Heard from your bank/court about your claim being restarted? Please let us know.

natweststaffmember

lindilou39 wrote: »

Someone answer me if they possibly can were I stand here...I won my case against LLoydsTsb before the oftcase commenced, this was by default as lloydsTsb did not comply with Court Directions, they had to comply by 20th September 2007 they did not so I entered Judgment to Northampton County Court before the case whereupon the banks solicitors requested immediate stay, I argued by written correspondence to the court and via telephone as to how a judge can overrule the judgment given by another as he was only a deputy, but they insisted the stay remains. Where now do I stand legally? I have been informed to contact the court to see if stays are lifted and to fax the solicitors for immediate payment, I have also been told they may try to have my judgment set aside, but if I won by default...then what grounds do they have to set it aside?

From the post, the default judgement was overturned and the case stayed. You have not won and your case is stayed.

lindilou39

natweststaffmember wrote: »

From the post, the default judgement was overturned and the case stayed. You have not won and your case is stayed.

I would not say the judgment was overturned tbh..a judge can only justify what it has been told to do hence the court stayed all claims regardless. But thanks for your support...I have followed your oppinions over the years

natweststaffmember

lindilou39 wrote: »

I would not say the judgment was overturned tbh..a judge can only justify what it has been told to do hence the court stayed all claims regardless. But thanks for your support...I have followed your oppinions over the years

Your case would not have been stayed if the judgement was not overturned since a win is a win. You need to contact the court today really to find out about the terms of the stay and repost here, ok?

Premier_2

lindilou39 wrote: »

Someone answer me if they possibly can were I stand here...I won my case against LLoydsTsb before the oftcase commenced, this was by default as lloydsTsb did not comply with Court Directions, they had to comply by 20th September 2007 they did not so I entered Judgment to Northampton County Court before the case whereupon the banks solicitors requested immediate stay, I argued by written correspondence to the court and via telephone as to how a judge can overrule the judgment given by another as he was only a deputy, but they insisted the stay remains. Where now do I stand legally? I have been informed to contact the court to see if stays are lifted and to fax the solicitors for immediate payment, I have also been told they may try to have my judgment set aside, but if I won by default...then what grounds do they have to set it aside?

Despite you originally winning judgement, this judgement was set aside despite you arguing against that.

Setting aside effectively means annulling; it no longer stands.

Then the defendant asked for the case to be stayed (effectively put on hold) - that was also granted by the court.

You need to refer to the court order staying the case. It will describe how to get the stay lifted if that is what you want to do.

If like many similar claims, the stay would have been until the outcome of the OFT Vs the banks case. As you know, that is now over.

Usually, you or the banks will be allowed to lift the stay. That essentially will put the claim back at stage 1. I can't see the bank applying to have the stay lifted, it's probably not in their interest to do so..

In light of the ruling last month by the Supreme Court, (and in further light of the decision by the OFT essentially saying theres no chance of them winning a battle against the banks under current legislation so they are not even going to try), do you have a valid claim?
If so, pursue it.
If not, you may as well advise the court you longer longer wish to continue with the claim.

kingboyk

I wasn't at the court stage as I was bit late getting started and was caught by the waiver, but I've had a letter from First Direct dated 18 December 2009 referencing the OFT court case and saying (unsurprisingly) that they won't be paying up. They invite me to "escalate my concerns" if I wish but I guess I'll wait for further developments.

eira

Is there value in waiting for a reply to the refusal to refund bank charges ?.As I've posted First Direct are pursuing my daughter for a sum totally composed of bank charges I feel guilty because it was my idea for her to join the bank-I should have known better.

I've been a customer for as long as they've been open, have savings and pay a reasonable salary in. They have refused me- a functioning bank card (have gone through arguments about Solo/Switch/Maestro-none replaced until shop systems started to bounce them back); no OD facilities (most recent was a refusal of a £100 OD unless I paid £25);no credit card; and no share account .

I stay because of the 24/7 day person to person phone service which is invaluable if you're travelling but I now only use the account for DD and transfers to my daughters' bank accounts. Their credit section is a nightmare-or has been for me. I find it reprehensible that they gave a student OD facilities and then piled on the bank charges. I've gone through her bank statements and she was mostly in credit apart from the charges. Hardly 'responsible lending ' in our case

richardcole

My mother has applied for the stay in her case to be lifted and has lodged amended Particulars of Claim based on the Consumer Credit Act. Abbey National would not consent to this and so we are waiting for the Court to do something. It is possible to access the OFT's Particulars of Claim from the test case on their website and to adopt their arguments (which related to fairness) to this act (although they are quite complicated). Are you able to say why this act only applies to such a limited period of charges, as the section on extortionate credit agreements in the act has been around before the Act was amended?

Alpine_Star

richardcole wrote: »

My mother has applied for the stay in her case to be lifted and has lodged amended Particulars of Claim based on the Consumer Credit Act. Abbey National would not consent to this and so we are waiting for the Court to do something. It is possible to access the OFT's Particulars of Claim from the test case on their website and to adopt their arguments (which related to fairness) to this act (although they are quite complicated). Are you able to say why this act only applies to such a limited period of charges, as the section on extortionate credit agreements in the act has been around before the Act was amended?

The OFT's POCs didn't include arguments under the CCA.

By all accounts it is not advisable to apply for a stay lift or amend POCs until the new POCs are published here in late January.

daisyhats

I had a letter from HSBC dated 18th December telling me that the court case had been decided and as such they would be reopening my case.

They would not put my case on hold while it was at court and sent it to a debt recovery agent and added more money on top of the bank charges.

I had a struggle in the beginning to get them to put it on hold, even though the case between the oft and the banks was on hold.

Lisa

bobberding

Had my letter from A&L today basically saying they will not refund with 8 weeks to respond or my case will be closed.Surely it is down to the courts to throw it out.I have paid for a small court hearing and that is what I will have.(unless thrown out of course).Surely A&L wasn't part of the test case but they took advantage of the waiver and in theory haven't won anything in court.

Last edited by bobberding; Today at 12:56 PM..