to take longer over so doing and that will be the only result of this legal farce!!

 

There are also potentially case management conferences to attend, etc thus exposing claimants who are already in financial difficulty to additional costs and expenditure of time, postage, document costs etc and hence there is a chance that more claimants will simply drop out of the process due to fear, lack of funds or time etc! I live 10 minutes by bike away from my County Court but a 1 1/2 hour car drive away from my nearest Mercantile Court. I can forsee having to attend the Court at least twice so there's £40 in petrol + parking for a start plus a days work lost. If my case were to go down this route I wouldn't give up but can ill afford the extra expenditure and further delay.

 

It will inevitably delay many, if not all refund claims as all the County Courts will now start waiting for a result from the Mercantile Court thus presenting claimants with more delays and the ensuing financial hardship caused by not getting their refunds for an even longer period of time.

 

I am really worried and annoyed by this irrelevant new tactic. Am I alone in feeling this way??

 

Pete

[JonCris]

Hello stranger,

 

I quite agree - and then the whole issues will be opened up for more people to request refunds.

 

Hi gizmo it's not him it's me I am merely the messenger.

[JonCris]

I know that the normal County Courts cannot set a precedent but a judgement in any court must be more than helpful to one side or the other? One way to short circuit all the prevarication by the banks would be to set hearing dates as quickly as possible following AQ and then start pursuing the banks for contempt if they keep taking cases to the brink.

 

By transferring to the Mercantile Court can the Judges not see that they are simply giving the banks more time to stall as they can argue a greater case complexity. The banks will continue to push it to the wire and then settle out of court but they will be able to take longer over so doing and that will be the only result of this legal farce!!

 

There are also potentially case management conferences to attend, etc thus exposing claimants who are already in financial difficulty to additional costs and expenditure of time, postage, document costs etc and hence there is a chance that more claimants will simply drop out of the process due to fear, lack of funds or time etc! I live 10 minutes by bike away from my County Court but a 1 1/2 hour car drive away from my nearest Mercantile Court. I can forsee having to attend the Court at least twice so there's £40 in petrol + parking for a start plus a days work lost. If my case were to go down this route I wouldn't give up but can ill afford the extra expenditure and further delay.

 

It will inevitably delay many, if not all refund claims as all the County Courts will now start waiting for a result from the Mercantile Court thus presenting claimants with more delays and the ensuing financial hardship caused by not getting their refunds for an even longer period of time.

 

I am really worried and annoyed by this irrelevant new tactic. Am I alone in feeling this way??

 

Pete

 

No you are not alone & I suggest that if any members suffers a stay that not only should they write to the court but given the court reference also other members along the lines of BF's suggestion pointing out that they are in fact doing the banks bidding to the detriment of the consumer.

 

Its' unfortunate but many of these DJ appear to not be aware that the law in this regard is already cast in stone & would take a HOL ruling to change.

[marlow]

I knew something would happen as soon as I claim, I KNEW IT!! There go loads of claims, month after month, settled here, settled there, no probs. I sent my AQ off couple of weeks or so back, needed to be there by the 17th but would have been there much earlier, I haevn't heard anything though. And I suppose there's no time limit for the courts is there?! The banks are forced to respond to our letters in so many days for each one but the courts can dilly dally all year long, is this right? It certainly isn't fair!