NWB Defence - Please help.

[Hobson30]

Sorry guy's this could be a long thread!

 

I have been going through the stages of claiming my bank charges back since Oct 06. We got to the point where we had, had the 2nd letter from the bank saying they are not going to pay up. With xmas coming up and then sorting our money out after xmas we could not afford to pay the court charges riight away. I checked with someone on the beer garden around March time if we could still put in a claim as it had been a few months and they said it was OK and I could possible get help with paying for the court fees.

 

We went ahead with going to court in April and have now been sent Natwest defence. They are basically saying we have not been in touch with Natwest before putting in the claim. We have now got until the 25th May to reply with the following info:

 

1. To what account(s) (giving details. of the account name, number & sort code) were the charges applied.

2. In relation to each charge please identify (a) the date when the charges was charged; (b) the amount of the same; and © the reason(s) given for the charging of the same.

3. In relation to each charge, please clarify the follwoing (a) is it the case of the claimant the same should not have been charged? (b) If yes; please explain why the claimant contends that the same should not have been charged? © If no; is it the case of the Claimant that the same should not have been charged in this amount? (d) If yes: please explain why the claimant contendsthat the same should not have been charged in this amount and identify the sum the claimant contends should have been charged. (e) If no; please state the claimants case.

4. In your claim you state that " the charges are an unlawful 'extravagant' penalty".

5. Please specify the clause(s) persuant to which the charges were applied;

6Please specify whether the charges applied were due to breach of contract (by reference to appropriate term(s) of the contract) that the charge related to

 

Paragraph 5: In your caim you atate that the charges are: " an unfair penalty under the Unfair Terms in the Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999".

 

Please specify all of the facts relied on by the claimant in support contentions in paragraph 5 above, and in particular please identify contractual provision(s) that the claimant alleges are invalid by reference to the regulations.

 

As you can see there is alot there and we do still have the letters the bank sent in reply to most of the above mentioned. Can someone help as I am now really worried and not sure what to do next. Do I reply to Cobbetts and sent a copy to the courts? What exactly do I need to send back? Please Help!

[Michael Browne]

This is a Part 18 request which is specifically exclude from the Small Claims track and there is no need to respond; Send them a schedule + this letter:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/natwest-bank/35672-cobbetts-cpr-18-request.html

 

Or if you prefer I can give you a detailed reply to each of their points

[rc99]

Hi Hobson - I have received the same letter from Cobbetts today with a reply deadline of May 25th too. I must admit that panic is starting to set in now! Going to send the letter in response with a copy to the court and keep my fingers crossed. Good luck with your claim x

[steven4064]

Michael's advice is best. You don't need to respond to Cobbetts at all, they are trying to intimidate you. You only need to supply any further information if requested to do so by the court.

 

We are basically at the same position with Nasty West - we received their defence today. It's identical to what most other people get (and therefore incorrect as it ignores specific things in our PoC). I don't think Cobbetts actually read naything they are sent. They have a set of common letter and they send what they think best approximates to an answer to everything they get. Complete waste of space.

 

Steven

[Hobson30]

Thanks everyone, I will be posting my letter tomorrow.

 

Good Luck to you too!!

[archer_66]

i agree i got the same letter and panicked! but they ask for things already supplied many times in previous letters and on the POC.then they sent AQ back asking for small claims so it wouldnt even be relevant for the CPR part 18!

i cant see how theyre getting away with all this

[steven4064]

i cant see how theyre getting away with all this

 

THey do it to intimidate and delay. They hope you will just go away. Don't

 

Steven

 

If this post is helpful, please click the scales

[graciefaye]

Hi Hobson, I've had exactly the same letter from cobblers. The advise given is brilliant. I panicked too, I think we all do. But been given great advise here. I actually phoned the local court today to find out how much that will cost me and the court clerk said that the judge wont allow it to go to hearing as it's a waste of court time!!! So don't panick and post a thread if you need help and support. Come to my thread and we can go through it together! Steven and CloeJane have been my saviours:)

[Parkvale]

Its your money taken unlawfully from your account, and you have a legal right to claim it back.

[Hobson30]

Had my AQ back and im having problems will filing in Section G, can anyone help?

 

I have seen the step by step guide of filling out the AQ but not sure what type of text to use in this section. Can anyone direct me to a thread that may help me with my wording in this section.

 

My claim amount is £1500

 

Thanks

[hedgey06]

Hobson, are you planning on sending the draft order?

[archer_66]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/welcome-our-forum/69359-cant-find-what-youre.html

its in there depends what AQ u want to fill in?

[Hobson30]

Sorry, what is the draft order?

[archer_66]

its a letter giving directions for the court basically to ask for full disclosure of how much it actually costs for the DD to be bounced..they dont have to use youre directions but it might help get things done a bit faster

theres 2 ways of doing the AQ read both and think which one best suits you.u need to get things ready as you need to submit things too if so directed by court if he follows ur directions

[Hobson30]

Thanks Archer,

 

I have just seen a copy of the Draft order from using your link above. I think it looks and sounds like a good idea to use it.

[steven4064]

You might also consider adding another draft order for the defence to be struck out as abuse of process as i have done and hedgey has done (http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/show-post/post-939107.html)

 

Steven

 

If this post is helpful, please click the scales

Any opinions are without prejudice & without liability.

Almost everything I know concerning the law I learned from this site

[Hobson30]

Hi guys,

 

Im sorry for sounding so thick but I have read alot of thread and im getting abit confused. I want to make sure I do everything right.

 

I have found the wording below for section G as my claim is below £5000 can I use this as I am already in the small claims track if not can anyone suggest what I do write or what changes I should make?

 

I am respectfully requesting that my claim be allocated to the small claims track. This issue is not a complicated one; it is an issue of fact and not of law. The issue is only whether the money levied by theDefendant in respect of its customer’s contractual breaches exceed their actual costs incurred. I am happy to pay their actual costs and I am surprised the Defendant did not counterclaim for these, because I would have paid them without argument.

 

However, the continuing problem is, (in common with the 100s of other cases currently being brought by other bank customers), that the banks refuse to reveal the details of their penalty-charging regime. As the banks have a fiduciary duty towards their customers, they have a duty to deal straightforwardly and in utmost good faith.

 

Accordingly, I would respectfully ask that the court in this case, not withstanding allocation to the small claims track, order standard disclosure. I understand that it is in the courts discretion to do so. This would bring a rapid end, not only to this litigation, but would also likely bring an end to much of the litigation in progress against other high-street banks.

I believe that the case will last no longer than 1hr.

[hedgey06]

Hi Hobson, don't worry - this bit gets a bit hairy and you're right to worry/question it! Section G should be:

Please find the following documents attached to this allocation questionnaire:

1A) section G - other information

1B) list of settled cases

1C) Text of order made by Lincoln county court

1D) Mullen v Hackney BC (1997) 2 A11ER 906

2A) Draft order for directions

Then section 1A is as follows:

 

Attachment 1A) In the xxxxxxx County Court

Claim number 7SF02827

 

 

 

Between

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx- Claimant

and

National Westminster Bank – Defendant

(Ref. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)

N149 Allocation Questionnaire

1A) Section G - Other Information

The claimant respectfully requests that an order may be made as follows;

1. That the Defence is struck out as an abuse of process, pursuant to rule 3.4(2)(b) of the Civil Procedure Rules.

 

On the basis that the Defendant has filed a template defence then subsequently settled each and every other claim of this nature.

 

Since May 2006, I am aware of over 100 claims of this nature in which the Defendant has filed an acknowledgement of service, then a Defence, then an allocation questionnaire, then has breached the order for pre-hearing directions, then has finally settled without liability shortly in advance of the hearing or trial. A sample list of these claims, including their claim numbers, is attached (attachment 1B).

 

It is submitted that the defendant’s litigation strategy is flagrantly abusive of the public resource, and further, contrary to almost all of the Overriding Objective’s of the Civil Procedure Rules. It is respectfully submitted that the Defendant will continue to conduct litigation in this manner for as long as it is allowed to do so with impunity.

 

Please find attached a copy of an order made by Lincoln County Court (attachment 1C) in at least 10 cases similar to my own involving various high street banks. The court considered the authority of Mullen-v-Hackney London Borough Council (1997)2 A11ER 906 to be relevant. If this honourable court also considers this authority relevant, I would respectfully request that the court applies its special knowledge of the defendant’s notorious and well established conduct in similar cases when considering order in the present case. Please find attached the case to which I refer (attachment 1D)

2. In the alternative, should the court not be minded to strike out the defence, and if the claim is to proceed to allocation, the Claimant respectfully suggests that special directions may be made as per the attached draft order (attachment 2A)

I believe the proposed directions will further the Overriding Objectives in that they identify the most fundamental issues in dispute, and will allow them to be assessed in advance of the hearing so that this claim may proceed justly and expeditiously.

 

If the Defendant has the serious intention of defending this claim at trial as is indicated by its defence, I would contend that it is incumbent upon it to disclose such information. Further, the proposed directions are now routinely ordered in claims of this nature in the Mercantile Court in London, as well as in small claims track cases in Leicester, Derby, Chesterfield, Northampton and Mansfield County Courts.

 

As the law relating to contractual penalties is long established, I believe the outstanding issues to be of fact. Accordingly, I would respectfully request that this claim is allocated to the small claims track, and estimate that the hearing of the claim should last no longer than one hour.

Post back if you need any more info/attachments. Hedgey xxx

[Hobson30]

Thanks Hedgy,

 

In the attachment 1a there is a space for a ref no under Natwest. What ref do I put in there?

 

The attachments I need for 1b,c & d can I find these in the templates library or do you have links that I can follow to find them easily?

 

Hobson

[hedgey06]

Attachment 1A is the above post (Section G - Other Information). Attachment 1B is the Sample List of Settled Cases. If you go into the Litigation forum on the main forum page, you can print off a sample list of cases by entering appropriate search details (if you use font size 8, you seem to get a better printout!) Attachment 1C I have at home - I can PM you with this later.

 

Hedgey x

[Hobson30]

Thanks againg hedgy

 

Sorry I put the wrong attachments down I have amended my post now it was b,c, d I required.

 

Hobson

[hedgey06]

No problem - I'll send you 'd' as well!!!! They're on my home pc - I'll forward them to you later if that gives you enough time.

 

Hedgey

[Hobson30]

Yes, I have to get it in by Monday so I can send everything off tomorrow.

 

I have just been to the litigation page you told me to use. Obviously I do not need the usernames in there do I need to tick the only show concluded box or do I use both?

 

Sorry about this! I just want to make sure nothing goes wrong

[hedgey06]

No, you don't need the usernames including with the details - tick the only show concluded box as well. I've also sent you a PM about the attachments!

[Hobson30]

Hi Guys,

 

Another quick question.

 

I do send a copy of my AQ to Cobbetts aswell don't I?

 

Hobson