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.
For those who remember the way County Courts operated before 1999, a CPR Part 18 Request is a "request for further and better particulars of the ..." whatever pleading was filed and served.
18.1(1) The may may at any time order a party to
(a) clarify any matter which is in dispute in the proceedings; or
(b) give additional informatoin in relatino to any such matter,
whether or not the matter is contained or referred to in a statement of case.
18.1(2) Paragraph (1) is subject to any rule of law to the contrary.
18.1(3) Where the Court makes an order under paragraph (1), the party against whom it is made must
(a) file his reponse; and
(b) serve it on the parties
within the time specified by the Court.
The word "order" is important. Only a Court can "order" you to provide clarification or further information.
People seem to be under some sort of illusion that they do not have to respond to Part 18 Requests when the Defendant has served them at the same time as the Defence.
Until and unless allocation questionnaires have been filed at the Court and the District Judge has made an order allocating the claim to a track, be it the small claims track, the fast track or the multi track - all such claims are "trackless" and both parties are at risk as to costs (especially if the Defendant makes an Application to strike out the claim as have no reasonable prospects of success).
If the Defendant is successful in any application to strike claims out of Court for whatever reason, and the claim has not been allocated to a track, the Claimant is liable to pay the Defendant's costs.
Cobbetts Solicitors are based in Manchester City Centre. As such there are four grades of fee earner. On summary assessment of costs a Court will generally not allow costs to be claimed above these hourly rates:
Grade 1: solicitors with more than 8 years post-qualification experience with at least 8 years litigation experience
Grade 2: solicitors and legal executives (Fellows of the Institute of Legal Executives) with more than 4 years post-qualification experience with at least 4 years litigation experience
Grade 3: Other solicitors, legal executives and fee earners of equivalent experience
Grade 4: Trainee solicitors, para legals and other fee earners
In Manchester, since January 2005, the rates allowed for these grades are:
Grade 1: £184 per hour
Grade 2: £163 per hour
Grade 3: £137 per hour
Grade 4: £100 per hour
Be under no illusion here. In particular, with Cobbetts and RBS claims - if you do not reply to the Defendant's Part 18 Request, Cobbetts could more than likely advise their client that the best course of action to take would be to make an application to the Court to strike out your claim on the basis that you have failed to comply with a request - at the very least, the Court would order you to provide this information and pay the Defendant's costs of and occasioned by the application - at the very worst, the Court would strike your claim out and order you to pay the entirety of the Defendant's costs of the action from start to finish (only the solicitor's costs) at the rates quoted above. It is likely that Miss Burgoyne of Cobbetts would be able to charge £137 per hour for her work. It is likely that Richard Webb would be able to charge £184 per hour for his work. It is also likely that Cobbetts have some private client arrangement with RBS to charge more or less than these rates.
I work for a firm of commercial solicitors in Manchester City Centre. I am a para legal. I am not a solicitor. I am not a legal executive. I have nearly 15 years of experience in litigation matters. I am only passing on some of my experience and I apologise if anything I have said is incorrect - if you wish to obtain legal advice, you should do so independently and not rely on what you read on these forums.
On a personal note I thank you for your advice, however I would say that although a lot of people do not agree that a CPR 18 should necessarily be complied with, most are sending particulars regardless, just to be on the safe side. Also, surely cobbetts who are acting on behalf of RBS would have obtained 'particulars' from their clients in order to be fully 'armed' to take on each case?
On another personal note... think of those of us who only earn £5.00 an hour as opposed to £100 - £184 an hour and cannot afford to get proper legal advice. You yourself are sailing close to the wind I notice from your other thread! All we have is the support of others on this forum. All we can do is go by other people's experiences and learn from them. Its a leap of faith for most, a lot of whom (myself included) are living on the edge, just trying to do the right thing and get their lives on track. These people earn more in a few hours than many do in a week or even a month. We only have each other and we are doing the best we can. You do have an advantage of having knowledge of the system, and I thank you for sharing this.
Please don't take this as a personal attack, it is certainly not meant as such. it just gets my goat when big institutions, aided by money grabbing firms like Cobbetts, are playing so hard to get when refunding our money. Most people's claims are a tiny drop in the ocean compared to the earnings and profits of RBS and Cobbetts , but this country seems intent on empowering the rich and disempowering the poor. You have caught me on a very bad day I'm afraid.
~ I'm a lover, not a fighter... well, most of the time ~
I wish I did earn £100+ per hour - those rates are what solicitors charge their clients.
It does seem to me from reading a lot of these threads that Cobbetts are sending out very similarly worded Defences to our claims - in my particular case, however, I have not received anything that says they are making a request for further information pursuant to CPR part 18.
My intention in my post above was not to shock people - but to warn of the potential risks.
My intention in my post above was not to shock people - but to warn of the potential risks.
I appreciate that, really i do. Like I said, I was having a rant about 'Them' not you at all, and I sincerely wish you all the best with your claim. I'm aware of the extortionate rates charged by solicitors, and even though they may not earn £100 an hour, I'm pretty sure its a lot more than £5 an hour!
I'm having a bad day is all, and it riles me when the rich are getting richer at the expense of the poor getting poorer. Personally, all I want is to be stable and not have to lose sleep with worry about money all the time. I want a good life for my daughter and my family without having to fight all the way to get it. Its the big firms like RBS, and their solicitors, that are standing in my way.
~ I'm a lover, not a fighter... well, most of the time ~
thanks for that I have subscribed to the thread in case this becomes an issue later with one of my claims. I have been following the CPR rules from the legal practice guide, I'm doing my ILEX next year just the legal practice sections as I'm exempt from the law papers. How is para legal work different from legal executive work?
Barclaycard Student credit card £400 partial refund received, S.A.R - Open & Direct Finance- extortionate, cca to Rockwell debt collection they ran away, now with Bryan Carter, no cca 17/03/08 sent back to Open Pugsley v Littlwoods, have not received the signed credit agreement only quoting reg of 1983
Pugsley v Fashion World JD williams, 17/03 2008 Debt Managers returning file to JD williams as they could not supply the credit agreement Capital one MCOL Settled in full Smile lba settled in full advice is given informally and without liability and without prejudice.
Abbey have paralegals dealing with their claims now as an aside.
I have seen a judge send an order to comply with a part 18, prior to the allocation questionnaires being submitted, and this was where the claimant had not contacted the defendant in response to the part 18 request.
So I would say reply to them quickly, point out that all the info they ask for is in the particulars of claim, and enclose your spreadsheets for their reference.
I don' think I will end up like that I was a PA secretary when I was younger and will always appreciate the office staff. lol
I'm doing the CLC conveyancing course as well, should get this finished next year to, then I will be a trainee conveyacer and be given all the dogsbody work myself!
Barclaycard Student credit card £400 partial refund received, S.A.R - Open & Direct Finance- extortionate, cca to Rockwell debt collection they ran away, now with Bryan Carter, no cca 17/03/08 sent back to Open Pugsley v Littlwoods, have not received the signed credit agreement only quoting reg of 1983
Pugsley v Fashion World JD williams, 17/03 2008 Debt Managers returning file to JD williams as they could not supply the credit agreement Capital one MCOL Settled in full Smile lba settled in full advice is given informally and without liability and without prejudice.
Aren't we missing the fact that it's up to the judge wether or not the cpr pt 18 request is warranted before or after aq stage? As it is up to the Judge what track the case should be on. Cobbetts relentlessly threaten people with this but at the end of the day, they cannot provide correspondance from the Court that the Judge has allowed them to do so. If it were the case that Cobbetts could ask the Court to strike out cases on this basis, then why aren't they doing that with all of us and much earlier?
I have supplied Cobblers with information at every stage of communication and have also sent copies to the Court. When the judge decides that I need to comply with their full cpr part 18 request then I will do so (and I'm ready!) but until then, why let Cobbetts intimidate us with it? It's up to the Judge to decide wether both cases have an 'equal footing' not Cobbetts.
I'm having a bad day is all, and it riles me when the rich are getting richer at the expense of the poor getting poorer. Personally, all I want is to be stable and not have to lose sleep with worry about money all the time. I want a good life for my daughter and my family without having to fight all the way to get it. Its the big firms like RBS, and their solicitors, that are standing in my way.
Aren't we missing the fact that it's up to the judge wether or not the cpr pt 18 request is warranted before or after aq stage? As it is up to the Judge what track the case should be on. Cobbetts relentlessly threaten people with this but at the end of the day, they cannot provide correspondance from the Court that the Judge has allowed them to do so. If it were the case that Cobbetts could ask the Court to strike out cases on this basis, then why aren't they doing that with all of us and much earlier?
I have supplied Cobblers with information at every stage of communication and have also sent copies to the Court. When the judge decides that I need to comply with their full cpr part 18 request then I will do so (and I'm ready!) but until then, why let Cobbetts intimidate us with it? It's up to the Judge to decide wether both cases have an 'equal footing' not Cobbetts.
Wxx
there that's better! lol
Agree 100% Willow
Just saying its best to put in some kind of reply to the part18 not ignore it, because then they are getting judges to order a reply to the part 18 before Allocation.
Oh yes, for sure....sorry if it sounded otherwise! It's always best to make the effort and respond as best you can then the Judge will view your case more favourably......but as for paniking over such tactics, then don't....deep breath and think w****rs you don't scare me!!!
You should make at least some response to a part 18 Request whether or not you think the Request is warranted or not. If you make no response at all, you are leaving yourself open to an application forcing you to reply to the Request.
It is at a Judge's discretion what sanction to impose - generally, the Court favours a litigant-in-person and every opportunity to assist is given by the Court (except staff at Court who cannot give legal advice) - but if there is evidence before a Court that a Claimant has not responded at all to a Defendant's Part 18 Request, and the Defendant has made an application for costs, the Court has in its power to award costs be paid by the Claimant to the Defendant for the costs incurred by the Defendant to make its Application.
Bear in mind that if you make no response to a Part 18 Request by the Defendant, the Defendant does not have to make you aware that they have made an application - they can apply ex-parte and have the application decided by a Judge without a hearing.
The practice direction says "If the second party objects to complying with the Request or part of it or is unable to do so at all or within the time stated in the Request he must inform the first party promptly and in any event within that time." I would advise people to do that to mitigate any potential future loss. Be seen to have responded in some way rather than not at all.
It's up to the Judge to decide wether both cases have an 'equal footing' not Cobbetts.
The Civil Procedure Rules govern all these claims we have started. It is up to all parties to further the overriding objective - the "equal footing" bit:
"The Rules are a new procedural code with the overriding objective of enabling the court to deal with cases justly. Dealing with a case justly includes, so far as is practicable ensuring that the parties are on an equal footing. The parties are required to help the court to further the overriding objective." (Part 1 Civil Procedure Rules)
I am in the same boat as everyone else who has started claims against the banking institution. I am not intending to have a dig at anybody. I just wanted to lend a bit of my experience to others. I will say that in nearly 15 years of experience that I have never once seen a letter being sent by any firm I have worked for that a Part 18 Request (or its predecessor) will not be replied to because it is not appropriate to do so given the track allocated to the claim.
If I send a request for information under part 18 as a defendant to the claimant, and I get no response (and this is prior to allocation questionnaire being received) can I make an application to the court to order they comply with the request ?
Would I make an application of this type on the N244 form and send a copy of the part 18 request to the court for consideration ?
Also the original part 18 request woul this go to the claimants solicitors or directly to the claimants ?
If I send a request for information under part 18 as a defendant to the claimant, and I get no response (and this is prior to allocation questionnaire being received) can I make an application to the court to order they comply with the request ?
Would I make an application of this type on the N244 form and send a copy of the part 18 request to the court for consideration ?
Also the original part 18 request woul this go to the claimants solicitors or directly to the claimants ?
First question: Yes, you can make an Application to the Court to order they comply with your Request. If they have not complied before the time that Allocation Questionnaires have been filed, you should make your Application at the same time the aq is filed.
Second question: Yes, make your Application on form N244. Attach a copy of your original Part 18 Request to the Application. If you had no response at all to your original Part 18 Request, send your Application in duplicate to the Court with the fee of £35, marking on it that you do not wish the Court to consider your Application at a hearing. If you have had some response to your Part 18 Request, but your Request has not been fully complied with, then send your Application to the Court in triplicate with the fee of £65 and the Court will then set a date for the hearing of your Application.
Third question: Your Part 18 Request should be sent to the Claimant's Solicitors if the Claimant is represented, otherwise directly to the Claimant.
And at no stage, the claimant is informed of any of this? There is no instruction from the Court, no copies of the application (N244) forwarded to the claimant?
CPR Part 18 Requests/Costs/etc
Rules:
Reply With Quote
I'm a lover, not a fighter... well, most of the time 
~
Originally Posted by pugsley
I'm TOTALLY with you there!
