hadyanth vs Lloyds TSB **WON in COURT!**

[hadyanth]

No probs Pablo Fr, here to help if I can.

 

I personally decided to fax off the letters and post them so that the judge would have access to them when finally getting round to familiarising him/herself with the case bundle. Therefore I have made sure that I have made a pre-emptive strike against the stay (which i'm pretty sure [problem] are instructed to do across the board).

 

At least then you can direct the judge’s attention to the letter to begin an argument against the stay. I also found a statement that’s very good in stating the grounds of why you want the stay removed. I'll PM it to you if it allows me to or i'll email it.

 

I wouldn't allow [problem] to have free roam in this situation and apply for a stay behind your back. Always best to get your word in also.

 

So to answer your question quickly; I would send the letter after you have revised it and changed it to your details and situation. But make sure that you include in your revision - the part of the letter that says "I am not aware of any correspondence..." etc. As this wording covers you in case they have sent a defence and it's just caught up in the post backlog.

 

Wait a couple of days before you do it though, it's up to you. It would sound premature and a bit presumptuous to say in the letter that "2 days have elapsed since the deadline..."

 

Let me know if this made sense as i'm a bit rushed at work at the mo.

[Pablo Fr]

Thanks for your help Hadyanth.

 

When I got home from work last night I got a letter from SC&M requesting for a postponed stay (surprise surprise).

 

The jist of the letter is because of the recent test case blar balr we feel that the case should not be heard until after this. Also in this letter they want me to confirm whether i agree with this or not in writing. I'm not sure what the best way of dealing with this.

 

Also I've noticed the letter is dated 01/09/07 which just falls out of the deadline for submitting the bundle, can i sue this as failure to comply with court proceedings given the fact that the test case was announced at the end of July and its taken all this time to request the stay?

 

Your help would be appreciated

[hadyanth]

I have left my copy of the bundle at home and I need the telephone number for Sechiari Clark & Mitchell, I need to make sure they haven't posted anything to my old address as I get the feeling they may have.

 

Has anyone got the number? It's on the defence statement from [problem].

 

Cheers

[TBeckett100]

have a look at one of the most recent threads, its on there i think.

[hadyanth]

Thanks I got it from Pablo Fr, the number is 01273 205381.

 

Cheers.

[hadyanth]

I spoke to [problem] a few minutes ago and asked to speak to Sean Copping and confirm receipt of the fax or the letter I sent yesterday, I got the run-around by a very nice lady who told me he is hardly around and she'd never seen him before...

 

Anyway, she did confirm that a letter was sent to my old address on the 3rd September 07 asking if I would agree to a stay. I told her that the fax/letter I sent already confirmed that I am opposed to a stay. She said thats fine and she will leave a message when she sees him at his desk (I thought she said she's never seen him before?!) and that's the end of the story.

 

Can anyone confirm if they have been through this situation and what will happen? I get the feeling that, because they have managed to stay thousands of cases that they now have the means to represent in court.

 

What are your thoughts on this people?

 

I'm interested to see what the outcome is, however I find it a bit strange that they are asking for agreement in going ahead for a stay. Before they used to just do it. Perhaps they got stung by a judge because of them presuming they could do it without consulting the claimant first.

 

Anyway we'll see what happens. I'm going to make a start in rehearsing my case in court

[hadyanth]

I'm going to the court tomorrow, any tips or last minute suggestions?

 

The hearing is 10am.

[fzrkitten]

Hi Hadyanth,

 

have a look on my thread, gary posted some good suggestions for me, especially about the fact that the test case only in the first instance tests the utccr's, and not common penalty law, I did rehearse it and use it, and it did bring a big question into my case on friday, but the judge still stayed unfortunately. also, apparantly one guy asked the questions advised on this site to ask lloyds how they come to the figures they do etc, it's in the court guidance bit, or preparing for court. Someone on friday said they think he may get a cheque.

 

Just try what you can, but don't make it too complicated. Tell them your case is no more complex than any other already settled by lloyds, and that the time scale involved is not fair etc. I just saw a post saying lloyds have actually reduced their charges, as of 2nd nov - surely this has got to be a bargaining tool also, that is almost an admittance in itself I think, even if they are not reduced enough!

 

Hope this helps a bit,

 

Regards,

 

Fzrkitten.

[hadyanth]

Thanks so much for that fzrkitten!

 

I just spoke to the court and asked the customer service lady about the status of my account and she said (I quote):

 

"The Judge has recieved your letter and he has said that the defendant is in breach of Section 3 (see 1st post) and the court hearing is going ahead tomorrow regardless of the application of the stay, go to the hearing tomorrow - you have nothing to worry about"

 

This sounds like good news to me as the impression I got of the Judge's tone in the order of directions (the first post in this thread) is that he/she is annoyed at the conduct of [problem] and their historically flagrant disregard for adhering to legal process.

 

What do you guys think about this new state of affairs? It's made me feel better about things anyway.

 

Nevertheless I am not going to be complacent - i'm setting up my guns tonight in preperation for whatever they throw at me.

 

Wish me luck!

[fzrkitten]

Hiya,

 

I so hope you are right, we need some good news. I just wish I'd known about lloyds dropping their charges when I went on friday, as I'm sure the barrister representing them wouldn't have known, and I would have loved to just ask if surely this was an admittance that their charges are too high - I really think it might have got me somewhere.

 

Sorry I haven't put any links to things on my thread, if you just click on my username you can see threads by me etc, but Gary really helped me and I know it was good ammunition for court, otherwise my 5 minute hearing wouldn't have lasted an hour!

 

Good luck for tomorrow, really hope it goes well for you.

 

BW, Fzrkitten.

[hadyanth]

Hey frzkitten, my heart sank when I read your thread - I feel for you and the crap you went through. It also sank at the prospect that you made your case so well and it was still stayed. I'm piecing together that stuff GaryH did for you and it's made me feel better - although there is a lot that doesn't apply to me as my claim is below £5000 so [problem] can't apply to have it fast track.

 

I'll have to stick around at work and get something put together from GaryH's stuff... his PM box is full (poor guy!) and i'll have to make do with my own brain power as well as all you helpful people out there

 

The butterflys i've had in my stomach for a few days are turning into dragons now!!

 

c'est la vie.

[Pablo Fr]

Best of luck tomorrow Hadyanth

[rubberlips64]

Didn't realise you're in court tommorrow - GOOD LUCK MY FRIEND

You'll be fine, be cool and remember this type of court is for the general public like us and they do allow for that and help you as much as they can. Let us know how you get on. Will be thinking of you!

Heard on the radio this evening on the way home that Lloyds had reduced their charges - wish i'd have known that at 2 pm this afternoon!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[hadyanth]

I went in today at 10am and met the representative for SC&M who was a nice chap, he provided me with the letters that I hadn't received because they were sent to my old address and they said the usual bla bla bla...

 

In the hearing I started by saying that I am there to object to the bank charges levied against my account etc. Then I went on to enforce the default judgement against lloyds for non-compliance i.e. They never submitted the application for stay before 7 days from the order of directions... The judge nodded through what I was saying and I read the bit in GaryH's statement he wrote for frzkitty about the non-compliance and the judge seemed impressed that I brought up the CPR 3.8 and 3.9 issues regarding Lloyds' application for a stay... because...

 

IT WON ME THE JUDGEMENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WOOHOO!

 

 

Basically the Judge said that Lloyds are legally allowed to file for a relief (stay) providing they give evidence for the reason and submit that evidence to me and the courts. Lloyds failed to submit the defense when ordered and then submitted a stay application on the 3rd Sept when it should have been made within 7 days from when the order was filed against Lloyds. The case was to be heard on the 11th which didn't even leave me time to research 3.8 or 3.9, "i'm sure Mr Hady hasn't even heard of 3.8 or 3.9" (judges words). The Judge went on to say that CPR 3.8 requires that they submit an application within the allotted time frame with evidence for the court to consider and deliver verdict. CPR 3.9 requires that they have submitted a valid application for relief and then a stay of action will be considered. As they didn't satisfy CPR 3.8 the Judge then said that he will not consider the plea for a stay in CPR 3.9 and he was not happy with Lloyds' conduct through the litigation, and Lloyds didn't even pay the application fee!!!

 

Lloyds now have 14 days to pay up or file an appeal under CPR 3.9 to have the stay enforced, although it is unlikely they can legally excuse the poor conduct during this case.

 

The Judges final words to me was "Mr Hadyanth I suggest you familiarise yourself with CPR 3.9 as this will be used if the defendant decides to appeal for a stay, CPR 3.9"

 

I said thank you very much, he replied thank you very much indeed!

 

:)

[fzrkitten]

Absolutely fantastic news hadyanth! Mind you, bet the next 14 days are going to be hairy waiting!

 

I hope they pay up quickly for you, so glad you got the right decision in court.

 

Fzrkitten.

[hadyanth]

Thank you so much fzrkitten, you were more help than you could imagine!

[fzrkitten]

Ah, I'd say 'Gary' was more help than you could mention - I didn't even bring up the CPR bit in court, not even sure what it means, I just lost it slightly. Tried to remember too many things!

 

Absolutely brilliant news for you, I'm now looking at appealing if anyone thinks it might be right, i'm just waiting on yet another order from the court first though, to re-allocate my re-allocation!

 

So pleased though, felt doomed on friday and I'm glad someone could bring some good news to the site!

 

BW, Fzrkitten.

[Rachel*H]

Well done on your outcome, you must be breathing a sigh of relief!

 

It's my turn to do battle with Lloyds tomorrow & i'm trying to cram in as much information as possible. Would you mind letting me have a copy of the Fzrkitten/GarryH statement that you used?

 

My case is identical to yours, the court directions were written in a slightly different way but more or less said the same thing. Lloyds didn't bother entering any kind of defence but instead sent me a letter of their intent to apply for a stay. I sent a letter back to the Court last week oposing it, but i'm fully expecting to have to fight my corner on this again in court tomorrow. Any pearls of wisdom or useful documents you can pass on to me Oh-Wise-One??

 

Any help would be greatly appreciated!

[nicsussex]

Excellent news (so far at least) well done!

[Pablo Fr]

Congratulations Hadyanth, this great news and gives us all hope. I know you have put in a lot of hard work.

 

I have a quick question about my case, is the hearing likely to be just about whether it is stayed or their non compliance or is the actual case likely to go ahead on that day?

 

Many thanks

[hadyanth]

Thank you guys'n'girls, i'll make sure that i keep a fervent eye on this until the end of the 14 days (calendar days I think?)

 

Rachel I will look up the link I got for GaryH's stuff, it's on fzrkitty's thread and its a massive thread for sure! So bear with me on this. Pablo read below for an answer to your question, but yes I think it would be best to start the hearing objecting to the defense for lack of compliance.

 

Click here and see post#208

 

Also you should read through the thread as fzrkitty had the same issue as us. There is another link that should help and I used sections from it...

 

Stays info & Guidance

 

All I would suggest you avoid doing is getting yourself worked up, I remember reading somewhere that once it is all over you will wonder what all the fuss was about, they are aware that you are not legally trained... SO TRUE! However do not go the other extreme and act arrogant as the Judge may be inclined to bring you down a peg or two.

 

Also the mistake fzrkitty and myself made is that we tried to remember too much at once! I mean 5 mins through the hearing I had already covered the entire desk with paperwork from my bundle.

 

The Judge did remind me that I wasn't there to discuss the actual case regarding the penalty charges - rather - to discuss the application of the stay. I was halfway through the rehearsed statement i made and the Judge chopped me down mid speech!

 

But all this aside, the main factual points of the hearing was CPR 3.8 & 3.9 (Civil Procedure Rules - Strikeout defense) - see this link - and the following:

• Did not pay the fee to apply for the stay
  
• Did not submit a defense as instructed to do so before 23 August
  
• Did not provide a valid reason for failure to comply with orders
  
• Did not provide evidence to support their application for the stay (CPR 3.8 )
  
• Did not apply for a stay within 7 days from the serving of the order (the date they recieved the order of directions) (CPR 3.9)
  
• Did not give claimant any information (or time to research) of the reason for application for stay (as in-depth legalities are considered over the heads of us normal folk , therefore denying us the knowledge to form an objection - contravening the basic right of a fair trial)

There is quite a bit to go through in this post but I suggest you do not overload yourself, just remember the following

• You are basically there (in the court) because you object to the charges levied against your account

• You respectfully request that the court consider the defence to be struck out due to non compliance and by virtue of Civil Procedure Rules 3.8 & 3.9 (please don't use these unless you understand them (see the link above))

• Use the human rights quote in GaryH's statement (see first link) - it raised the judge's head in interest

Then form your own questions by reading through the threads relevant to your case... you might want to try looking at Pablo Fr's thread as he is in the same boat and has a court date soon.

 

Phew i'm exhausted! it's been a long day and my appetite has only just come back

 

P.S. I will definitely be donating to this site as I couldn't have done it without you guys! thankyou 8)

[fzrkitten]

Hi Hadyanth,

 

Wicked post that last one, just wish I could have done same on friday, but my internet wasn't working so didn't catch you. Hey ho. Perhaps an appeal against my stay might be in the pipeline...... Nearly all the same issues.

 

And you wanted my help? Think I should have been begging you for this info last week!

 

Fzrkitten.

[Rachel*H]

Hadyanth,

 

Thank you soooo much! Your last post is 100% spot on. Here i was, sat in a cold sweat panicking about tomorrow & you've really helped me prioritise the key points & calm down.

 

You've been fantastic, a BIG heartfelt THANK YOU!

[BARTY]

Well done, great news!! :D

Barty:)

[hudu]

Thank you guys'n'girls, i'll make sure that i keep a fervent eye on this until the end of the 14 days (calendar days I think?)

 

Rachel I will look up the link I got for GaryH's stuff, it's on fzrkitty's thread and its a massive thread for sure! So bear with me on this. Pablo read below for an answer to your question, but yes I think it would be best to start the hearing objecting to the defense for lack of compliance.

 

Click here and see post#208

 

Also you should read through the thread as fzrkitty had the same issue as us. There is another link that should help and I used sections from it...

 

Stays info & Guidance

 

All I would suggest you avoid doing is getting yourself worked up, I remember reading somewhere that once it is all over you will wonder what all the fuss was about, they are aware that you are not legally trained... SO TRUE! However do not go the other extreme and act arrogant as the Judge may be inclined to bring you down a peg or two.

 

Also the mistake fzrkitty and myself made is that we tried to remember too much at once! I mean 5 mins through the hearing I had already covered the entire desk with paperwork from my bundle.

 

The Judge did remind me that I wasn't there to discuss the actual case regarding the penalty charges - rather - to discuss the application of the stay. I was halfway through the rehearsed statement i made and the Judge chopped me down mid speech!

 

But all this aside, the main factual points of the hearing was CPR 3.8 & 3.9 (Civil Procedure Rules - Strikeout defense) - see this link - and the following:

• Did not pay the fee to apply for the stay
  
• Did not submit a defense as instructed to do so before 23 August
  
• Did not provide a valid reason for failure to comply with orders
  
• Did not provide evidence to support their application for the stay (CPR 3.8 )
  
• Did not apply for a stay within 7 days from the serving of the order (the date they recieved the order of directions) (CPR 3.9)
  
• Did not give claimant any information (or time to research) of the reason for application for stay (as in-depth legalities are considered over the heads of us normal folk , therefore denying us the knowledge to form an objection - contravening the basic right of a fair trial)

There is quite a bit to go through in this post but I suggest you do not overload yourself, just remember the following

• You are basically there (in the court) because you object to the charges levied against your account

• You respectfully request that the court consider the defence to be struck out due to non compliance and by virtue of Civil Procedure Rules 3.8 & 3.9 (please don't use these unless you understand them (see the link above))

• Use the human rights quote in GaryH's statement (see first link) - it raised the judge's head in interest

Then form your own questions by reading through the threads relevant to your case... you might want to try looking at Pablo Fr's thread as he is in the same boat and has a court date soon.

 

Phew i'm exhausted! it's been a long day and my appetite has only just come back

 

P.S. I will definitely be donating to this site as I couldn't have done it without you guys! thankyou 8)

 

First off I just want to say a Big CONGRATULATIONS, hope they are not pedantic enough to try and wriggle out of it at this late stage - I doubt they will.

 

Looking at the above post, your case is pretty much exactly where mine is and with the same lack of response from Lloyds - they have breached all the same orders. The only difference is i do not have a hearing date, just keep getting stonewalled by the court office. I have applied to the Judge for Judgement - and would imagine than at the basis of the above that a stay should be lifted, if indeed there is one (You'll have to read my thread - its VERY complicated at the moment:evil:)

 

Anyway - well done, and thanks for giving us all hope still.