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.
Innocent vs Natwest...need a double check****WON ****
Hi there all, isnt this a great site....
Been dealing with Lloyds, Capital One, Natwest and Barclaycard and more to come...
I have already sent all necessary letters and schedules (with all the DPA correct info) with no avail...
But this is my first moneyclaim online situation, and I would appreciate some encouragement and someone to check i have done everything correctly;
Under REFERENCE DETAILS i just put "Natwest Penalty Charges" is this ok?
Secondly i have a multitude of accounts so this was the claim; is it ok?
1.The Claimant has accounts 80xxxxxx-55xxxx,
4263xxxxxxxxxxxx and 5454xxxxxxxxxxxx with
the Defendant, opened March2003,Feb04,Aug03;
2.Since 08/10/03,25/01/04 and 22/08/03 the
Defendant debited charges+interest inrespect
of purported breaches of contract; 3.
Defendant is aware of all details as list of
charges has already been supplied.Another
copy will be sent; 4.Claimant contendsa)
The charges exceed the Defendant's losses
caused by breaches;(b)The term permitting
the Defendant to levy such charges is
unenforceable under the Unfair Terms in
Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999,Unfair
Contract Terms Act 1977 and at Common Law;
5.Claimant claimsa)return of the amounts
debited of £2884.13;(b)Interest per S.69
County Courts Act 1984 of 8%-£403.46 contin
at 8% until judgement or settlement at a
daily rate of £0.63; 6.Alternatively,if the
charges are a fee for a service,then they
must be reasonable under S.15 of the Supply
of Goods and Services Act 1982; 7.Costs
allowed by the Court.
Isnt the 24 line rule fun?
Thirdly, because I am claiming online, where should I send further (updated and final) schedules to???
Lastly, is anyone at roughly the same stage with me, that perhaps we can communicate regularly and encourage each other?
Try to browse the winning thread and use a more descriptive POC as yours seems to be lacking in details about the statutes you are inserting in your PoC. Cobbetts are actually trying to struck out cases on the basis that PoCs aren't precise enough...
You may send copies of updated docs to the Northampton county court (Court dealing with MCOL), so they'll append them to your claim.
And I cannot answer your first question... sorry!
Good luck... and follow your timeline...
---Aut viam inveniam aut faciam---
***All advice given should be taken as guidance... Professional advice should always be taken before any course of action is pursued***
- I do not reply directly to any PMs, but you are more than welcome to enclose a link, in a PM, to your post. Thank you -
Make a contribution to this site... Help the CAG keeping on helping you for FREE.
Will start compiling my folder for the court case this coming week and forward further, updated schedules to Natwest registered office, and MCOL
Once I have had some documentation from (presumably) Cobbets I will forward schedules to them too...
Wish me luck........
**ps quick question: I have got a Natwest business account too (or used too) but business now ceased trading..... sooooo how can "the business" (now ceased) take Natwest to court and not "the individual"???
In fulfilment of my particulars of claim and for reference I enclose a copy of the schedule of charges I am disputing showing all dates, penalty charges, interest on penalties and including interest per S.69 County Courts Act 1984. I have previously sent copies of this schedule direct to Natwest.
In addition I enclose an “expanded” version of the ‘Particulars of Claim’ already submitted. I am only enclosing this because of the restrictions of space when filing my claim online.
I would appreciate if all of these details could be attached to my claim.
Many thanks,
Yours faithfully,
I have attached a schedule showing all on the date of the claim
and the explaned POC (basically just clarifying accounts and sort codes, but it was clear enough on original)
Thank you for your letter dated the 9th November, 2006.
I respectfully decline your offer of settlement of £1700.00 and request, once again, that your client, National Westminster Bank plc, return to me all charges imposed on my accounts, interest and court fees, which together with the daily rate of £0.63 now total £3429.01 as of 15th November 2006.
I will accept the sum offered only as part settlement and on the clear understanding that I will pursue recovery of the remainder, with the current county court case. I will be willing to withdraw my claim upon receipt of unconditional full settlement of my claim.
Although you have deemed that this offer is reasonable, I will bring to the courts attention that this is not the case as at no point has the defendant justified their charges to the accounts. Consequently without such justification, the charges are unlawful and only a full refund is acceptable.
I am also not prepared to agree to any confidentially clauses you try to impose.
Did they try for a CA on the original offer. If they didn't then don't tempt them into one.At the end of the day, you can always refuse to be bound by conditions but if they aren't there in the first place it's less of an issue.
Paul
Advice given is either my experience or my opinion and is given without liability. If in doubt, consult a qualified professional. If you PM me for advice I will only reply in your own thread
ca? confidentiality agreement (forgive spelling long night)?
they sent me a "bog standard" offer letter stating i will loose it court (blah blah) accept this as gesture of good will (blah blah), letter "without prejudice" but want they want to be able to disclose in court....
[....without prejudice but they want the right to show offer in court....absolute cheek.... one rule for one and one rule for another i think not.... this is why i included: i reserve the right to ask them to disclose the actual costs incurred to the court of the penalty charges]
.....and i cannot talk to 3rd parties [again i think not]
I think my letter is "apt"
I thank u again for ur response......so many cases here, its nice to get one ;-)
Im encouraged because this is there first and offer to me so far, and only after 3 weeks of court action and no fdefence or aq yet
Tell ya what? I hope they read here, cause Im ready; folders ready everything for court action....
Hi innocent thanx for replying to my thread, would like to ask i have just done my mcol as you know on mon 13th nov but havent sent a schedule of charges to the court yet as i dont know wot court i am under, when will i find this out so i can send them the schedule?
As soon as they file their defence (if it gets that far), you will receive a notice of transfer, you can then send a copy of your schedule to the court then.
If you want to send one to MCOL (Northampton Court) first it wouldn't hurt, I did anyhow just to be on the safe side.
Hi
Just thought i'd let you know I am in same position as you re Natwest Business Account. Cobbetts sent letter this wekk offering £650 goodwill...... I replied yesterday declining their offer. They too said they'd use the 'without predj. ' letter in court. I in turn explained that without knowing how much it costs them to return DD/SO etc. I didn't know if £650 was a fair offer!!
Janet
Received copy of defence from cobbetts and court system
Had notice of "notice of transfer of proceedings" to Portsmouth county court... and
Allocation questionaire (small claims track) due back on the 5th November (which I will leave to the end of this month for now, based on other cases)
This was the defence; a little short??????
(still the same mistake in their defence)
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. On allocation the Defendant invites the Court to direct that there be a case management conference in order for the Court to consider the making of appropriate orders to give the Claimant the opportunity to properly particularise his claim.
3. No admissions are made as to what charges have been debited to the Claimant's bank account.
4. In relation to the allegation that the contractual provisions pursuant to which the charges have been applied are unenforceable by virtue of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 ("UCTA 1977") and/or the Unfair Contract Terms in Consumer Regulations 1999 ("the Regulations") and/or the common law, the Claimant is required to identify:
4.1 (a) the section(s) of The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 ("UCTA 1977");
(b) the regulations of The Unfair Contract Terms in Consumer Regulations 1999 ("the Regulations");
and (c) the principles of common law relied upon by the Claimant in alleging that the contractual provision(s) referred to are unenforceable; and
4.2 the contractual provision(s) that the Claimant allege are invalid by reference to UCTA 1977 and/or the Regulations. Until such time as these sections/regulations/provisions are identified the Defendant cannot (save as appears below) plead to the allegation referred to in paragraph 4 above. The Defendant therefore reserves its right to plead further to the allegation once (and if) the Claimant identifies the relevant contractual information.
5. Save as hereinbefore appears the Defendant joins issue with the Claimant on his claim(s) and denies it is liable to the Claimant as alleged or at all.
Statement of Truth
The Defendant believes that the facts stated in this Defence are true. I am duly authorised by the Defendant to sign this statement. Lynsey Clare Burgoyne....Cobbetts LLB
What no request for a CPR18??? (Oh I was so looking forward to this hehehe)
Whats a case management conference???
How, or do I respond to their defence???
Having read through many, many, many other threads and got back ache this morning (perhaps I can put in a personal injury claim too) it has been suggested that I reply to acknowledge the defence to the court and "cc" it to Cobbetts....
How about this???
I am writing to inform you that I have received a full defence from the defendant Natwest Bank Plc today 16th November 2006.
I feel I have answered all the questions that the Defendants representatives appear to be asking and have sent the Defendant the full details of my claim on at least 2 occasions already.
I note that Cobbetts defence and requests seem to be based on a standard template being sent out to all claimants regardless of the way the Claimants claim is constructed and its only purpose appears to be to frustrate and intimidate.
Should the courts require any further information please do not hesitate to contact me using the contact details above.
I am writing to inform you that I have received a full defence from the defendant Natwest Bank Plc today 16th November 2006.
I feel I have answered all the questions that the Defendants representatives appear to be asking and have sent the Defendant the full details of my claim on at least 2 occasions already.
I note that Cobbetts defence and requests seem to be based on a standard template being sent out to all claimants regardless of the way the Claimants claim is constructed and its only purpose appears to be to frustrate and intimidate.
Should the courts require any further information please do not hesitate to contact me using the contact details above.
it seems the ball is started rolling again for you innocent, 'case management conference' sounds like a party to me is it bring a bottle, or in there case fetch a chequebook????
Innocent vs Natwest...need a double check****WON ****
, Capital One, Natwest
a)
CLICK MY SCALES IF I HAVE BEEN USEFUL 
Reply With Quote
Re: Innocent vs Natwest...need a double check
Re: Innocent vs Natwest...AN UPDATE
Re: Innocent vs Natwest...need a double check
Originally Posted by innocent
Re: Innocent vs Natwest...need a double check
