Time delay after LBA

[GaryH]

FF,

 

Whereabouts in the process are you exactly? I noticed that the court ordered a stay for settlement - is it up yet? If not, when?

 

Actually, if you could post the full wording of the order that'd be good.

 

Also, I noticed you mentioned preparing your court bundle - have you had your directions order? If not then I would'nt bother just yet. If you have can you post it up as well please?

 

As your claim is fast track material I've got a couple of idea's which might see it over with sooner rather than later. If you could answer the above questions in the meantime then I'll come back tomorrow with the response letter as well.

 

Gary

[TUTTSI]

Hi guys,

 

Getting myself in a tiss over the court bundle again, I have printed off the 40 page zip file, in my statements what do I include??

 

Whitness Statement?

Draft order for directions?

Case Summary?

 

I have got examples from another thread, but not sure if I use all or just some??

Sorry for being dim once again, but cant someone calm me down and point me in the right direction. Want to send it all off tomorrow (be glad to see the back of it) Fx

 

FF, have you got a copy of the T&C's, you should include this with your bundle. As this was the sticking point on the Berick Case! I believe.

DS

[petcat]

hi FF, following your story, good luck.relating to the above post on t& cs , read misterminds thread, comparisons in space and time.(i think its called that!) i intend to follow the advice and include the irish banks t& cs too as they only charge a few pounds and will at least enlighten the judge that these so called fees are not set in stone at around the 30-40 pound mark. only in the uk.it makes for interesting reading.(the thread by MM)good luck foxy.

[petcat]

ps sorry to hijack but GARYH, sent you a pm ages ago.not sure if it worked. please could you take a look at my thread,petcat v abbey and advise?pretty please.ta.

[FoxyFiona]

Thanks Gary, this is where we are at the moment, last correspondence from the court is as follows. Received on the 4 May (stay requested by Abbey)

 

Standard order for stay for settlement with consent of all the parties

 

All parties having agreed District Judge Hall orders that this claim is stayed until 02 June 2007 to enable the parties to attempt sttlement.

 

On or before 16 June 2007, one of the following steps must be taken:

either

the claiment must notify the court that the whole of the claim has been settled; (see note i below)

or

the claimant or defendant must write to the court requesting an extension of the stay period, explaining the steps being taken towards settlement and identifying any mediator, expert, or other person helping with the process. The letter should confirm the agreement of all parties. (see note ii below)

or

all parties must file a completed allocation questionnaire at the court. Where a settlement of some of the issues in dispute has been reached, a list of those issues should be attached to the completed questionnaire. The list must be agreed with the other parties and must indicate that is has been agreed.

 

 

Note i) Where settlement of the claim is achieved before the end of the period of stay, the following will be taken to include an application for the stay to be lifted:

a) an application for a consent order to give effect to the settlement.

b) an application for approval of a settlement where one or more of the parties is a person under a disability:and

c) the filing of a notice of acceptance of monies paid into court, or an application to accept monies paid into court out of time.

Note ii) Extentions of the period of stay will generally be no more that 1 month.

_________________

 

Now then the Abbey has also requested in their AQ that the case be run in the small claims court reason given "in the interest of commerciality, the defendant consents to the entirety of the claim being handled on the small claims track" However I have had nothing from the court so far stating it will. Not sure why they want that, any ideas??

 

Am going to pop in court today as after typing all that want to know if it means another AQ and does that mean another £100???

 

Hope that all makes sense Fx

[GaryH]

Thanks.

 

I'll work on something today for you.

 

No, no need for another £100. No need to take anything to the court today either - the new AQ doesn't have to be in until the 16th. I've got a feeling she might settle before then though.

[FoxyFiona]

Ah thanks Gary, REALLY appreciate it. Fingers crossed your right Fx

[GaryH]

Firstly you need to reply to this -

WITHOUT PREJUDICE

 

Dear.......

 

Thank you for your letter of the 23 May 2007 (received by us on 30 May 2007. Your views on the significance of th Berwick v Lloyds case are noted. It is not, however, correct, to say that Abbey has an strategy to intimidate claimants or dissuade them from pursuing legitimate complaints and Abbey does not agree that drawing your attention to the existance of the Judgement can reasonably be interpreted in that way or in any other way unfair or inappropriate.

 

It is disappointing that you do not wish to pursue settlement discussions at this stage. Abbey would like to resolve this case rather that have to continue to expend legal costs or management time in defending its position. If you wish to reconsider your position and have a discussion with me on that pragmatic basis then I would be very happy to speak with you.

 

Yours sincerely

Inga Kirkman

What you need to bear in mind is, that the judge has ordered a stay for the parties to attempt settlement. In other words, both sides need to be able to demonstrate to the court that they've done there best to settle within the month, or at least have made an effort to narrow the issues.

 

IMO this does not mean that you need to reduce the amount you are willing to settle for, although its clearly up to you.

 

I suggest you respond something like this;

 

Dear Ms Kirkman

 

You -v- Abbey Plc

Claim No: *******

 

Thank you for your letter dated **/**/**.

 

I am sorry that you seem to have interpreted my last letter as an indication that I do not wish to pursue settlement discussions. This is patently not correct. I am fully amenable to an amicable settlement of this claim and have never suggested otherwise.

 

My letter was intended to state my objection to Abbey Plc's attempt to seize upon a judgement which is completely irrelevant and spuriously quote it in an attempt to persuade me into accepting a derogatory sum in settlement of this claim. Despite your denials, it is quite clearly the case that you have been instructed to exploit the judgement of Berwick -v- Lloyds to your advantage as a means of dissuading your customers from pursuing their claims against you. I quite reasonably consider this to be intimidatory and I still await your retraction of this reference.

 

I welcome your statement that you wish to settle these matters without the need for further expense of protracted litigation.

 

However, may I respectfully suggest that settlement negotiations could in fact have taken place at any time in the previous 6 months, but instead, in common with the hundreds of similar claims brought against your client, it has chosen to rebut with template letters or otherwise completely ignore all previous correspondence and settlement attempts, both prior to and during proceedings.

 

Notwithstanding the above, in an effort to facilitate an amicable settlement to these matters and in compliance with the order of District Judge ***** dated [date] I will now attempt to narrow the issues in dispute to see if we can reconcile our areas of disagreement.

 

As you know, I object to the default charges which the bank makes because I say they are penalties and that they exceed actual loss incurred as a result of the breach of contract from which they arise. As such, they are contrary to well established principles in common law and statute.

 

You state in your defence that the charges levied to my account are a reasonable and genuine pre-estimate of damage incurred as a result of each breach, and as such amount to liquidated damages clauses as opposed to penalties. Further, in previous correspondence you have also initially refused to settle the full amount of some claims because "defaults have occurred on your account for which their must be some charge".

 

It therefore seems to me that this whole case can be easily settled if you simply provide evidence of your clients’ actual costs. It is very clear that this is the fundamental crux upon which these matters rest.

 

Upon disclosure of such costs information I will of course be happy to amend the value of my claim accordingly, in order that both parties may be in the same position as before the breach occurred - in accordance with the principles of common law upon which my claim is based.

 

I strongly believe that it is in the interest's of both parties in the present case, as well as the court and in fact the general public, if only you were to verify your assertion that your charges are in fact a pre-estimate of your loss, by disclosing such costs information.

 

In view of this, please find attached a request for information and clarification under CPR Part 18. As you are aware, this claims value means it is likely to be allocated to the fast track. However, I believe the court would find this request appropriate regardless of track allocation and expect a response within 2 weeks.

 

In the meantime, a copy of my most recent schedule of charges is attached to this message for your due consideration.

 

Kind Regards,

 

[you]

 

Attached:

- Schedule of Charges

- CPR Part 18 request

 

Copy by post and to ****** County Court

Don't send it yet - I've still got to do the part 18.

 

Part 18. Send it as an attachment.

 

CLAIM NUMBER: *******

 

In the XXXXXXX COUNTY COURT

 

Between:

 

FOXY FIONA

Claimant

 

 

-And-

 

 

 

ABBEY PLC

Defendant

 

____________________

 

REQUEST FOR INFORMATION

 

UNDER CPR PART 18

________________________

 

 

DATE OF SERVICE: [date sent]

 

This request for information under CPR part 18 is served in anticipation of the claim being allocated to the fast track. However, notwithstanding track allocation, I believe that the court would consider this request as appropriate. In the event you ignore or do not comply fully with this request a formal application will be submitted to the court for an order under part 18.

 

1. Please provide copies of the terms and conditions governing the account in question and which are referred to in Paragraph 3, 4 and 5 of the defence. The terms and conditions required are those that formed the contract between the Claimant and Defendant covering the entire period from when contract was first entered into until the present day, including amendments or alterations where appropriate.

 

2. In relation to each and every breach by the Claimant which resulted in a charge being levied as confirmed by the Defendant in its Defence please provide full details (with all relevant supporting documentation) of;

 

a) any letters, telephone calls, or incidents of manual intervention into the account in respect of each and every charge claimed by the Claimant in the Particulars of Claim;

 

b) how charges are applied to the account (whether automatically or by some other means) and when;

 

3. in respect of the Defendants reference to the "administrative expenses" to which the charges are purportedly proportionate, as referred to in paragraph 9 of its defence, please provide full details (with all relevant supporting documentation) of;

 

a) the Defendant’s assessment of the cost to it of sending any letter making any telephone call or otherwise administering the account, with details of how the cost to the Defendant is calculated and what items of expense are included, or such other costs as are foreseeable in the context of contractual damages and the remoteness thereof and which can be specifically identified and defined and which can be reasonably attributed to each and every breach on the part of the Claimant;

 

b) the justifiably objective principles upon which all such costs or expenses are calculated and result in the specific level of each charge levied by the bank in respect of each of the breaches which resulted in the charges now claimed by the Claimant.

 

A full response to each and every point of this request should be served within 14 days, by [date].

I almost feel sorry for her!!

 

The Part 18 is based on one done by Rbrears for his NatWest claim

[Lula]

ROFLMAO

 

she is gonna absolutely love you Fi LOL and Gary, you are a sadist !!

[FoxyFiona]

Hope she doesnt own any wax and pins, she may know what I look like now. Mind eye been hurting all day......mmm.

 

Gary your brill, sounds fantastic and something I certainly couldnt have come up with, will wait the rest. CHEERS Fx

[FoxyFiona]

PS Whats ROFLMAO mean? Sorry Ive already established Im dim

[FoxyFiona]

Its ok Lulu, bit slow. Got it now

[Robdblynd]

Foxy, and you an Angels as well.

 

Roll On Floor Laughing My A**e Off. 9 (lol)

[Lula]

she is going to pay up and you will know her pain, cos it is going to KILL her paying you Fi!!!! :-P

[GaryH]

Part 18 added.

[mariejader]

I wish I could be a fly on the wall when she reads that

 

Have you sent it yet?

[srfrench]

Inga doesn't half take things personally doesn't she

[Lula]

Yes she does, that's why this is so much Fun. probably not for Fi, but for the rest of us

[FoxyFiona]

Thanks Gary!! Will send it recorded today. The two weeks will take me past the 16 June tho - will this matter or should I make it so she has til the 15th?? Should I email it as well??

 

Lulu it is funny, but it would be hilarious if it was someone else

 

Got a headache today, convinced its the wax and pins again. Will wait til the letter hits and see what ailments I get then to be sure

[mariejader]

I email it as well??

 

I would e-mail you may get an answer quicker.

 

In a funny way I do feel for Inga and the staff at Abbey, I am sure it must seem it's them against the rest of the UK (which as we all know it is) you have to give it to them for putting up a fight. Mind you it would be so much easier if they just paid up to start with.

 

I just wonder how much longer Inga will be with Abbey before the stress finally beats her and she quits? maybe some should start a book running I would say two months max

[FoxyFiona]

In a weird way I feel sorry for her too, will like her more when I get my cash tho

[GaryH]

Yes, e-mail it with the letter as the message and the Part 18 and a schedule as attachments (word docs or whatever). Also send a copy of everything by post though.

 

In a funny way I do feel for Inga and the staff at Abbey, I am sure it must seem it's them against the rest of the UK (which as we all know it is) you have to give it to them for putting up a fight. Mind you it would be so much easier if they just paid up to start with.

 

I just wonder how much longer Inga will be with Abbey before the stress finally beats her and she quits? maybe some should start a book running I would say two months max

Its certainly nothing personal against Inga, or any solicitor of any bank come to that. They're only doing their job at the end of the day. They aren't the baddies - they're merely being instructed to act in the best interests of their employer. As I said before I actually think Abbeys sols are the best out of the lot. They're always communicative (to a point) and professional.

[FoxyFiona]

Thanks Gary - what about the date? two weeks takes it past the 16 June when we have to tell the court the score from the months stay. Hope that makes sense

[GaryH]

Doesn't matter. Two weeks is fine.

 

When the stay is nearly up you can write to the court outlining the steps you've taken to acheive a settlement. You may well get settled before then though.

[FoxyFiona]

Cheers Gary your a star, your letters are empowering in a funny sort of way, felt like topping myself last week, feeling very energized this week.

 

Letter etc will be emailed and posted today!