Oddfellow vs Abbey - 100% ish offer received

[Odd Fellow]

Well, all things ShAbbeyness seem to have moved on quite a bit since I last posted on my own thread. Thought I'd post the latest updates.....

 

There are none.

 

I've not heard from the bailifs about the warrant against ShAbbey - note to self, call court when you get a chance

 

I've not have any written notice from ShAbbey or DLA about the change in legal representation. However, I did speak to the Leeds Love God (can't see it myself) last week and he confirmed that ShAbbey had taken my case in house and gave me some references. He also told me that I should get some written notice within a day or so. Well, that was last Thursday and still nothing.

 

My day in court is the 3rd November at 2pm. It's fast approaching. I've had no 100% offer. Probably too early for them.

 

Perhaps I should contact them? Errr. Nah.

 

Actually, perhaps I should. I have no intention of accepting a 100% offer if it has terms attached, so perhaps I should tell them that sooner rather than later?

 

All I need to do is find a little time.

[Lula]

Good God Odds, what are you doing thats even more important? or dont we want to know FWIW when they offer the 100% I dont think that there will be any terms imposed, nobody that I have heard of has had any terms, cant you make the baliffs go in a bit quicker, that has to be worth watching

[Guest Niklowe]

I did read on one thread that a bank asked for confideniallity. However the claimant told them yes, but only if they added on an extra £1000 for removing his right to free speech! Needless to say they dropped that clause.

[Odd Fellow]

Well, things like without accepting liability / responsibility are terms.

 

Whereas I would prefer not to, I can afford to lose £700 or so (afterall, it's not as though I have it now and it's being taken away, I've already managed without it).

 

So, if Shabbey fancies telling me that I can have a 100% settlement out of court but without liability, it can shove it.

 

I'll get that in court and with the added bonus of knowing that it's going to cost it more money to attempt a defence and the tremendous adverse publicty that it will get for becomming the first bank to lose such a defence.

[srfrench]

If an offer to settle out of Court includes terms other than that claimed eg: Claim for £2000 and they offer you £2000 you must accept.

 

However if they offer you £2000 and a condition that you mustn't pick your nose, (you get the gist!) then you can refuse and the Court will not penalise you or look on it unfavourably!

 

Fact!

[Odd Fellow]

If an offer to settle out of Court includes terms other than that claimed eg: Claim for £2000 and they offer you £2000 you must accept.

 

However if they offer you £2000 and a condition that you mustn't pick your nose, (you get the gist!) then you can refuse and the Court will not penalise you or look on it unfavourably!

 

Fact!

 

I don't know about that specifically.

 

Surely, if the settlement is without an admission of liability, then that is a term of the offer. If accepted, you also accept that they are not liable.

 

Equally, if such an offer is Without Prejudice, then it's not admissible anyway.

 

Certainly, I am not taking Abbey to court just to get some money back - it's the principle and I have been advised elsewhere that I am under no obligation to accept an out of court settlement that contains any such terms.

 

Perhaps one of the mods can clarify this?

[Glenn UK]

Without an admission isn't a condition of settlement its a position surely since it doesnt matter to their offer whether you accept that condition or not.

 

A condition would be one requireing you to do, or not do something inrelation to the claim.

 

At least thats how I see it.

 

Be interested if anyone can clarify the issue,

 

GLenn

[Odd Fellow]

I can see your point, Glenn, but to my mind it works both ways.

 

Without admission, position or not, gets them off the hook. The entire point is that we want them to loose in court and I would prefer for a judge to tell them that they are in the wrong than let Abbey continue to get away with it.

 

That said, of course, I'd also push for a higher out of court settlement so that it pays at least in some way for its unlawful actions.

[Glenn UK]

Odd

 

I see your point too, but as i see it as much as you and I may have a moral bone to pick with the banks the court is not so much interested in that.

 

Bearing that in mind their overriding objective is that if they find for the claimant to put the claimant back to where they would have been had the unlawful charges not been taken.

 

For this to be the case the banks doesn't have to admit it was wrong.

 

I think in reality that unless or until they refuse to settle and get into court for a judgement then their 'guilt' will not be an issue we can force.

 

I would like to see a case forced into court over the issue you outline, I'm not sure a court would be interested in settling the issue of the banks liability on its own.

 

I would be happy to be proved wrong though.

 

JMHO

 

Glenn

 

PS forgot to say, Im not sure i would take the moral high ground over this issue and forgoe a settlement over the possibility of losing in the attempt to try to force them to admit liability.

[flames7205]

Hello odd fellow

I have an allocation hearing booked for 15th nov is this "the" hearing to finally force Abbey to pay up or just another step in a long and drawn out saga ?

I have heard nothing from new solicitors ect......

just waiting along with everyone else ??????

[Odd Fellow]

edit.....

 

PS forgot to say, Im not sure i would take the moral high ground over this issue and forgoe a settlement over the possibility of losing in the attempt to try to force them to admit liability.

 

I agree. However, as I said before, this is not money that I have just lost. I've learned to live without it already. I'm not saying it won't be useful for paying the mortgage and I would like to get it all back, but I can do without it.

 

I do not believe that there is a cat in hells chance of me not winning such a case against Abbey. If there was, we'd all end up in court instead of getting 100% out of court settlements.

[Odd Fellow]

Hello odd fellow

I have an allocation hearing booked for 15th nov is this "the" hearing to finally force Abbey to pay up or just another step in a long and drawn out saga ?

I have heard nothing from new solicitors ect......

just waiting along with everyone else ??????

 

The allocation hearing is to decide on how to proceed with the claim.

 

It may have been called because of a claim above £5k or because you're asking for full disclosure or because the defense is trying to shift the track of the claim (possibly other reasons). I am no expert.

[flames7205]

My claim isnt above £5k

they have alredy told the courts that "they are unable to comply with the courts order as they have not yet obtained a report from the proposed expert"

 

in writing to the courts via DLA Piper !!!!

 

I wonder if they will appear at court hearing ? or would they pay up before this ?

[Glenn UK]

Odd

 

I agree in principle that our case is good, very good to excellent id even say.

 

However, when or if it ever got to court, that doesnt matter as much as the people presenting the arguments. Being realistic if it does get to court there is every possiblity that the claimant would be fighitng a QC with experience.

 

It would be foolish to think that an ammatuer would win simply becuase they had right on their side, or at least I would not bank on winning having seen barristers at work.

 

BTW I am not trying to presume on your abilites or experiences, only talking generally here.

 

Glenn

[Glenn UK]

My claim isnt above £5k

they have alredy told the courts that "they are unable to comply with the courts order as they have not yet obtained a report from the proposed expert"

 

in writing to the courts via DLA Piper !!!!

 

I wonder if they will appear at court hearing ? or would they pay up before this ?

 

Id write to them, copying the court, expressing surprise at their inabilty to provide documentary evidence of the 'genuine pre-estimate' of the shelf.

 

You might like to enquire as to how long they have been conducintg 'genuine pre-estimates' and that they could provide one from an earlier generation to demonstrate thier basis for calculation.

 

Just a thought.

 

Glenn

[Odd Fellow]

Id write to them, copying the court, expressing surprise at their inabilty to provide documentary evidence of the 'genuine pre-estimate' of the shelf.

 

You might like to enquire as to how long they have been conducintg 'genuine pre-estimates' and that they could provide one from an earlier generation to demonstrate thier basis for calculation.

 

Just a thought.

 

Glenn

 

Wonderful. Let's wait for that to happen.

 

Holding breath now......

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Opps. I've turned blue....

[Odd Fellow]

Odd

 

I agree in principle that our case is good, very good to excellent id even say.

 

However, when or if it ever got to court, that doesnt matter as much as the people presenting the arguments. Being realistic if it does get to court there is every possiblity that the claimant would be fighitng a QC with experience.

 

It would be foolish to think that an ammatuer would win simply becuase they had right on their side, or at least I would not bank on winning having seen barristers at work.

 

BTW I am not trying to presume on your abilites or experiences, only talking generally here.

 

Glenn

 

You are, of course, right.

 

However, I am prepared (at least at this stage) to take that risk. If I find that my absentmindedness allows me to fill my diesel car with petrol again next week (as I did last) the money might come in handy.

[Glenn UK]

You are, of course, right.

 

However, I am prepared (at least at this stage) to take that risk. If I find that my absentmindedness allows me to fill my diesel car with petrol again next week (as I did last) the money might come in handy.

 

LOL

 

having a motorbike i don't find the diesel pump at all tempting

 

Re the request for their 'genuine pre estimate' I made a request for one by way of a letter pursuant to CPR 18.

 

Not expecting a reply but it made me smile.

 

I did point out they shouldn't have to do much work since they should have the info already.

 

Ill probably find a 40 foot artic filled with scrap paper to go through when i get home just for my cheek!!!

 

I am wondering what the court will do when Abbey fail to comply with this request, since i will write to them asking them for an order under CPR18 and when i file my allocation questionnaire Ill be asking them to strike on the basis they obviously don't have the info and therefore no defence.

 

Just in case the court disagrees ill ask for standard disclosure too, oh my claim is fast track so the defendants should be expecting disclosure anyway.

 

Glenn

 

PS i wish id studied law instead of fire engineering right now

 

Still

[Odd Fellow]

1) SUCCESS! I have received a cheque form the Assistant Paymaster General for £35.00 as a result of my Warrant of Execution against Abbey for failure to pay my court costs in my successful action against it in the DPA case.

 

I shall photocopy it and frame it for all to see - probably.

 

2) I spoke to someone at Abbey the other day and asked about settlement. My claim is next Friday at 2pm (3rd November). I was told that Abbey was offering 50% to people and I told them that I was well aware that 100% settlements were being offered and that I had already rejected the 50% offer. Also told them that I would not accept less than 100% and was told that someone would call me back, maybe the same day, maybe the next. As it turned out, it is maybe never.

[Glenn UK]

Odd

 

Don't worry yo much, Abbey haven't even tried to offer me anything in my claim, not Even measly £100 and I have to file my AQ by the 6th November.

 

I think their deciding whether I'm the one their going to hand draw and quarter!!!

 

It would be just my luck to end up being the hapless victim of their test case.

 

Still Ive put most of the arguments into one case for them, charges older than six years, contractual interest and I'm sure theres something else too.

 

I bet you'll be having the champers before long!

 

Glenn

[Odd Fellow]

What I'm worried about is not having enough time to negotiate a settlement.

 

By the way, there's some free champers at certain tesco stores...... If you know how to get it and have the brass neck....

 

Check your PM.....

[flames7205]

odd in same boat

getting concerned over lack of movement

[Odd Fellow]

OK. Perliminary Hearing is tomorrow at 2PM.

 

Been out all day. Got home to find an offer of settlement from Abbey for the full amount.

 

As with all these out of court settlements, Abbey is saying that it is in Full and Final Settlement, without prejudice and is "entirely without any admission of legal liabiliy by Abbey".

 

At the bottom, there is a paragraph that reads:

 

I accept the offer on the terms set out in the above letter as full and final settlement of the Court Claim referred to in the heading of the letter and confirm that as soon as payment has been made, I will write to the court and withdraw the claim

 

There is no alternative way I can read this. The paragraph is asking me to accept the offer.

 

I have telephoned Abbey to tell it that I do not accept the offer and the woman is trying to tell me that it's not an offer it's a settlement and that once the money is paid, I do not have a claim. She is also telling me that it dosen't matter whether I sign the letter or not, they will make the payment and the matter is closed.

 

I want to see Abbey attend court or pay me to accept it's terms (no liability, etc.)

 

What are my options here? I have verbally told them that I will attend court tomorrow and that I do not accept the offer. Given that it is Abbey itself that uses the word "offer" when asking me to accept, surely I have the power to reject it and push on?

[Lula]

Hi Odds, as it is so late in the day you would be best off still attending, what you can then say to the judge is that Abbey have made an offer to settle the full amount outstanding but you have reservations about the terms, I am not sure what the judge will say to be honest, usually they will frown upon you messing about too much, unless it is a gagging clause or the settlement precludes you from making any more claims.

 

Is it just the fact that they dont accept liability?

[Odd Fellow]

Is it just the fact that they dont accept liability?

 

Yes AND,

 

I've just looked at my original spreadsheet for the charges, had it update for the additional time that's passed and Abbey's "settlement in full" is about £25 light.

 

How can a banking establishment who's prinicpal task it is to calcualte figures get this wrong?