Urgent Help

[smokeandmirrors]

Hi all,

 

I wonder if someone in the know might be able to help?

 

I posted some time ago - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/natwest-bank/12224-its-national-waste-mister.html

 

And since then have put two claims (one for each account) in against Nawest.

 

I made two small mistakes in my claim:

 

a) One account I have claimed for longer than 6 years and

b) On both accounts, my statement of charges differs from the claim amount I placed (this was due an error in the spreadsheet that I spotted after I made the claim and was printing of the spreadsheet to send to the court and to Natwest - I corrected the spreadsheet and sent the statement off with a differing figure).

 

I attach a scanned version of what I have had back from Natwest:

 

a) a request for information and

b) their defence.

 

Would anyone be kind enough to advise as to whether:

 

a) I should continue to claim for over 6 years (I've been reading some theads which suggest I could)?

b) My claim will be put at risk if the amounts on the statements and the claim differ?

c) I should send the amended statements in response and write to explain the differences

 

Could I also ask for some advice on how to respond to the questions in the Request for further Information and also on how to respond to the defence?

 

I have until the end of the week to reply

 

Many thanks in advance

 

Steve

[steven4064]

A quick response, hopefully others will add more information. Yes, I think you should continue with the greater than 6 years (see http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/announcements/30/33/center-you-should-now-80.html)

 

I think you need to correct your claim. Sending the amended statements in response and writing to explain the differences may be the easiest way. You can formally change your claim by submitting a form (N134?) and paying £35 (not recoverable) but that is when you change your mind rather than correcting a msitake.

 

Anyone else like to comment?

 

Steven

[steven4064]

A quick response, hopefully others will add more information. Yes, I think you should continue with the greater than 6 years (see http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/announcements/30/33/center-you-should-now-80.html)

 

I think you need to correct your claim. Sending the amended statements in response and writing to explain the differences may be the easiest way. You can formally change your claim by submitting a form (N134?) and paying £35 (not recoverable) but that is when you change your mind rather than correcting a msitake.

 

Anyone else like to comment?

 

Their request for information is a CPR 18 request which doesn't apply to the small claims track (how much is your claim?). You only need to supply additional information if requested by the court. This is standard Cobbler's cobblers.

 

There are several threads with standard replies to this sort of request. Perhaps someone can point you in the right direction. Someone? Anyone?

 

Steven

[shadrach]

I found this that may help.

in the tread

Cobbetts Cpr part 18 request.

 

 

Dear Sir or Madam:

Claim No:

 

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 account:

Account Name:

Account number:

Sort Code:

 

Please also find enclosed a breakdown of all charges I am claiming.

Yours Faithfully

 

 

Hope that helps

Shadrach

[The cobbett slayer]

There are some big issues in the defence that would suggest that your original claim was significantly flawed but nothing that can't be corrected.

 

Can you post a copy of your original N1 that I can have a look at.

 

I would also suggest that if you are using scanned copies of original documents, that you obscure your real name before posting.

[smokeandmirrors]

Many thanks All

 

Thanks for the advice re the original docs Corbett Slayer... I repost with my name etc removed.

 

Thanks to all for their comments.

 

Here is the text form my claim:

 

Claim 1)

 

1. The Claimant has an account ??????? with

the Defendant 2. Since 02/02/2000 the

Defendant debited charges and interest in

respect of purported breaches of contract.

3. Defendant is aware of details as a list

of charges has been supplied. 4. Claimant

contends: (a) The charges exceed the

Defendant's losses caused by the 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 claims:

(a) return of the amounts debited of

£3952.91; (b) Interest per S.69 County

Courts Act 1984 of 8% - £53.42 continuing at

8% until judgment or settlement at a daily

rate of £0.86; 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.

 

 

 

Claim 2)

 

1. The Claimant has an account ???????? with

the Defendant 2. Since 02/01/2003 the

Defendant debited charges and interest in

respect of purported breaches of contract.

3. Defendant is aware of details as a list

of charges has been supplied. 4. Claimant

contends: (a) The charges exceed the

Defendant's losses caused by the 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 claims:

(a) return of the amounts debited of

£2272.44; (b) Interest per S.69 County

Courts Act 1984 of 8% - £31.60 continuing at

8% until judgment or settlement at a daily

rate of £0.49; 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.

 

 

I'll keep an eye on this post this evening... cheers S

Request.pdf

Defence.pdf

[The cobbett slayer]

Steve

 

I'll reply tomorrow if you don't mind. I'll give you the full procedure for what you need to do.

 

Just come off nights and been awake for 27 hours so I can't do it now:)

[smokeandmirrors]

I've also had a letter from the courts, transferring my case to my local court. It encloses the Defence and the Request for Further Information and Clarifcation.

 

The letter also states:

 

IT IS ORDERED THAT:-

 

1. The filing of an alocation questionnaite be despensed with in this case unless the District Judge at the court of trandfer orders otherwise.**

 

Note: Any party affected by this Order may under Rule 3.3 (5) apply to have it set aside, varied or stayed. Such aprty must apply under Rule 23.3 within 14 days of this service order.

 

** Please note that an allocation fee may be payable in this instance. Please contact the court of transfer for further details.

[smokeandmirrors]

Thanks Cobbett Slayer - you're a star!

 

That will give me Thursday to do what I need to do and get it in the post

 

Steve

[The cobbett slayer]

Thanks Cobbett Slayer - you're a star!/quote]

 

I didn't choose my name - I earned it:)

 

Sorry it doesn't leave you much time but don't stress too much about time scales - Cobbetts don't!

[shadrach]

Looking at you POC and your letter from the court i would guess that you made your claim though MCOL

There is a whole new thread on the no AQ tactic.. this is because the courts are being swamped by the nomber of claims and the fact that the banks are using the AQ as a delaying tactic

have a look here http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/welcome-our-forum/83859-allocation-questionnaire-dispensed.html?highlight=no+Allocation+Questionnaire

[The cobbett slayer]

shadrach - you are jumping way ahead here.

 

The original claim is flawed and needs to be corrected and until it is the rest of the information is irrelevant and misleading

[shadrach]

good to see your watching..

[shadrach]

sorry smokeandmirrors if I mislead you in any way with me comments. The cobbett slayer is right about your original claim. I am sure he can sort you out tomorrow... Keep reading around the site...

Good luck with your claim..

Shadrach

[The cobbett slayer]

Steve

 

The first thing you need to do is complete a new N1 claim form

http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/courtfinder/forms/n1_0102.pdf

and fill it in using the template here

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/681-4-particulars-claim-n1.html

making sure that you get the maths correct and the right names in the right boxes. You then need to make an application to the court to amend your particulars of claim using this form

http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/courtfinder/forms/n244_0400.pdf

 

In the left hand box tick 1 c) without a hearing, 5 District Judge and 6 Defendant.

 

In part A1 insert your name, the claimant

 

In part A2, delete the part in brackets as you are not attaching a draft order and insert something along the lines of "the particulars of claim be amended and the attached claim form be substituted for the claim submitted on (date)"

 

In part A3 insert something like "the claimant , as litigant in person, made errors in his original claim which the defendant now seeks to exploit in it's defence of this claim."

 

In part B, tick the box "evidence in part C"

 

In part C, put something like "I am now aware that there was errors in the original claim submitted to the court which the defendant seeks to exploit in repudiating this claim on a technical rather than legal basis. I would respectfully request that the court accept the attached claim form in substitution of the original"

 

Take it all along to the court in triplicate. It will cost you £35 which you can't recover and if all goes well it should take a week or so to get a response. I really can't see the judge refusing the application.

 

Once that is done you can get on with the serious business of fighting Cobbetts.

 

Hope this helps.

 

Paul

[smokeandmirrors]

Paul

 

Your a good man - thanks for this. I'll do the form filling tonight and get it off to the court tomorrow.

 

I'll obviously keep you posted on how I get on.

 

Many thanks again for your help mate - really very appreciated!

 

Steve

[smokeandmirrors]

Hi All

 

Sorry for being stupid....

 

I'm filling in the claim form and it requires:

 

Charges £xxx.xx

Overdraft Interest £xxx.xx

Interest under s.69 County Courts Act 1984 £xxx.xx

Court Fee £xx.xx

 

TOTAL £ xx.xx

 

I want to make sure I am getting the claim right, so which fields form the advanced calculation speadsheet fill in the correct bit of the above??

 

Charges = obvious

Overdraft intertest = is this H11 (interest on penalties)?

Interest under s.69 County Courts Act 1984 = is this E11+I11 (8% on penalties + 8% Interest on interest on penalties)?

 

Thanks

 

Steve

[The cobbett slayer]

Steve

 

It looks ok to me but I've got to be honest and say I'm not familiar with the spreadsheet you are using, largely because I dealt with the legal side of things and left the difficult stuff to the wife.

 

I think its correct but a second opinion would be advisable.

 

Paul

[smokeandmirrors]

Thanks Paul.. if there is a mistake in the calculations, does this throw the whole claim out?

 

Steve

[The cobbett slayer]

Potentially, yes. As this is an amendment to the original claim it's going to be worth hanging on for a bit until you get confirmation that it is correct.

 

If nobody replies in the next couple of hours bump it up and see if you can get a response.

[Michael Browne]

Charges = obvious

Overdraft intertest = is this H11 (interest on penalties)?

Interest under s.69 County Courts Act 1984 = is this E11+I11 (8% on penalties + 8% Interest on interest on penalties)?

 

Correct.

 

In part A3 insert something like "the claimant , as litigant in person, made errors in his original claim which the defendant now seeks to exploit in it's defence of this claim."

 

In part B, tick the box "evidence in part C"

 

In part C, put something like "I am now aware that there was errors in the original claim submitted to the court which the defendant seeks to exploit in repudiating this claim on a technical rather than legal basis. I would respectfully request that the court accept the attached claim form in substitution of the original"

 

I'm not sure whether you should delete the above. The bank's solicitors have a perfect right to enter a defence based on what you put in the POC's, which they've done. Sure, they're 'exploiting' your mistakes, but that's their job.

[The cobbett slayer]

Correct.

 

 

 

I'm not sure whether you should delete the above. The bank's solicitors have a perfect right to enter a defence based on what you put in the POC's, which they've done. Sure, they're 'exploiting' your mistakes, but that's their job.

 

Thanks Michael.

 

My thinking was that it would add weight to the application as the threat to strike out was based on a purely technical issue. If you believe that it shouldn't be in there I shall bow to you greater experience. At the end of the day we advise what is best for Steve's claim.

 

Paul

[smokeandmirrors]

Michael, Paul

 

Thanks so much for your help. I'll delete as Michael suggests and let you know how I get on!

 

Steve

[Michael Browne]

If you believe that it shouldn't be in there I shall bow to you greater experience.

I've no greater experience in this than you.lol

It's just that I thought it sounded like a 'whinge' that 'these smart lawyers are taking advantage of poor little me, just because I didn't file a claim correctly', and it might even be counter-productive, since the obvious riposte is 'Well you should have got it right in the first place'

[The cobbett slayer]

Fair comment Michael - over to the judge then!