Could this be the biggest claim on the site?

[TANZARELLI]

This is just one of my accounts.

Other in the post this week, which will probably double the figures.

Even so, I do agree with you regards the SOL actions now being submitted........ I recived a PM from someone (I shall afford them anonymity), who think's their claim could reach £500 K !!!!

 

You'd fall of your chair if that figure popped up after adding charges into the spreaddie wouldn't you.

 

LOL

 

Would love to see banks face when they opened that claim up. lol

 

Tanz

[TideTurner]

Tanz,

 

Once exemplary damages are taken into consideration, there are some on this site with twice that much.

 

Tide

[TANZARELLI]

Thats getting into a different leauge then eh?

[TideTurner]

Yes, should hear more by Wednesday.

[TANZARELLI]

Yes, should hear more by Wednesday.

 

Keep us posted

[Tigs33]

Good god!!!! 500k!!!! I hope they go after the bank for every single penny of that!!!!

 

 

Good luck Photoman, I too, will be watching your thread with interest.

 

 

This is just one of my accounts.

Other in the post this week, which will probably double the figures.

Even so, I do agree with you regards the SOL actions now being submitted........ I recived a PM from someone (I shall afford them anonymity), who think's their claim could reach £500 K !!!!

[photoman]

Just a quick bump to say I'm still here, and matters in full swing.

 

3 claims now in action, and a total in excess of £105k

 

.......oooops !!

 

........... anyone got a phone number for Tom Brennan ??!!

[Curlyben]

*Picks self off the floor*

Cripes that will be one heck of a settlement.

[TideTurner]

Good luck PM.

 

If it's any help, I've got bubbles coming out of both ends at the moment. You ain't alone mate. I've got two more to do but daren't tackle them until I've got the biggie out of the way.

 

Tide

[TANZARELLI]

I'll know where to come for a loan then mate, what rate do you charge PM, it cant be any worse than W@ncome finance. lol

[photoman]

Recieved my acknowledgement of Service today for Business account claim.

lloyds intend to defend all of claim.

Solicitors are Foot Anstey.

14 days to wait until recieve defence.

Do I need to contact a mod to pass on Litigation in process details ?

[Pondfish]

Good luck PM

 

I PM'ed (Private Message not Photoman ) Jonni2bad in the format shown in the litigation in progess forum.

 

Pondy

[photoman]

Okay

 

Recieved the defence from Foot Anstey yesterday.

 

NOT the usual 9 point standard defence...

 

It's a 28 point defence,

.. most of it standard stuff, but some of it is a bit away from the norm.

 

I think Foot Anstey are making efforts to move away from the usual defences, so it would probably be something the Mods and site helpers would want to see.....

 

....... also, I think I'm definately gonna need some help with this one !!

 

Could any mods or site helpers PM me, and I'll forward it by email ?

 

Will try to post for all to see once they have looked over it and determined if safe to do so.

 

Best regards

 

PM

[monopoly23]

28 point defence? How long was your POC?? LOL

[TANZARELLI]

Sound a biggy pm, most like you say would be usual bumf. Be interested to see that when the time is right. Which bank is it again?

 

[Edit] ignore the last bit just noticed, LTSB.

 

Tanz

[Pondfish]

Well this was never going to be your "standard claim", but a 28 point defence is going to keep you busy.

Good luck PM, if anyone can see this through it is you. I have every confidence in your ability to argue your case.

Post the details when you think you can. Many will be watching this with interest.

 

Pondy

[justwon]

You'd fall of your chair if that figure popped up after adding charges into the spreaddie wouldn't you.

 

LOL

 

Would love to see banks face when they opened that claim up. lol

 

Tanz

 

Not as much as I would love to see their face when they realised that they had let the claim "slip through the net" and judgement had passed in default.

[TANZARELLI]

Indeedy Justwon

[Pondfish]

Any news yet PM?

 

MODS assisting?

 

Pondy

[photoman]

Recieved a very stern (and very long) defence on Saturday, refuting all my claim. It also contained a counter claim for sums supposedly outstanding on a previous loan.

Recieved a further letter (drafted it appears 2 days after the defence), offering a partial out of court settlement ?

The offer is totally unacceptable, ignores (without giving justification) anything prior to 6 years, and only offers statutory interest, calculated from some arbitary date that bears no relation to my claim.

The offer also includes a provision to waive the counter claim as part of the settlement.

I will be rejecting the offer, and also providing hard evidence that the amount in question regards the counter claim, was actually written off some time ago, as part of an amicable settlement deal, so cannot be brought into the equation.

[PeterAnderson]

I have just seen this and registering an interest as my claim is £11.5k plus a private account no details yet.

 

I did not read the entire thread BUT this may be of interest to and is part of the POC's posted by 'Innocent'

 

9. Contractual Interest

a) The claimant claims compound interest on the charges and overdraft interest applied thereon to the claimant’s account ("the principal claim"), at 29.8%EAR. This is the rate currently applied by the defendant to the claimant’s unauthorised use or borrowing of the defendant’s monies, as provided for in the said contract.

The claimant’s case for claiming this rate is based in equity, and a legal requirement for fairness and balance.

The claimant deems the defendant’s principal indebtedness to the claimant to be unauthorised, since it is comprised of charges that are unconscionable, remain unsubstantiated, and amount to unenforceable penalties at law. If the defendant avers that its charges are fair, reasonable and therefore enforceable, its remedy will be to defend the claim by providing evidence of its actual losses or pre-estimate of costs in relation to the claimant’s account breaches. Since the defendant has been invited to do so prior to the issue of court proceedings, and has refused, and since the claimant is aware that the defendant has failed to defend any other similar claim, choosing to settle before the trial dates, the claimant deems the defendant’s charges to the claimant’s account to be indefensible, unenforceable at law, and unauthorised, since it was clearly not in the claimant’s contemplation when entering into the contract, that the claimant would authorise the defendant to apply penalty charges and interest thereon to the claimant’s account, or to profit in an unlawful manner from the claimant’s account breaches.

For the contract to confer advantageous terms (i.e. entitlement to compensation) on one party (the defendant) where there is no comparable term in favour of the other party (the claimant) is to create an imbalance in the parties’ rights and is contrary to the requirements of Regulation 5 (1) of the Unfair Terms In Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 ("UTCCR").

 

Regulation 5 (1) of the UTCCR states as follows:

Unfair Terms

5. – (1) A contractual term which has not been individually negotiated shall be regarded as unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties’ rights and obligations arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer."

 

 

Therefore, to satisfy the requirement of fairness, within the definition given by the UTCCR, the contract would have to provide a mutual or reciprocal term permitting the customer to apply the same rate of interest on any unauthorised withdrawals from the customer’s account by the bank (the defendant). The interest claimed is therefore deemed to provide an equitable remedy.

 

b) In the alternative to 9 (a), should the court deem that the claim does not merit the application of the defendant’s unauthorised lending rate, the claimant claims compound interest at the defendant’s authorised borrowing rate of 18.7% EAR, based in the premise that the court finds that the defendant’s withdrawals from the claimant’s account were authorised;

 

c) In the alternative to 9 (a) and (b), if the court is unable to agree that the claimant is entitled to either of the two contractual rates of interest, on the grounds stated, the claimant avers that the defendant would be unjustly enriched if the claimant’s entitlement was limited to the statutory rate of interest in that the defendant has had use of the sums and would have used these sums to re-lend at commercially compounded rates. On these grounds the claimant seeks restitution of the compounded contractual interest at the defendant’s authorised borrowing rate of 18.7% EAR;

 

e) Details of interest calculated & rates used are attached to these Particulars of Claim as follows:

Appendix xx – Compound interest calculated daily at 29.8%EAR

Appendix xx – Compound interest calculated daily at 18.7%EAR

Appendix xx – Simple interest under s.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at an annual rate of 8.00%

Appendix xx – Evidence of the Defendant’s current borrowing rates

 

10. Accordingly, the Claimant claims (having first contacted the Defendant about these amounts on the 26th April, 2006):

 

a) The return of the amounts debited between 27th April, 2000 and xxxx xxxx xxxx in respect of charges in the sum of £xxxx, together with interest charged thereon in the sum of £xxxx – totalling £xxxx;

 

b) Any applicable Court fees;

 

c) Compound interest at the contractual rate of 29.8% EAR from the date of each transaction to xxxx xxxx xxxx of £xxxx, and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of £xxxx;

 

d) In the alternative to 10.c), compound interest at the contractual rate of 18.7% EAR from the date of each transaction to xxxx xxxx xxxx of £xxxx, and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of £xxxx;

 

e) In the alternative to 10.c) and d), interest under section 69 County Courts Act (1984) at the rate of 8% a year, from the date of each transaction to xxxx xxxx xxxx, of £xxxx and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of £xxxx.

 

11. Save payments into and/or determined by the Court, any sums paid in settlement of this claim are required to be made by cheque, which should be made payable to the Claimant.

[justwon]

Is there any chance that I can see the defence?

 

I helped a relative claim the fully pricipal sum with contractual interest (unauthorised simple) along with exemplary and aggravated damages recently and would be interested to see what they have put

as an "expanded defence".

[PeterAnderson]

I cannot remember the whole thread I just read these POC and thought they were very clever in that 'innocent' was giving the judge 3 options and was not just resting his case on CI; which according to some MOD's is dodgy ground.

 

Now I quite like the approach of this POC, as seems very fair and in the end the judge gets to pick which option suits him; the CI aspect has not been proven in court as far as I know. And if you follow the thread of Pen V's TSB which had an AQ hearing yesterday, Pen was claiming CI but the judge asked for clarification as HE was unsure. OK if the judge is not sure, BUT you have laid it out as per 'innocence' POC then it would seem to me that you may be granted CI especially if the judge is ****ed off with the banks.

 

The original thread is here:-

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/private.php?do=showpm&pmid=240584

[photoman]

Okay,

I'm thinking that I may apply to revise my POC's.

This is in light of the fact that the Bank, despite several requests have still as yet failed to produce a copy of the original contract.

However, I do actually have several signed agreements that relate to various overdraft facilities agreed on several occasions throughout the period (and I do believe they fit all the criteria required to be considered as contracts, ie; an exchange of agreements in consideration for others by the other party, signed dated and exchanged).

I am thinking that I may ask that the court allows me to amend my POC's to incorporate an amendment to paragraph 2 (which related to my contract in just a singular sense) to also encompass and be widened to include these subsequent contracts.

These agreements do very explicitly state a set overdraft limit that MUST (their words) not be exceeded.

Thus by exceeding or attempting to exceed these limits set, I have clearly broken the terms of the contract.

They do go on to say that charges as published etc are applicable to the account, HOWEVER...

They also state that this limit is INCLUDING any charges, interests and costs.

 

Firstly, any views on this?

 

Secondly, how do I go about filing such an amendment?

 

Thirdly, any suggestions for the wording?

 

Regards

 

PM

[jowalshy]

To do an amendment to a claim you have to complete the form N244. It costs £35 to amend a claim which is not receoverable. Here is the link to HM Courts site to download a copy

 

http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/courtfinder/forms/n244_0400.pdf