Written by John Kruse, one of the leading experts on Bailiff Law, this consumer friendly guide is essential reading for anyone who comes into contact with a bailiff.
The book is easy to understand and clearly explains the rights
a bailiff has, and also what they cannot do when collecting debts and repossessing goods etc.
Hi, have started to claim bank charges back from Natworst Bank by using MCOL and have now received a defence and cpr 18 request from Cobblers.Could someone please give me a link to the correct response to this cpr 18 as i have seen a few on the forum and am not sure which one is the most current response people are using. I have till the 12 of july to respond and its still all being dealt with at Northhampton Court as far as i know. To be honest it does make you nervous when you get all this paperwork which a lot of it i dont understand. Really hope i win too like so many others here have already.
You may also find it useful to read the faq's http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o....se-read-these/along with some of the threads in the nat west successes forum - they'll give you a really good understanding of what to expect from nat west and cobbetts during your claim.
Best of luck, post back whenever you need advice xx
Hi i have just been reading the faqs and now realise i have not sent my schedule of charges to Northhampton court as well as i claimed using MCOL, i only ever sent them to the bank. Should i send a copy to the court now at this stage or wait until its moved to a local court or am i now doomed?.
Send a copy of your schedule of charges to cobbetts. With regards to sending a copy to the court, I'd be inclined to wait until it's transferred to your local county court and then send them a copy of the schedule - just so that it doesn't get 'lost' in the transfer. Don't worry - you're not doomed at all! We don't allow 'doomed' on here! x
Hello everyone, i today have recieved a notice of transfer of proceedings to a local court and in the covering letter it states:
To all parties
A defence has been filed. The claim has been transfered to the court covering the area where the claimant lives or carries on business.
Please read the accompanying documents carefully.
Then the next bit about the allocation questionaire has been ruled out with a pen does this mean i wont be getting an allocation questionaire and therefore wont have to pay the extra £100.
Also with this notice of transfer was another copy of the defence and another copy of the cpr18 request, does this now mean i have to fill in the cpr18 or was it just sent for my information.
Hi Joanne, did the notification come from Northampton? If it did, they always dispense with the AQ, but your local county court may still issue one. You'll know more in a few days time when you receive notification from your local court. If your local court dispenses with the AQ, you may still have to pay the fee if your claim is for £1,500 plus. You can also still send off the draft order for directions even if they don't want an AQ - but post back when you hear from the court before doing anything about this.
With regards to the CPR 18 request, you don't have to respond to anything that cobbetts send you - you only respond to CPR 18 requests if the court orders you to do so. Send cobbetts the letter in this link Cobbetts Cpr part 18 request/CPR part 16.4.1
And send the court a copy of this letter (you'll need to adapt it slightly as some of the info in it is a bit dated) Letter to Court re CPR18 request
Hope that helps - let us know what your local court says when you hear from them.
Ok i see now thanks so much.Sorry if it seems i have asked questions when if i had read more posts on this forum i would have found the answers myself, however it is still much more reassuring when my questions are answered direct like you have done hedgey cos im always worried someone elses case mayby slightly different from my own.
Many thanks once again, it looks like i may be getting close to a result soon, cant wait, if i win i will definatley contribute something to this fabulous site.
Glad to put your mind at ease Joanne! It's better to post and ask a question rather than worry about something unneccessarily - and it's better to ask rather than not know what to do. So keep asking questions - and keep reading threads, you'll be fine! x
Hello everyone again, i have a question which im sure has been asked before and that is i am i too late to decide to claim interest because in my schedule of charges that i sent to the bank i never tried to claim interest but now wish i had. What would be involved if i decided to do this or is it best to leave it as it is now. I am about to type out all my letters tonight and further schedule of charges for Cobbets and for the local court.
I'd advise you to contact the county court once your claim has officially been transfered to them and explain that you've entered an incorrect claim amount.
They may want you to to submit an amendment form Form N244 - application notice, for which there's a £35 (unreturnable) fee. However, given that the 8% interest may add a substantial amount to your claim, I'd urge you to correct your claim to include the s69 8% interest.
Phone the court as soon as your claim's transferred to them - and let us know what they say. We'll help with the amendment. May as well get the full amount 'eh!
Right i have decided not to bother changing my claim now and just continue as i have started, thanks for the advice anyway.
I am now typing out my letters to the local court and to Cobbets as you have advised Hedgey but just have one more question as i filed my claim using MCOL do i need to send my POC to anyone or just send the schedule of charges along with the respnse to the CPR18 request. I ask as i have never sent any POC to anyone yet.
Your POC was originally filed with MCOL when you made the original claim.
Send the 'cobbetts' letter to cobbetts along with a schedule of your charges, and the 'court' letter to your local county court with a schedule of your charges once you know the address and claim no. You'll need to modify the court letter though as it's a little out of date (post it up here if you want somebody to look it over first).
Hi Hedgey i have just been reading the template of the letter to the court and really have no idea what bit to modify could you explain what you mean by its a bit out of date.
Dear Sir/Madam (address the envelope to the court manager)
Claimant’s response to the request for further information
We have received a request from the defendants for further information, which they say is made pursuant to CPR part 18. However it is highly likely that this claim will be allocated to the small claims track and we know part 18 does not apply.
The Defendant’s part 18 request suggests very strongly that we have not supplied them with enough information to mount a defence. Despite this they have submitted a very full and complicated defence.
We are anxious to be seen to be co-operating as much as we can and therefore we are providing the following information and sending a copy to the defendants.
In section 2 of their request, the defendants ask for a detailed Breakdown of the charges that have been applied to our account and our account details. We do not understand why they require this information as we sent their clients copies on dates you sent the schedule of charges to nat west and cobbetts. We also filed a copy with my claim form which you will find in the court file and presumably the court must have served this on the defendants with the claim form.
In section 2.3 the defendant asks why the charges should not have been levied against us, but it has already been explained in the claim, the charges are disproportionate penalties. In fact section 3 of the defendants request makes it fully clear they are aware to the answers to their section 2.3 as they specifically refer to the reasons for my claim.
Section 4 of the defendants request; ask for details of our account contract with the defendant. However the defendants are clearly fully aware of the details of the contract, the contract is their own terms and conditions imposed by them with no basis for negotiation. Further more the defendant has purported to rely on upon the terms and conditions in order to implement charges against us. The defendants must understand very well, which are the contractual terms in issue.
We are sure the court is already aware of the current flood of litigation which is being brought against all of the major banks on the issue of penalty charges. We can tell the court that hundreds of claims have been issued at courts around the country, many having been allocated to the fast track. However to date every case has been settled by the banks before/shortly after going to a hearing.
The Natwest, the defendants in our own case has settled many cases, many of them for much larger amounts than my own claim.
The banks are fully aware of the bank charges issue. The Office of Fair Trading conducted a 2 year investigation into Credit Card penalty charge cases and found they were unfair and unenforceable at law. The OFT also said there was a read-across to banks of their penalty charges. The OFT has urged the banks to comply with their findings. The banks have refused and the OFT in entering into further discussions with them.
In the meantime the banks oblige thousands of their customers – very ordinary citizens, to bring court claims which their banks or their solicitors then go on to complicate the process with procedural devices such as the present part 18 request.
Only those claimants of sufficient heart and tenacity are eventually paid out in full. We are sure the great majority give up altogether or accept reduced payments. This is the deliberate intention of the banks style of litigation.
The banks style of litigation is intimidatory and it is sham.
The banks style of litigation would be vexatious if it were not for the fact they are the defendants.
The Master of Rolls in 2004 addressed an international conference on vexatious litigation. He told the conference the evil of vexatious litigation was that it undermined justice and was a burden to the public resource.
We can not imagine any better description of the result of the banks style of litigation.
It really should not be for an ordinary citizen to bear the burden of bringing the banks back within the rule of law.
The OFT has the power to deal with this matter and is tasked and resourced to do the job. If the OFT were to seek an injunction then this burden upon the private individual could probably be brought to an end within a week.
Yours Faithfully
cc Cobbets LLP
And obviously, adapt the paragraph numbers to fit your own CPR 18 request!
Philljo V Natworst**won post OFT**
Reply With Quote
Re: Philljo V Natworst
