Seminole v Abbey: £10,235 RECEIVED

[NitrousOxide]

Hi,

Can you lend me a fiver?

[Bean]

Congratulations Seminole!!!

[simcap]

Well Done Seminole,

 

I have just read the whole of this thread as I was directed here by Karnevil. I have a rather large claim that I need your advice on. My thread is simcap v scabbey national.

 

If you have time between spending spree's, please could you take a look.

 

Simcap.

[Jane Austen]

Hi Semi

 

The papers might be more interested now after the news item this morning stating the banks profits have risen due entirely to their penalty charges.

[Odd Fellow]

Hi Semi

 

The papers might be more interested now after the news item this morning stating the banks profits have risen due entirely to their penalty charges.

 

Check out the story on the BBC site:

 

BBC NEWS | Business | Banks 'reap more' from accounts

[Jane Austen]

It's also here:

business Stories

 

I like the bit that says:

"The 13% hike came from overdraft charges and penalty fees on bank accounts and credit cards."

 

and further down:

 

"he added that "much of the increase" was because of "vastly improved means of communicating with the customer" through targeted mailing and improved product offers."

 

What vastly improved means??????

[sharont1]

Seminole I have read through all of yours and Alanfromderbys threads and cannot find the answer to my query. basically my husband has recieved a court date for DPA refund of £30 and I wondered if either you or alan recieved a court date and if so did abbey turn up, pay the money or what. Please could someone let me know

many thanks

[philread1]

Hello sharont1

 

Oddfellow has just been to court about the DPA. His thread is below.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/abbey-bank/8969-oddfellow-abbey-d-p-7.html

 

Hope this helps

Phil

[goforit]

"However, having reviewed the schedule of charges supplied under cover of your email dated 6 July 2006, we note that your claim includes various charges which were incurred more than 6 years before the date on which you issued your claim (13 June 2006). We would point out that you are prevented from reclaiming these charges by the Limitation Act 1980.

In particular, you are not able to reclaim the charges you have listed as incurred during the period 30 September 1999 to 30 May 2000."

 

From Seminole's post.

 

How does this leave the argument that we may be able to go back further than 6 years? - see Bankfodder's thread in "general".

Are you going to try and argue against this? That the banks were deceiving you as to the true costs of the charges?

I ask because I am interestd in going back beyond six years.

 

I don't know if this has been mentioned before, but I'll post it.

 

If the Defendant does not allege that an action is time barred by virtue of the Limitation Act 1980 then they cannot rely upon it at a later date.

 

CPR 16PD 13.1 "The defendant must give details of the expiry of any relevant limitation period relied on."

 

I remember seeing it somewhere more explicit and will continue to look.

[lesser1010]

hi semi

i am persuing abbey for £8000 and i presume that this will be fastrack.this is from a business account although not a ltd account so i assume consumer law will not cover it.will i still be able to ask for full disclosure as section 18 is in consumer law isn't it? i'm a little confused.dla have today filed abbeys defence so i need to know which way to go with this now.if i can ask for full disclosure so much the better.

thanks

les

[dunnie1]

Seminole - love your strategy of frightening Abbey into settling..say, did you end up pursuing the unfair charges that according to Abbey at least were statute barred?