Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
        • Thanks
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

ME v RBS, with a vengence!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6391 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

After the usual rigmarole I have finally received the defence from Cobbets, with the courts reallocation questionnaire. On it, it says, there is a £100 fee if the claim is over £1500. My initial claim is for £945, so with the £80 initial court fee, I guess will be £1025. does this mean I do not have to pay the fee, or does it mean that with the additional RBSs’ costs it will be over £1500 so I do have to pay the £100?… I rang the court, but the, I guess receptionist, didn't really fill me with much confidence in his response. I really don’t want to balls it up now by not paying the £100 if I need to, but also don’t want to send money to the court and not get it back if I don’t need to.

 

 

Further more, I read the “Some people are making mistakes" warning within the RBS forum, about claiming for charges which are not penalties, what are these? (Sorry if being daft!)

 

 

In regard to “the banks charges are a disproportionate penalty and therefore unenforceable as they are contrary to common law”

 

What are the “clauses pursuant to which the charges were applied”

 

Were the charges applied due to a breach of contract on my behalf?

 

How do I answer, “please specify all facts relied on by the claimant in support of the contentions in ......

 

(charges were 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)…and unreasonable with the meaning of the supply of goods act 1982 s 15)

 

......and in particular please identify the contractual provisions that the claimant alleges are unenforceable by reference to the UCTA/the regulations.”

 

 

Thank you so much for your help!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 123
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I'm waiting on defence from Cobetts also. I have seen some info on the "extra charges".

 

How did you claim, Was it in person or over the moneyclaim site ?

Tomba90

 

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.

- Mahatma Gandhi

Link to post
Share on other sites

if the claim is for £1045 then no fee will be payable, RBS costs don't come into it!

 

Charges that are not penalties are like the Royalties Gold fee of £12 a month as this fee is for a service.

 

If the questions in the defence are under CPR part 18 then you don't need to respond as it is not relevant to the small claims track!

 

Oh and Im in Manchester if you need a court buddy! not that it will get that far!

NatWest - Settled in full 22/05/06

 

RBS- Prelim sent 9/05/06 £1,147

£500 offer 27/05/06, rejected 30/05/06

LBA sent 25/05/06 :razz:

MCOL 15/06/06

Defence received 20/07/06

Settled in full 01/09/06 wahey!!!!!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

if the claim is for £1045 then no fee will be payable, RBS costs don't come into it!

 

Charges that are not penalties are like the Royalties Gold fee of £12 a month as this fee is for a service.

 

If the questions in the defence are under CPR part 18 then you don't need to respond as it is not relevant to the small claims track!

 

Oh and Im in Manchester if you need a court buddy! not that it will get that far!

 

 

cheers! thats what i thought but didnt wanna balls it up this late in the game, just about finished my reply to their defence which ill post at some point later in hope for it being useful to someone else, as guessing cobbetts have the same defence letter template sitting on their desktop to print out quickly....more times ive read it more it seems like trying to make something dead siumple sound dead complicated!

 

ill keep you informed and may take u up on that offer if get that far...cheers!

 

 

p.s. tomba90... went via moneyclaim

Link to post
Share on other sites

“clauses pursuant to which the charges were applied"

 

"......and in particular please identify the contractual provisions that the claimant alleges are unenforceable by reference to the UCTA/the regulations.”

 

again, sorry but am i right in thinking all it is actually asking me is which of RBS' contract terms are applicable to my case, therefore which ones i am saying are invalid?

 

do i actually have to talk about the actual terms in the unfair contracts terms act 1977 s.4 , unfair terms in consumer contracts regulations 1999 Para 8 and sch.2 (1)(e) or supply of goods act 1982 s 15 ???

 

 

as other people have said, just seems to be making something simple seem amazingly complicated to intimidate! jack asses!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Davidhannam,

 

Would it be possible to see a copy of the letter you sent in response to the defence, might save me a couple of days confusion.....

Tomba90

 

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.

- Mahatma Gandhi

Link to post
Share on other sites

sure, my internets down at home...just at work now so first op will prob b monday, hope that ok....wot did they stick in your defence letter?

 

 

I haven't had one yet !!! Just the notification from the court. But expecting it anyday now !!!!

Tomba90

 

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.

- Mahatma Gandhi

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Sir or Madam:

 

 

I acknowledge the receipt of the defence posted by Cobbetts on behalf of Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS).

 

In Cobbetts defence response, they requested further information under CPR Part 18. The guidance that I have received indicates that CPR Part 18 does not apply to the small claims track and is therefore irrelevant in this case. I am sure that Cobbetts are already aware of this and I can therefore only conclude that the inquiry was intended to intimidate. However I am aware that Part 27.2(f) applies subject to paragraph 3 of part 27.2 which states that the Court of its own initiative may order a party to provide further information if it considers that is appropriate to do so. In acknowledgment of this and in good faith as well as respect for the court I will provide the following information.

 

 

Enclosed is a full list of the breakdown of charges with my account details.

 

 

 

 

 

In respect of the relevant clauses and contract terms, I sent a letter to the defendant, Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) several months ago asking for such relation of charges. Unfortunately they did not send a copy of the original terms and conditions. I have endeavoured to obtain them in multiple trips to RBS branches, but the best I have managed to retrieve from them is a leaflet about charges.

 

In respect of the charges detailed on the enclosed spreadsheet, the relevant statements of the said leaflet are as follows;

 

· Where just a date is given, this relates to

o Service charge £10

§ Monthly maintenance charge

· “If you borrow more than your agreed overdraft limit you will be liable for a maintenance charge applied monthly, 16 days after the end of the charging period (or the next business day if this is a Saturday, Sunday or Bank Holiday). The charging period is normally in line with the date that we send your statement to you.”

 

· Paid referral £30 per day

o “If we pay a debit drawn on your account which results in an unarranged overdraft, a daily referral charge is payable and will be applied monthly on the sixth business day of the following month.”

 

· Unpaid items £38 per item (previously £35)

o “Payable when a cheque, standing order or Direct Debit is not paid due to there being insufficient funds available on your account”

 

· Unauthorised transaction fees £35

o Card misuse

§ “Payable when we are forced to pay an item which has been supported by cheque guarantee or Maestro although there are insufficient funds available on your account”

 

· “When your account is overdrawn in excess of any agreed overdraft limit, a maintenance charge will also be applied.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

However as stated in my original claim and letters the charges laid out in the original contract are unlawful penalty charges and cannot be legally enforced. i.e. charges in relation to unauthorised Overdraft, Referral, Chq/DD/SO Unpaid and Default Notice etc are a disproportionate penalty and therefore unenforceable as they are contrary to common law. Further, as a disproportionate penalty they are 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 then they are unreasonable within the meaning of the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 s.15.

 

I hope this clarifies the situation for you.

 

 

Yours sincerely,

Link to post
Share on other sites

David is this letter required to be sent as its the first one along these lines I've come across? I've responded to Cobbetts to say I'm not responding to CPR part 18 enquiries etc and enclosing spreadsheets, and I've filed AQ. is this like a response to their defence?

 

Stacy

NatWest - Settled in full 22/05/06

 

RBS- Prelim sent 9/05/06 £1,147

£500 offer 27/05/06, rejected 30/05/06

LBA sent 25/05/06 :razz:

MCOL 15/06/06

Defence received 20/07/06

Settled in full 01/09/06 wahey!!!!!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

i sent it to cobbetts and the court in response to their defence / further info letter. know didnt have to give em all that info but if in slightest chance may speed up my claim without em asking for more stuff thought itd b worth it

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good Stuff Davidhannam,

 

I've still not had a comunication from Cobetts and there time will be up on the 8th Aug.......

Tomba90

 

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.

- Mahatma Gandhi

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, recieved the defence today from Cobbetts, usual crap about cpr18. Will draft a letter tonight and post in my thread tomba90 vs RBS.

Tomba90

 

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.

- Mahatma Gandhi

Link to post
Share on other sites

Davidhannam,

 

Just a quick question, did you fill the questionaire from the court and pay the fee, it's not clear in the thread.

 

As mine is well over £1500.

 

Is the questionaire to do with cpr18 ??

Tomba90

 

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.

- Mahatma Gandhi

Link to post
Share on other sites

hey, yeah filled in the questionaire, pretty sure u have to, only takes a minute, apparently because my claim was for less than 1.5k i didnt have to...so guessing unfortunately u will, but u can claim it back when u go to court....or more likely when they settle with u b4 hand!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey David,

 

Just been speaking to the courts, do you know if Cobbetts have returned there court allocation form yet ??

Tomba90

 

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.

- Mahatma Gandhi

Link to post
Share on other sites

just got letter from cobbetts... something along the line of....

 

 

Our client considers that your challenge to its charges would fail in court….believes charges are fair, reasonable and transparent….have been applied strictly in accordance with your agreement …which it is satisfied complies with all applicable laws and regulations…our client is committed to ensuring the transparency of the information that it gives to its customers about the operation of its products. As such, our client does not believe that your claim has any prospect of succeeding.

 

However as gesture of goodwill, will offer £500 (my claim is £945 + 80 Court fee)

 

As long as

 

-Agree not to disclose to any third party

 

-Write to court withdrawing the claim

 

 

 

 

....so nice of them to offer me £500 even tho they believe i have no prospect in succeeding...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup, start thinking on what your buying with your £945, sounds as if they are getting desperate and running out of ideas/excuses. Don't think It'll be a much longer wait now!! :)

BOS

Claim No.3 for £589.75+8%, Decree received, Sheriffs Officers instructed to serve a charge 21/4!

Claim No.4:- claiming £1507.00, Court Papers submitted 5/4 !

Link to post
Share on other sites

oooh I'll be expecting a letter today or tomorrow offering a similar amount hehehe, my first offer back in May was for £500 though so I'd expect more than that!

NatWest - Settled in full 22/05/06

 

RBS- Prelim sent 9/05/06 £1,147

£500 offer 27/05/06, rejected 30/05/06

LBA sent 25/05/06 :razz:

MCOL 15/06/06

Defence received 20/07/06

Settled in full 01/09/06 wahey!!!!!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...