Tom Brennan v NatWest - This is a must-read!!!

[PPMAN159]

Thanks Mr B.

 

Makes interesting reading

[mtamu]

@Sparkie

 

Did you represent yourself by any chance?

[Sparkie1723]

Hi mtamu,

 

Yes I did represent myself, the estimates off solicitors to take the case to completeion was £15 -£20.000.

It was either DIY or not at all.

 

Within my whole claim was a claim of false accounting and theft of information, those were the two main things the RBOS did not want to have heard in court, because I had the facts in back & white in their own witness statement. I have made a complaint to the County Police about these and I have given them the basic facts and I am having a visit paid to me to assess the situation.

That doesn't get me the damages I sought but it will give the RBOS some real bad publicity.

 

Sarkie 1723

[Sparkie1723]

I have posted this on another forum, but I wonder if anyone on this forum wants to chew this over ( maybe Tom Brennan might wish to add this to his claim if he reads this site)

 

We all know that Direct debits and cheques etc are rejected by the Banks computer it checks your account and if you have not go the funds in to pay them it rejects it and applies a penalty to the account.

 

So if a direct debit comes up say £100 and theres not enough money in the account, bingo £30 plus penalty.

But if you go to the cash point machine and try to draw out £100 and there is not enough money this very same computer rejects you application BUT you do not get charged a penalty ....I want to know what is the difference. the same computer has rejected the same amount for the same reason not enough money, the cost can't be any different, anyone any different ideas?

 

sparkie1723

[photoman]

I have posted this on another forum, but I wonder if anyone on this forum wants to chew this over ( maybe Tom Brennan might wish to add this to his claim if he reads this site)

 

We all know that Direct debits and cheques etc are rejected by the Banks computer it checks your account and if you have not go the funds in to pay them it rejects it and applies a penalty to the account.

 

So if a direct debit comes up say £100 and theres not enough money in the account, bingo £30 plus penalty.

But if you go to the cash point machine and try to draw out £100 and there is not enough money this very same computer rejects you application BUT you do not get charged a penalty ....I want to know what is the difference. the same computer has rejected the same amount for the same reason not enough money, the cost can't be any different, anyone any different ideas?

 

sparkie1723

Sparkie, I would just like to add this also.

The Banks often state that an unauthorised borrowing fee is akin to an informal request for an overdraft extension, and so as such is clasified as a service.

On some occasions when over our limits, cashpoint machines have still allowed money to be drawn out? We then receive notification of unauthorised borrowing fees. In such circumstances, it was obviously the cashpoint machine that has "made" that decision, so the charge is obviously disproportionate to the expenses incurred.

[ripoffstopper]

Does anyone have an update on this topic?

Cheers ROS

[crfx250]

I want to wish the lad the very best of luck for tomorrow. In my opinion he's genuine and has a real conscience. He's a good bloke.

 

I don't think anyone knows his chances of success as he's in unchartered waters. But should he lose, I've already pledged him substantial financial support.

 

Good luck

[PPMAN159]

Well said-we all hope that he is successful.

 

Do you know what time the case is being heard?

[isidore]

Tom who? Have I had my head in the sand ? Got a link?

[PPMAN159]

Tom Brennan is the guy who is taking Nasty West to court tommorrow to get them to justify that their charges are fair and reasonable

[isidore]

in which case I know what you're on about!!

 

Yes indeed, good luck for him!

[PPMAN159]

I just wish that I could find what time he is due in court but I cannot get any details on the court from the HMCS website.

[ladybird17]

i don't think they post the lists until after 4pm.

 

GOOD LUCK TOM!!

[PPMAN159]

The case is being heard at the Mayor's and City of London County Court at Guildhall and Nasty West must be worried as the have offerred him £4000 to settle his claim of £2500.

 

Fingers crossed this Friday the 13th will be lucky.

[zootscoot]

Best of luck Tom

 

You've got 130,000+ members of CAG behind you!!!!!!!!!

[PPMAN159]

I cannot see that he will lose but if he does then the 130,000 CAG members will be right behind him!!.

 

Only joking

[ladybird17]

Lol. See what you mean!!

 

£1 each and we can help cover his costs - however, he will banned from practising as a barrister if he loses & has to declare himself bankrupt - so is he very confident or very mad?

I'm seriously hoping his rationale and preparation for the hearing has been backed up by more experienced legal eagles.

[PPMAN159]

Lets hope that the Nasty West Eagles do not sh$$ on him!

[veilside01702]

Hi everyone, just spoke to someone in the court....

I have been told that all the bank cases, as well as mine will be heard on 27th June 2007....

So much for getting one of them into court as a test case....they have lumped all bank claims together on one day!

Sorry to get everyones hopes up.....

Can anyone shed some light on what the hells going on....???

lol..........

As the poor court staff were amuzed when I suggested the judge names and calls in the banks Directors and Data Controlers for wasting court time....lol

Again....Sorry and good luck everyone....

Russ

[PPMAN159]

When you say all of the cases is this every single claim lodged against a specific bank or banks in general?

[veilside01702]

All they said was that the cases against banks for charges had been moved to the 27th June and that is the day I can also state my case in court...

Other than that she couldn't discuss other cases with me....

I can't sem to find the person who told me the ones heard on the 5th April would be available to public....

I don't understand how they work.....maybe someone can shed some light??

Sorry...

[PPMAN159]

If it is all cases then surely they are going to need more than one day to get through them.

 

Still things may change after tommorrows case-Tom Brennan V Nat West.

[crfx250]

Lol. See what you mean!!

 

£1 each and we can help cover his costs - however, he will banned from practising as a barrister if he loses & has to declare himself bankrupt - so is he very confident or very mad?

I'm seriously hoping his rationale and preparation for the hearing has been backed up by more experienced legal eagles.

 

 

That was my thinking originally but it would appear that his unswerving ruthlessness in pursuit of natwest has no bounds. Determined that a victory for the bank should only be ‘’pyrrhic’’. He wants costs awarded to the banks legal hyenas to be met only by ..err..natwest. (doncha just luv im?)

 

So any contribution would go to help picking himself up off the floor rather than to the needy natwest bank.

[Glenn UK]

they are banking on the banks settling prior to the day.

 

I had an AQ hearing at Southend CC, i was the only oen that hadnt settled before the day, i dont know how many they had listed, but the judge was quite upset when he found out that one of the claims hadnt been settled.

 

Glenn

[freakyleaky]

Good luck to Mr Brenan today!

Give em hell!