Thread: darthbane2k V Natwest **WON**

Hmmmm really you do need to start this again as you do need to send in a pre lim letter and a lba letter. This is because if the banks get clever they could argue that you haven't given them enough time to pay up. However if you really did want to list this in on your LBA i would clearly put in that you are adding £70 for recent or recently found charges on (AC NUMBER) for £70 and you are going to be claiming this back also and i would include a seperate spreadsheet on this so they can clearly see what you are doin. Good Luck.

Hi Darthbane2k.

When you go into Moneyclaim on the particulars entry,put down both account numbers and ampounts.You have already followed precedure with Prelims and lba's so you can as long as the total is below £5000 claim them both as they are the same bank.Be careful though with your wording.

Claimant had 2 accounts (acc nos here)with the Defendant opened on (dates)
conducted on their standard terms and conditions.Claimant is claiming the return
of Amounts taken by Defendant in the form of an (state fees).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.The claimant claims interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year from (dates to and from) of £...,and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or settlement of £...a day.

This only just fits in the box.You may have to ajust it slightly to fit your needs.

Hope this helps

Ukaviator

Hi Darth

Just read your post agian.You may have to start the process again for the £70
Why not try a phone call to get them knocked off the account.Now they know you are serious they may remove the charges.

Ukaviator..

I see people have been responding to your question. Please stick with one thread.

All you can really do is wait for the defence to come through from Cobbetts. The court will likely send you a copy of Cobbetts defence as well, as well as sending you an allocation questionnaire through.

I say all you can really do is wait, but really you'd be best advised to spend this time reading through the forums on cases that are just ahead of yours, so you know what to expect next.

Edit: Also, do not worry! Most cases get to at least this stage before Cobbetts will think of giving in.

1. Yes
2. Yes, it will be added to settlement
3. Yes, send them a copy of your aq and schedule of charges
4. How long is a bit of string?! In some cases people have received settlement offers quickly after returning their AQ others have to wait alot longer. Once you return the AQ sit back and wait!

You can either post or return in person. If you've got money in that account, then fine (wouldn't want the cheque to bouce and get another charge!).

It's not scarey at all if you're prepared. You're doing fine.

Originally Posted by darthbane2k

Okay - So I get the questionnaire, complete it and take it to a county court (With schedule of charges) with £100 fee.

My question is

1) is the court likely to be my local one?
2)is the £100 recoverable - how do I ensure I get it back
3) do I have to correspond in anyway with corbitts? eg send them copies etc
4)How long is all this likely to take

1) I would think so yes, in my case it was my local court, and most peoples seem to be.

2) Yes, the £100 is recoverable. If (or when!) Natwest make you an offer, you should remind them the amount you are claiming now includes additional costs as incurred by bringing this court action. You should also remember (if you are claiming the 8% interest) to add on the interest accrued since you began your MCOL.

3)Yes, when you send your AQ back to the court, also send a copy to Cobbetts. There are various sampel letters in peoples threads on how to phrase this. Chances are, Cobbetts will will also you send you a CPR 18 request for more information. A response to this can also be found in many threads - search for CPR 18

4) I don't know. It seems it can vary quite a bit here, but I received my AQ a few days after Cobbetts filed their defence. I then had 3 weeks to get it back (i was due back last Saturday) and I'm currently waiting to hear from the court. It will depend on how busy your local county court is as to how long you have to wait for a hearing date.

Got home and read my letter from cobbetts. Its a copy of their defence and a CPR part 18 request.
Must admit, it has shaken me a bit. I'll BOLD things that I am unsure of and that have unsettled me.
Please advise how best to respond.


MY PARTICULARS OF CLAIM:
Claimant has an account #xxxxxx with the defendant since before August 2002 until the present date.Between xx/xx/xxxx and xx/xx/xxxx. The defendant made various deductions from the account in respect of unauthorised overdraft fees and 'returned payment' fees. If the defendant is able to establish that the contract between claimant and the defendant did contain terms puporting to entitle the defendant to levy these charges, the claimant will contend that they are unenforcable at common law, being penalty clauses rather than being liquidated damages clauses.
Claimant claims from the defendant a sum equivalent to the total amount unlawfully debited to the claimant's account during the above mentioned period, being £xxxx.
The claimant further flaims interest pursuant to s69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8%pa, being the sum of £xxx.xx and interest at the same rate up to the date of judgement or earlier payment at a daily rate of 0.022%. Plus the court fee.

COBBETTS' DEFENCE:
1. This Defence is filed and served without prejudice to the Defendant’s case that the Particulars of Claim do not disclose reasonable grounds for bringing a claim against the Claimant to recover the bank charges (and interest thereon) referred to in the Particulars of Claim or any other sum(s). In the event that the Claimant does not properly particularise his claim then the Defendant will apply to strike out the claim and/or for summary judgement in respect of the same.

2. The Claimant’s claim is based in contract. Despite this and contrary to CPR Part 16 PD paragraphs 7.3-7.5, the Particulars of Claim do not plead full and necessary particulars concerning the contract between the Claimant and the Defendant. In the circumstances (pending the proper particularisation of the claim) no admissions are made as to whether there is (or has been) a contract between the Claimant and the Defendant. The remainder of this Defence is pleaded without prejudice to this nonadmission.

3. No admissions are made as to what charges have been debited to the Claimant’s bank account.

4. The Claimant is put to strict proof of each and every charge the subject of the claim and must identify in respect of each charge (a) the date the same was debited, (b) the amount of the same and (c) the description applied to the charge.

5. In relation to the allegation that the bank charges amount to an unenforceable penalty the Defendant pleads as follows:
5.1 In order for the Claimant to sustain a claim that the charges debited by the Defendant are in the nature of a penalty he will need to plead and prove (a) the clause(s) pursuant to which the charges were applied; (b) that the charges were applied due to a breach of contract by the Claimant; and (c) identifying in each case the particular breach of contract (by reference to appropriate term(s) of the contract) that the charge related to. As presently pleaded the claim does not plead these matters and therefore does not disclose reasonable grounds for bringing a claim that all or any of the charges referred to in the Particulars of Claim have been applied pursuant to an unenforceable penalty clause.
5.2 Until such time as the Claimant pleads the matters referred to in paragraph
5.1 above the Defendant is unable to plead to the claim brought against it and therefore (pending the provision of full and proper particulars of the claim) at this stage denies that any charges have been applied to the Claimant’s bank account pursuant to unenforceable penalty clauses.

6. To assist the Claimant with the proper particularisation of his claim(s), the Defendant serves with this Defence a request made pursuant to CPR Part 18. If the Claimant fails to provide the particulars requested in the time stipulated and/or the defects with the claim(s) (referred to in paragraph I above) remain then the Defendant will apply to the Court for (among other things) an order striking out the claim.

7. Pending the proper particularisation of the claim(s) the Defendant is unable to plead to the Claimant’s claim(s) beyond at this stage denying that the Defendant is liable to the Claimant as alleged in the Claim or at all. The Defendant reserves its right to amend this Defence to plead further to the Claimant’s claim(s) once or if the Claimant properly particularises the same.

8. Save as hereinbefore appears the Defendant joins issue with the Claimant on his claim(s) and denies that it is liable to the Claimant as alleged or at all.

REQUEST FOR MORE INFO:
1. This request is served pursuant to CPR Part 18.

2. The reason(s) why this request has been served are set out in the Defence which has been served by the Defendant.

3. You are asked to provide a response to this request in accordance with CPR Part 18 by 17 October 2006.

4. If you are unable to provide a response by this date then you should immediately contact the Defendant’s solicitors and tell them when you will be able to provide a response.

5. In the event that you do not provide an adequate response to this request by this date (or such other date as may be agreed with the Defendant’s solicitors) then the Defendant can apply to the Court for an order requiring you to provide the information requested or (in view of the deficiencies in the way that the claim is pleaded) an order striking out the claim(s).

The Request
1. In your claim you state: “Claimant claims from the Defendant a sum equivalent to the total amount unlawfully debited to the Claimant’s account, being £1955.05.”

2. Please provide the following particulars in support of your claim:
2.1 In relation to each charge alleged to have been overcharged please identify (a) the date when the charge was charged; (b) the amount of the same; and (c) the reason(s) given for the charging of the same.
2.2 In relation to each charge and fee identified in response to 2.2 above, please clarify the following: (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? (c) 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 contends that 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 Claimant’s case.

3. In your claim you state that the Defendant’s charges “are unenforceable at common law, being penalty clauses rather than being liquidated damages clauses.”

4. Please provide the following particulars in support of your claim:
4.1 Please specify the clause(s) pursuant to which the charges were applied;
4.2 Please specify whether the charges applied were due to a breach of contract by the Claimant;
4.3 Please identify in each case the particular breach of contract (by reference to appropriate term(s) of the contract) that the charge related to.


Now I was thinking of replying along the grounds of below - would this be acceptable and cover everything cobbetts have addressed? I dont want to be caught out later down the line.


I Acknowledge the receipt of the defence posted on behalf of National Westminster Bank plc.

I am not prepared at this stage to answer the CPR Part 18 request . I anticipate that the claim will be allocated to the small claims track and would not then expect to have to deal with a Part 18 request since these are specifically excluded under Part 27 unless the court specifically orders me to do so of its own initiative

Furthermore I consider that the CPR part 18 request is intimidatory and I intend to bring the intimidation to the notice of the court.

However, for clarity, I confirm the charges I am claiming were applied to the following accounts:

Account numbers:
Sort Code:

Please also find enclosed a breakdown of all charges I am claiming. This schedule of charges was provided to National Westminster Bank in earlier correspondence, and is based on the information acquired from the Bank’s own records.


Yours sincerely

hey darth - dont panic
they are merely trying scare tactics and its a pretty standard letter. i replied with a letter and YET another schedule of charges. You actually dont have to even do this but no harm in covering yourself - ill put the letter on here for u - back in a tic x