Debenhams Store Card PPI ***Urgent Help Required*******

[Kate1973]

Hi Andy

 

Just looked again, i had a 'General Form of Judgement or Order'

 

1st Claimant = SANTANDER

1st Defendant = me

 

Before the districe judge *** sitting at ** county court

 

IT IS ORDERED THAT

 

Unless the claimant files at court a completed (allocation) (listing) questionnaire by 4 pm on 5 Septemner 2011, then the claim shall stand struck out out ant the claimant pay the costs of the defendant to be assessed. Any party affected by this order may apply within 7 days of service of it upon him/her/ it to have it varied, set aside or stayed

 

Is this what you meant??

[Andyorch]

Notice of Hearing 8/9 above dated ??? ordered to submit by the 5/9 Could be an hearing to strike out then if they have not submitted their AQ.

Check with the Court on Monday and ask if they have filled their AQ if yes then its as per my last post.If not then they are in trouble..

 

Andy

[Andyorch]

Who is the Claimant out of interest?

[Kate1973]

Hi Andy

 

Claimant is 'Santander Cards UK Limited R.O.2 Triton Square.

 

Gen form of judgement was dated 24 Aug, and now looking at the dates on the notice of hearing i think you may be right!. I will chek with the court on Monday as tp wether the filed their AQ. I know i did as it was in person and the staff are really firendly there. I really hope so!!

 

Thanks

[Andyorch]

IF it is for strike out make sure you raise your PPI ( if substantial ) if not accept the strike out but we can go through that on Monday when

you clarify the above.

 

Ok for now Kate?

 

Regards

 

Andy

[Kate1973]

Andy,

 

Brill Many thanks, i so hope it's strike out!!!!! it is to me a substantial claim, 5 X what i owe so well worth it. I just can't believe ow they have been untrue, but hopefully i won't have to go that far, but if i do i will give it all i have!!

[gezwee]

Hi Kate

 

It forms part of the Automatic Orders Pilot Scheme [part 51], won't necessarily mean it gets struck out but the 7 day notices go out regardless. Think it was an initiative to unclog the system a little from the likes of BC who hedge their bets on no AoS prior to having to stump up the hearing fee.

 

Gez

[Kate1973]

Hi Gez

 

I'm so hoping they are too busy and have forgot mine!!. Was just stressing as thought it was the main hearing and not yet prepared for it! Lets hope they haven't filed and the judge is on my side!

 

Thanks

[gezwee]

Fingers and toes all crossed for ya

 

Gez

[Kate1973]

Hi All

 

I phoned court yesterday, HC did file the AQ, i asked what the hearing was for, they told me it is an Allocation hearing for the judge to decide which track to allocate it to. Is there anything i need to take with me, i really have no idea and am obviously worried by a court hearing having never had to do this sort of thing before!???

Thanks guys......

[Andyorch]

As per my post number 100 then:wink:

 

Andy

[Kate1973]

Hi All

 

Can anyone give me any pointers as to how i set out my skeleton agrument?? Does it have to be a set format???

 

Thanks

[Andyorch]

No its just an informal defence for you to refer to and raise points needed to clarify any points that

will assist with the claim/defence and direction of the claim.

 

Andy

[Kate1973]

Hi

 

I am due on court this pm and need to leave in an hour. Please can someone have a quick look over my skeleton argument. A bit lengthy but there are some 40 points to respond to which i have condensed down by not referring to each one individually. I have got all of my points across. Do i need to take 3 copies with me, one for me, one for HC & one for the Judge?? Am really paniking now, not had to do this before and really do not know what to expect when i get to court, i don't even know where to go once i get there??

 

Thanks Guys, encouragement needed!!!

 

IN THE **** Case No *****

 

BETWEEN:

Santander Cards UK Limited R.O 2 Triton Square

Claimant

-and-

*******

Defendant

 

 

DEFENDANTS SKELETON ARGUMENT

 

 

· The defendant was at all material times a customer of the claimant and does not dispute entering into a credit agreement with the claimant.

· The claimant is a financial institution and credit card provider.

· The defendant disputes the amount stated as outstanding by the claimant due to the deduction of insurance premiums applied to the account which the defendant believes was mis-sold.

· The defendant disputes that her counterclaim is irrelevant as had the insurance premiums not been debited to the account this alleged balance would not stand.

· The defendant believes the insurance was mis sold as detailed in her defence and counterclaim.

· The defendant started her complaint to the claimant in January 2011 and the reason this was not questioned before is due to the defendant not being aware that the policy was mis sold until the recent media publicity which has exposed the industry wide mis-selling of this type of insurance.

· It is denied that the defendant is merely jumping on the recent bandwagon. Indeed many financial institutions have since stopped selling this type of insurance once the exposure of massive mis-selling has become apparent.

· The defendant disputes that collection activity only commenced from the claimant after issuing its final response. The defendant did receive letters dated 14/02/2011, 07/03/2011 & 26/03/2011 from Viking Collection Services demanding payment, and threatening a number of actions whilst clearly the account was in dispute.

· The defendant is in receipt of the claimants Subject Access Request dated 1 December 2006, which is incomplete and fails to see why the claimant has no record of this despite having records of all other correspondence including the copy of the original agreement which pre dates the Subject Access response. It should also be noted that this request remains incomplete due to missing statements which is a serious breach of the Data Protection Act.

· The defendant disputes the insurance has not been mis-sold and requests a full refund of premiums paid including interest applied to the account

· The defendant denies the claimant has bourne the costs of these proceedings as he has indeed also paid fees in respect to her counter claim. These being £100.00 duly paid after submission of her defence and counterclaim.

· The defendant denies that the Default Notice has been registered as a result of failing to maintain contractual repayments, had the insurance premiums not been applied the balance would have been owed.

STATEMENT OF TRUTH

 

The defendant believes that the facts contained in this skeleton argument are true

SIGNED…………………………………………………

******* – defendant

DATED THIS 3rd day of October 2011

[rebel11]

Hi kate

 

I flagged it up for the Site Team, you've left it a bit late, Good Luck.

[citizenB]

The only thing I would have pointed out is that you spelt a word wrong.. it should have been borne, not bourne

 

And yes indeed 3 copies of the statement.. one each

[Kate1973]

Hi Citizen

 

Thanks for that, i'm changing it now and then it's of to court i go. Will let you know how i got on later.

[citizenB]

Best of luck

[Kate1973]

Hi Folks

 

Well that didn't take long, i was there early and was met my a Mr Graham representing Santander. He asked to see me before we saw the judge which i agreed to. He asked if i had any objections to his clients draft order, which i personnaly didn't have however i confirmed that it would be up to the judge to agree. He started going on about a witness statement and how there were leaflets to help me set it out etc and that i needed to provide copies of what i would be relying upon and making sure i label them correctly. I pointed out to him that i had brought along a copy of my skeleton argument with me to which he had a copy and looked at it and said i don't think you need the leaflet!.

 

When we went into court the judge spoke with Mr Graham who confirmed the conversation we had had earlier and that he had just seen a copy of my skeleton argument. He passed a copy to the judge. He then went on to state that there was no defence and that the judge should strike out the defence and rule in their favour. The judge did not agree to this and had issues with allocating it to small claims due to 'the legal issues surrounding the mis=sale of PPI that needed to be addressed given the recent FSA case and new OFT guidelines which have recently come into force (today i believe)'. He felt that although it looked on paper a case for small claims given the legal issues which had not been mentioned by the claimants he was reluctant to allocate ot to small claims at this time. He then asked if the claimants were saying it was statue barred which the judge didn't agree with and Mr Graham couldn't confirm. He felt that the issues were far more complex that the claimants solicitors had addressed. The Judge suggested mediation as an option but in the first instance has ordered that the claimants solicitors file a detailed skeleton argument to include the legal issues surrounding the issue, and based on the OFT guidelines and recent FSA case law. He stated this is done in 21 days when it will be referred back to the judge for further direction. Personally it felt to me that the judge was not happy with what the cliamants had submitted and have failed to even consider any of the legal side of the mis-sale of PPI. It will be interesting to see what their reply to my skeleton argument is, especially as i have provided information which contradicts what they have said such as collection activity which commenced after i stated my complaint, and also the DPA breach!. The judges main concern also seemed to be around compound interest being claimed?? I'm not sure why as surely if that is what i have been charged and paid then if claiming back i should be entitled to that also??

 

The Judge also asked me on what grounds i was claiming mis-sold even though there was a copy of the document, and i was given a cooling off period. I confirmed that at no point were any details surrounding my personal circumstances taken, so how could i be sold the product, and i also confirmed that it had taken till now to complain due to the fact that i was not aware thst this coule have been mis-sold until the recent media coverage in particular to one of the most mis-sold products on the market. The judge confirmed it unlikely there would be any recoreds from the store from the time but i pointed out that there must be some records as the claimants were able to produce the original application form!.

 

The Judge's parting comments were i hope not to see you again with this and he suggested we try and negotiate outside of the court room.

 

Any thoughts from out legal buffs???, personally i felt a little bit like round one to me??

[rebel11]

Well Done Kate, and thanks CB.

[Andyorch]

Excellent Kate you held your own, defiantly round 1 to you.They will try to settle before round 2 but let me see any directions you receive in the meantime and if any mediation attempts are made.Have you got a figure for your PPI plus interest?

 

Well done.

 

Regards

 

Andy

Edited October 3, 2011 by Andyorch

[Kate1973]

Hi Andy

 

Thanks, at times i did feel out of my depth but i am prepared for a fight, Lets see what they come up with, as the Judge has suggested settlement out of court i think my best course of action is to write to them seeing what they are prepared to offer?? Or do you think i should wait for them to write to me?? Anything that comes my way i will scan and let you know. Considering i was so nervous i am pleased the way round '1' went!!!!

[Andyorch]

"The Judge suggested mediation as an option but in the first instance has ordered that the claimants solicitors file a detailed skeleton argument to include the legal issues surrounding the issue, and based on the OFT guidelines and recent FSA case law. He stated this is done in 21 days when it will be referred back to the judge for further direction."

 

If you have not heard anything within 15 days its a fair bet they wont and wish to carry on the fight so you must prepare to proceed also in the absence of this.

Swot up on the PPI case laws/recent rulings and finalise your figure with compound interest.You can always mediate at the last minute should needs must.

 

Andy

Edited October 4, 2011 by Andyorch

[Kate1973]

Hi Andy

 

Thanks for your useful advice as ever, i will be getting lots of research time in ready for the fight.

[caro]

Well done Kate. I agree with andy that the ball is in santander's court, (no pun intended), but if they don't contact you then you must contact them to show that you have done as the judge has ordered and tried to settle. It's perfectly reasonable to expect to get back the PPI plus interest charged, plus 8% statutory interest. Don't forget court costs and other wasted costs too. Plenty to bargain with there.

 

If you haven't got a spreadsheet with it all on prepare one now, and get any receipts you may have for your costs. Be ready for them if they come to you, or to take them on yourself.

 

Good statement there too. Not too long but you obviously had enough on there to get the judges attention!