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.
Hello everyone, thought I would start a thread on the case of my fiance v Natwest. By the way, what a fantastic websites this and Moneysavingexpert are. I suddenly feel as though I am starting to get some control back over our lives!
Anyway - sent a letter to branch on 3 August asking for £2168.06 and giving 14 days to respond (as per template)
Yesterday recieved letter dated 10 August from branch saying "I am not yet able to answer your concern fully, as I need to look into matters further. I will contact you again within the next 10 working days either wilth a full response to your concern or an update."
The letter came from the Customer Lending Centre in Brighton (local branch is Eastbourne).
So - what is my next course of action? Im thinking send a letter before action to the Customer Relations Manager, Freepost NAT12685, Borehamwood WD6 1BR and copy in the Customer Lending Centre - any comments?
The only thing that concerns me is that my Fiance also has a loan with Natwest - whilst we have a parachute current account should Natwest decide to shut account down, we can not afford to repay the loan yet. Anybosy been in this situation?
Once again, thank you to all contributors to the website - wish Id found it a long time ago!
Dont worry about the loan they cant touch it, its a separate agreement! yes send your lba in, they are using stalling tactics hoping you will drop it they wont come back with anything positive, give them until the 19th though before you send lba, so you can prove that you have given them a reasonable amount of time to comply ok? good luck!
I QUESTION THEREFORE I AM!!
Unfortunately i'm not an expert in any given field legally and my advice and that of the Consumer Action Group and the Bank Action Group is given without prejudice and without liability so please if in any doubt whatsoever seek help from an insured qualified professional. Contents of my posts are purely my own personal opinions and not condoned or endorsed in any way, shape or form by CAG. Thank you!
Unfortunately i'm not an expert in any given field legally and my advice and that of the Consumer Action Group and the Bank Action Group is given without prejudice and without liability so please if in any doubt whatsoever seek help from an insured qualified professional. Contents of my posts are purely my own personal opinions and not condoned or endorsed in any way, shape or form by CAG. Thank you!
cillitbanger- i have continually read about this idea that 14 days is a delaying tactic. It really isn't, it is to allow NW to get the information on that one individual acount. On NW computer systems the max you can view account transactions including charges is 1 year. That's information that you can view immediately on screen. The 14 days in my opinion is to get the information and then send out a response.
Having said that the next step is lba on this thread.
nwsm How come they never come back with a positive response then?
I QUESTION THEREFORE I AM!!
Unfortunately i'm not an expert in any given field legally and my advice and that of the Consumer Action Group and the Bank Action Group is given without prejudice and without liability so please if in any doubt whatsoever seek help from an insured qualified professional. Contents of my posts are purely my own personal opinions and not condoned or endorsed in any way, shape or form by CAG. Thank you!
To give a positve response is to admit that they are wrong and we all know that it wouldn't happen. I think that getting statements is to make sure that if someone says they are owed x amount that this is the right amount even though they will decline a refund or offer a partial refund. Hope that answers your question and apologies for a slight hijack on the thread
Just a quick update..
Letter from Natwest today, from customer lending centre in brighton (not signed).
Basically a bugger off letter...BUT..we are claiming BANK charges...and the letter refers to that fact that they do not accept the OFT finind in relation to CREDIT CARD charges...seems they have sent a standard letter out, without checking in reflects the facts.
Hi Weebag - I'll keep an eye on your case as I have a personal loan with Natwest, too. It's an interesting situation, because a standard condition on their loans is that you maintain a current a/c with the bank until the loan has been repaid - which could be taken to mean that they can't close your a/c in a fit of pique.
Recieved a defence from Cobbetts yesterday, and also a request for further information (CPR18).
Am figuring that I dont need to do anything ref their defence, but will respond to CPR18 request saying that is likely to end up in small claims, and so do not need to respond. Will also send copy of charges.
Do i need to update the interest on the charges when I send another copy?
Re: Novis V Natwest - Claiming £2168.06 - MOD HELP REQUIRED??
Hello all - some help would really be appreictaed now!
Just got a letter from Cobbetts. Thought it may be an offer, but no
It says "we note your comments regarding our Request For Further Information. It is our clients contention that your POC did not properly particulurise your claim. For example. our client cannot properly defend a claim where you have not given the details of each charge you claim is disproportionate and unreasonable.
The Court is bound by an overriding objective to deal with cases justly and ensure that parties are on an equal footing. It was clearly the case that our client could not respond to your claim where you did not provide sufficient particulars."
By way of info, my claim was by MCOL and POC as follows :
Particulars of Claim
Claimant has account ( xxxxxxx/ xxxxxx)
with Defendant from approximately 1999
conducted on their standard terms and
conditions. Claimant is claiming the return
of £1769.80 taken by Defendant in charges
over 6 years. The Defendant's charges are a
disproportionate penalty and therefore
unenforceable as they are contrary to common
law. They are also invalid under the Unfair
Contracts Terms Act 1977 s.4 and under the
Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts
Regulations 1999.Para.8 and sch.2.1.e.
In the event that the charges are not a
penalty they are unreasonable within the
meaning of the Supply of Goods and Services
Act 1982 s.15. Defendant has declined
justification of charges despite repeated
requests. Claimant claims interest under
Sec. 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a
rate of 8% a year from 23/11/2000 to
06/09/06 of £411.50 and also interest at
same rate up to the date of judgment or
earlier payment at a daily rate of £1769.80
x 0.00022
Can someone offer any advice?? I submitted the spreadsheet of charges once to Nat West, twice to Cobbets and CC the court.
Had a cheque come through the post today for £2,400.77
Had usual clauses in, so have sent letter rejecting that....but kept hold of the cheque (just not cashed it)
Novis V Natwest - Claiming £2168.06 ***WON***
v Natwest
Reply With Quote
Re: Novis V Natwest - Claiming £2168.06
