Wolfcub Vs Lloyds - **IT IS SOOOO WON!!!**

[wolfcub]

Allocation Questionnaire sent in: 10 days later have court date in Sept. Anyone else have court date yet? Seems like they are settling some.......

[barracad]

Threads merged again (Third time) - PLEASE stick to one thread!!

[wolfcub]

It seems that Mrs Wolfcub will indeed meet Lloyds in court this wed pm. Their solicitors claim that they did not receive the court date from the Court.

 

We are meeting Wed as planned where they are pushing for an adjurnment and I will petition the judge to hear the full case on Wed. It is up to the judge to decide.

 

They have had 3 months since the date given by the court and they have failed to provide information requested by me on 6th June. They have clearly not looked at my file for 3 months.

 

Bankfodder - I'll PM you.

 

Looking forward to my date in court.......

[wolfcub]

Wolfy went to court yesterday - armed and ready to fight the mighty Lloyds TSB. Judge granted an adjurnment because Lloyds claimed they only knew of the court date 2 days ago (they knew 3 months ago). Much came out of the hearing, which I shall share later on..... I have to dash out to meet a client at the moment.

[reload]

:o

 

Waiting with baited breath

[wolfcub]

Hi, well a synopsis,

 

It was indeed the mother of all cock ups that I unded up in court from Lloyds point of view, They sent a local solicitor to ask for the adjurnement who was merely there for 15 minutes work. I was prepared with a complete (and confident legal) case and instead of caving in when they asked for the adjurnemnt announced that I would like to have the case heard there and then.

 

The eyes of Mrs "locum just been sent to get a adjurnement" bulged out of her head!! I petitioned the Judge to hear the case on the grounds that Lloyds had stalled, delayed and bullied me ( a small individual). Mrs x was very nice, but still reprenting Lloyds..

 

Think about it ....what if the tables were turned and a small individual turnd up in court against a PLC and said "I'm sorry, I didmt know about it.." It would be thrown out. "Sorry, not our problem" type of answer...

 

The Judge was sympathetic to the extreme (for me). She said that it would not be fair legally to let the case be heard as Mrs x could in no way defend the case. I petitioned her that this was really not my problem or fault... They have stalled dealyed. bullied and now constucted some xxxx excuse for a team of professional solicitors not to be ready.

 

She did say however:

 

-The cases being brought against the banks are the talk of the circuit

-They clog the system and get settled - implying they waste valuable court time(true)

-My case was important as i was in fact sitting in a court with a case to be heard and no cases ever get to court

-She understood they had stalled and basically refused the information I had requested and gave LLoyds a direct court order to provide me with the info I request 3 months ago (original copy of terms and conditions and details of all manual interventions on the account). They have to comply within 3 weeks.

- They would like a definitive resolution to these cases

- It needs effetively to go to the court of appeal (after winning a case) and to win at the court of appeal to get the change in law that these charges are UNFAIR TERMS

 

I was there for an hour. I shall post full details of my defence for all interested. (lloyds defence is that this is for a service) which in legal terms is arragant in the exteme.

 

Good luck to all. Hopefully, one day soon we shall actually see a change in the law.

 

It also stuck me that most people on this site have little idea of the bigger legal issue as to why charges are an unfair term in UK law and just focus on the charges they have been saddled with (naturally).

 

The bigger picture (i.e changing the law) is so so important. I'l write something up to post.

 

Goodnight.....Wolfy (Mrs)

 

Plus, did you know that the claimant can also be a witness and to write a full witness statement for the court hearing.... more when I have time

[cathrionas]

Wow Wolfy (Mrs), How exciting. I look forward to reading more!!!!

 

I understand your point as well. My relatively small claim is a point of principle. The 'real' money was taken along time ago when I was much more vulnerable. It is only a matter of time now before things change on all counts (not that it will be perfect even then).

Thank you for this,

C

[GaryH]

Excellant thread. It must have been quite satisfying to put your arguements and say your piece before a judge, even though it was'nt a full hearing. Also, what the judge said to you confirms what we have suspected for a while - that the judges on the curcuit are well aware of, and more importantly take a dim view of, the banks (Lloyds in particular) underhanded tactics. This bodes well for the future - surely their position with regards to this abuse of the system is unsustainable? Lets hope so.

 

And please do post more of your insights here if you can, they are most helpful.

 

Gary

[reload]

Excellent stuff Wolfcub, glad you're keen on seeing this through to the ultimate end too. If you need any help or support we're here for you

[datxman]

truly inspiring thread. good luck and keep us informed.

[wolfcub]

Dear all,

 

detailed below are my case notes which you may find useful. Please be aware that these are my notes and my opinions and should not be taken in shape or form as legal advice. If you are unsure about your case, you should always contact a solicitor.

 

Hope its useful,

Wolfy.

 

________________________________________________________________

The Facts

 

I have a contract with Lloyds TSB that is governed by UK Contract Law. I have held two accounts with Lloyds TSB since 2000 and Lloyds have charged me £xxxx in penalty charges in that time.

 

The Case under UK Contract Law

 

These charges are NOT for a service as the Defence claim, but are penalties.

Under UK contract law, Lloyds TSB is indeed entitled to make a charge for losses incurred from a breach of contract. This is not in dispute. Examples of breach of contract in this case are going over a set agreed overdraft limit, not having sufficient funds to pay a direct debit etc. The are explicit or implied breaches.

 

The law clearly states that a company cannot profit from a breach and the charge for a loss suffered from a breach of contract should be the amount necessary to put both parties in the same position before the breach occurred. This means that Liquidated damages are charged.

 

This is backed up by case law – Robinson Vs Harman 1848.

 

The law says that the charge for loss or damage must be proportionate to the loss incurred.

 

Charges are Penalties – “In-Terrorum”

 

These charges levied on my account by Lloyds TSB are penalties. The law states that a clause is a penalty if it provides for “a payment of money stipulated as in-terrorum of the offending party”. i.e. it designed to scare or coerce or it is used as a threat.

 

Lord Dunedin stated in the case of Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co v New Garage & Motor Co 1915:-

 

“the sum is a penalty if it is greater than the greatest loss which could have been suffered from the breach”

 

It is also worth noting that Lloyds is a multi-national corporation. This term regarding charges was inserted unilaterally in contract. i.e. I had no opportunity to negotiate the clause.

 

The Costs Incurred by the Bank

 

Lloyds do not publish costs associated with going overdrawn, although they have been requested for this information. Neither do they outline how the cost of these charges is set.

 

The banks operate a highly computerised, automated process when dealing with charges. There is no evidence of any personal involvement by a member of Lloyds TSB staff. An account is flagged as being over the limit/non payment of a direct debit etc and the computers sends a mail-merged (by computer) letter which is fulfilled by an automated mailing house and posted.

 

Having been in marketing for 15 years I would estimate this cost to be £0.50-£1.00. There is no evidence of personal intervention. I received 9 individual letters from Lloyds in 9 envelopes, detailing 9 separate charges on ONE day in March 2003. If a person was involved, there would be one letter detailing the charges in one envelope and one stamp. In this example, I was charged £270 (£30 per item) in March 2003.

 

This is no data for UK banks but studies in the USA and Australia on this subject have estimated the real cost of sending a letter following no payment of a direct debit to be AUS $0.54 and US$0.50-$1.50.

 

It is worth noting that Lloyds charged unauthorised overdraft interest on an account in breach of its limit which is almost 0.30%. Perhaps a good pre-estimate of the loss they incur (i.e. liquidated damages).

 

External View and Comments

 

Pressed by the House of Commons Select Committee 2005, banks revealed these charges are designed to offset their debt recovery losses. (It’s therefore not about my account but a charge to contribute to all customers debt).

 

Peter McNamara, who was Head of Personal Banking at Lloyds, said in a BBC Radio 4 interview in 2004 that charges are used to fund free banking for all personal customers.

 

Finally the Office of Fair Trading on April5, 2006 suggested that these penalty charges are unfair.

 

Service – The Defence’s Argument

 

It is inconceivable how these charges are for a service. However in argument:

 

Their claim that under Section 7 of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations 1999 (UTCCR99) states that their prices do not have to be fair, that they are NOT subject to the scrutiny of a court.

 

This then implies they can set them at whatever level they like - £100 for going over your overdraft limit? £150.00 for not paying a direct debt. Lloyds imply that their charges can be uncapped and unregulated.

 

However the Sale of Goods and Services Act 1982, sec 15.2 clearly states that the sum must be fair and reasonable. Is a 3000% mark up fair when the average mark up on the High Street is 100%?

 

This is an unfair term within the contract because it allows Lloyds TSB to charge any price they wish for a service - which is far in excess of the cost or value of the service.

 

Further under the UTCCR99, Sec 2 Par 1 states that

 

“A terms that allows a party to unilaterally raise of price or for a price to be determined on delivery is unfair”

 

Summary

 

The charge made by Lloyds TSB is not for a service but is a penalty charge, used in-terroum to frighten and coerce individuals not to breach their contract.

 

The charge made is not liquidated damages as it does not reflect the true cost of the breach incurred by Lloyds TSB. They have not offered any evidence of how these costs are constructed or proof that for example, bouncing a direct debit costs them £30.00.

 

I estimate that the cost is less than £1.00.

 

UK contract Law states that the charge must be the amount needed to put both parties in the position they were before the breach happened.

 

Contrary to Lloyd’s argument, there is both an explicit and implied breach of contract by myself by going over an agreed overdraft limit or not having sufficient funds in the bank to pay a direct debit. These charges are directly related to actual breaches in contract. They are not levied in any other situations that I am aware of.

 

These charges caused complete hardship for me in the first six months of 2003. In both Feb and March 03, Lloyds levied £270 for non payment of 9 direct debits. £540 in 2 months – more that the amount needed to pay a loan secured on my house (a clear priority) which resulted in a repossession order on my house. Huge costs were incurred by me in coming to court, paying xx company’s charges and the resulting administration charges. I did avoid repossession.

[GaryH]

Thanks for posting that, its going to be a great help to alot of people - myself included. I'm nearly at the stage where I'm going to have to start thinking about rounding up evidance and putting my case together (waiting for court date) and that will certainly come in useful. Cheers!

[wolfcub]

No problem. Glad to help. Have you put in your AQ yet?

[GaryH]

Yes, the A/D deadline was 8th August and I was offered settlement with the usual conditions shortly after. I politely but firmly told them where to stick their conditions on the 18th August and have heard nothing since (see GaryH vs Lloyds TSB). I rang the court and was told that the judge was looking at and allocating the case on 11th sept (yesterday), so presumably the delay was as a result of SC&M asking for an extra month to reach settlement. I await the court date and judges directions any day now.

[wolfcub]

Excellent. SCM are good at losing documents, delaying, stalling etc. The lady I spoke to last week was pretty abraisive! She asked me what I was going to rely on in court...I suggested that I would be relying on the law if it was Ok with her!!

 

If I get a settlement letter, I wont be accepting any terms and conditions. Its now a court directive that SCM have to provide a HUGE amount of paperwork to the court in 2 weeks time for my case (new court date Nov 16), so I suspect they may try to settle. If they dont, then so be it!! All the better.

 

Hang in there, It will all come good.

[GaryH]

...I suggested that I would be relying on the law if it was Ok with her!!

 

Brilliant!

 

Yes, I think you might well be receiving a settlement soon by the sounds of it. Especially since you sent their lacky back with the tail between her legs after the prelim hearing! Either way, looks like you've got it well covered.

 

Good luck (not that you'll need it), and thanks for your support.

 

Gary

[rachel2609]

Hi

 

I (well my Mum) is in court on 27th September against Lloyds TSB, just finalising my defence documents, so thanks for the info you put in yours. Mine was v similar anyway.

 

Also dealing with SCM, no contact with them since 26th May, muppets!

 

Rachel

[wolfcub]

Hi Rachel,

 

SCM may well say that they didnt know about the date. Did they send you their copy of the AQ? I'm surprised they haven't settled as it's not thousands you're claiming back.

 

I suspect that SCM may need to go on an Account Management/Filing Efficiency course some time soon..... as they do not seem to be too good with their admin.

 

Best of luck

Wolfy

[un1boy]

I've just issued MCOL to Lloyds and this thread has bene interesting to follow. I do not understand why they allow some people to get to court, but pay others.

 

I am a bit scared though I must admit if I do end up in court - I wouldn't know where to start, or what to prepare!!

 

Keep us posted Wolfy!

[wolfcub]

Hi Un1boy,

 

It may seem scary - but it's not. Its actually great to be able to go to court with a thorough legal argument. I did a fair amount of research and have a close friend who is a lawyer. But dont worry if it gets that far - I'll help you out, as i'm sure many other will do!

[rachel2609]

Their admin is the worst I have ever had the misfortune of coming across. Yes I have a copy of their AQ so no excuses!!!

 

Rachel

[Natasha77]

The more i read the more confident i feel! Am about to fill out the wonderful questionaire! Joy!

Have you guys used and experts or witnesses? and why would they need an expert? thought they were the experts!!!

[tim2718281]

 

The Judge was sympathetic to the extreme (for me). She said that it would not be fair legally to let the case be heard as Mrs x could in no way defend the case. I petitioned her that this was really not my problem or fault... They have stalled dealyed. bullied and now constucted some xxxx excuse for a team of professional solicitors not to be ready.

 

She did say however:

 

-The cases being brought against the banks are the talk of the circuit

-They clog the system and get settled - implying they waste valuable court time(true)

-My case was important as i was in fact sitting in a court with a case to be heard and no cases ever get to court

-She understood they had stalled and basically refused the information I had requested and gave LLoyds a direct court order to provide me with the info I request 3 months ago (original copy of terms and conditions and details of all manual interventions on the account). They have to comply within 3 weeks.

- They would like a definitive resolution to these cases

- It needs effetively to go to the court of appeal (after winning a case) and to win at the court of appeal to get the change in law that these charges are UNFAIR TERMS

 

Can you add a request for exemplary damages? eg, triple the amount you are suing for.

 

Tim

[GaryH]

thought they were the experts!!!

 

Lloyds TSB and their incompetant solicitors are certainly experts in one field - it starts with b and ends with ***t.

[carl hussell]

Good luck with your case i filed my claim on 10 sep 06 with my local court have received a court date for 23 oct, cant wait but no doubt lloyds will try to **** this up lol.