Marc Gander - The Consumer Survival Handbook


A 220 page introduction to all things consumer related by our own BankFodder.

Includes energy companies, mobile phone providers, retailers, banks, insurance companies,debt collection agencies, reclaim companies, secondhand car sellers, cowboy garages, cowboy builders and all the rest who put their own profits before you.

£6.99



Patricia Pearl - Small Claims Procedure - A Practical Guide


An excellent guide for the layperson in how to use the County Court - a must if you are intending to start a claim.

£19.99 + £1.50 (P&P)


Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 22
  1. #1
    Basic Account Holder
    Do you record your calls?
    You'll regret it if you don't.




    Follow Real_CAG on Twitter
    Cagger since : May 2006

    Posts
    63

    Default Help! 12 Page Letter Recvd From Cobbetts

    Hi and HEEEELP!!! I’m helping my friend out with his RBS and weve followed the set timelines with the Prelim, lbaicon and now its got as far as MCOL and they’ve submitted a defence right on the v last minute! The swines!!

    Now Ive been looking round on here how to respond to their 12 pages letter and I’m a little bit lost now to say the least. I hoped theyd have paid up by now as HSBC did with me but this is Cobbetts………….

    Now Ive read a bit on CPR 18 but no CPR Rule 27.2(3)!?!?!???

    This is what the letter says:
    In the Northampton county courticon Claim 6QZ8XXXX



    Between:

    My friend

    -and-

    National Westminster Bank PLC ( <<<<The claim was actually against RBS tho?)


    DEFENCE

    1. This Defence is filed and served without prejudiceicon to the Defendat’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. without prejudiceicon to the non-admission set out in the foregoing paragraph, if and to the extent that the Claimant proves the allegation that the Defendant debited charges to his bank account, insofar as such charges were debited on a date or dates more than six years prior to the issue of this claim, any remedy in respect of the same, whether damages, restitutionicon or otherwise, is barred by thew operation of the Limitations Act 1980 and/or the doctrine of laches and the Defendant will apply to strike out this aspect of the claim and/or for summary judgement.

    3. The Claimant states: “The Claimant is claiming £1000.00 taken by the defendant in way of charges for the last 6 yearsicon”.

    3.1 If the Claimant is to bring such a claim against the Defendant then he must identify the account(s) (giving details of the name and number of the account) to which the charges and fees have been applied.

    4. No admissions are made as to what charges have been debited to the Claimant’s bank account.
    5. 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 of the same was debited (b) the amount of the same and (c) the description applied to each charge.
    6. In relation to the allegation that the bank charges amount to an unenforceable penalty the Defendant pleads as follows:
    6.1 In order for the Claimant to sustain a claim that the charges debited by the Defendant are in 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.
    6.2 Until such time as the Claimant pleads the matters referred to in paragraph 5.1 above the Defendant in 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 Claimants bank account pursuant to unenforceable penalty clauses.

    7. In relation to the allegation that the contractual provisions pursuant to which the charges have been applied are invalid pursuant to the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 (“UCTA 1977) and/or the Unfair Contract Terms in Consumer Regulations 1999 (“the regulation”) and/or section 15 Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 (SGSA)
    7.1 The Claimant is required to identify the contractual provision(s) that he alleges are invalid by reference to UCTA 1977 and/or Regulations. Until such time as these provisions are identified the Defendant cannot (save as appears below) please to the allegation referred to in paragraph 7 above. The Defendant therefore reserves its right to plead further to the allegation once (and if) the Claimant identifies the relevant contractual provisions.
    7.2 In relation to the case of the Claimant that the contractual provisions are invalid pursuant to section 4 UCTA 1977 then it is the case of the Defendant that the section is not applicable as any contractual provisions relation to charges do not relate to the Defendants liability for negligence or breach of contract.
    7.3 In relation to the case of the Claimant that the contractual provisions are invalid pursuant to the Regulations of the Defendant pleads as follows:
    7.3.1Schedule 2 to the Regulations is an Indicative and non-exhaustive list of terms which may be regarded as unfair” (emphasis supplied).
    7.3.2If the Claimant is to rely upon paragraph 1(e) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations then he is required to plead and prove in relation to each bank charge that he seeks to recover the matters referred to in paragraph 7.1 above and all facts and matters relied upon in alleging that the sums paid are disproportionately high.
    7.3.3In the circumstances no grounds are disclosed for a claim that the contractual provisions (whatever they are alleged to be – see paragraph 7.1 above) falls fould of the Regulations and in particular oaragraph 1(e) of Schedule 2.
    7.3.4The Defendant is therefore unable (save as appears below) to plead to this allegation beyond denying that any bank charges have been applied pursuant to terms which contravene the Regulations. The Defendant reserves its right to pleas further to this allegation once (and if) the particulars referred to in paragraph 7.3.2 above are provided.
    7.3.5Without prejudice to paragraph 7.3.4 it is the case of the Defendant that the Regulation have no application because the charges amount to payment for services provided by the Defendant and the adequacy (or otherwise) of consideration paid under a contract for services is not an issue to be judged by reference to principles of fairness under the Regulations.

    7.4 In relation to the case of the Claimant that the charges are unreasonable within the meaning of SGSA section 15 the defendant pleads as follows:
    7.4.1The Claimant is required to plead and prove the necessary factors (referred to in section 15 SGSA) concerning the contract between the Claimant and the defendant which mean that pursuant to SGSA section 15 there is an implied term that the Claimant pay a reasonable charge for the service under the contract.
    7.4.2Further, the Claimant is required to pleas and prove (a) that the bank charges which have been debited are unreasonable; (b) all facts and matter relied upon by the Claimant in support of this case and (c) what charges would have been reasonable)
    7.4.3In circumstances no grounds are disclosed for a claim that the Defendant has acted in breach of SGSA section 15
    7.4.4In the circumstances (save as appears below) the Defendant is unable to plead to this allegation beyond denying that it has acted in breach of SGSA section 15 as alleged or at all. The Defendant reserves its right to plead further to this allegation once (and if) the defects in the pleaded case referred to in paragraphs 7.4.1-7.4.3 above are addressed.
    7.4.5It is the case of the Defendant that the contract between the Claimant and the Defendant does not fall within SGSA section 15 because (a) the consideration for the servicewould be determined by the contract between the Claimant and the Defendant and (b) was not left to be determined in a manner agreed by the contract or determined by the course of dealing between the Claimant and the Defendant.

    8. To assist the Claimant with the proper particualrisation of his claim(s) the Defendant serves this Defence a request made pursuant to CPR Part 1. 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 1 above) remain the then Defendant will apply to the Court for (among other things) an order striking out the claim.
    9. Pending the proper particularistion 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 Claimants claim(s) once or if the Claimant properly particularises the same.
    10. 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

    Statement of Truth BLAH BLAH BLAH…

    LC BURGOYNE
    4 Jauary 2007



    Our Client: National Westminster Bank PLC >>(HOWEVER THE CLAIM IS AGAINST RBS??)


    We are instructed on behalf of the above named
    We enclose by way of service
    1 Defence
    2 Request for Further information

    We confirm we have filed a copy of the same with the Court. Would you acknowledge receipt



    REQUEST FOR FURTHER INFO & CLARIFICATION

    NOTE IMPORTANT
    1. This request is served pursuant to CPR Part 18 alternatively with regard to CPR Rule 27.2 (3)
    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 18 January 2007.
    4. If you are unable to provide a response by this date then you are asked to contact the defendants solicitors promptly 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 Defendants 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:”The Claimant is claiming £1000.00 taken by the Defendant in way of charges for the last 6 years”.
    2. Please provide the following particulars in support of your claim:
    2.1 To what account(s) (giving details of the account name, number and sort code) were the charges applied.
    2.2 In relation to each charge 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.
    2.3 In relation to each charge 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 a disproportionate penalty and therefore unenforceable as they are contrary to common law”.
    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 terms(s) of the contract) that the charge related to.

    5. In your claim you state that the charges are: “invalid under the Unfair (Contract) Terms Act 1977 s.4 and Unfair Terms iun Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 Para,8 and Sc.2(1)(e)” and “unreasonable within the meaning of the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 s.15”
    6. Please specify all of the facts relied on by the Claimant in support of the contentions in paragraph 5 above, and in particular please identify the contractual provisions(s) that the Claimant alleges are invalid by reference to UCTA/the Regulations.

    DATED 4 January 20007
    My fingers are hurting from typing all that out!!!!!

    Do any of you angels have any advice on where to start?
    Do I need to supply new POC?
    Do I have to reply about the limitations act part of their defence or is it just put off tactics?
    What do I do about the CPR18 and rule 27? I dont even know what track the claim is yet!
    I know I need to send them the schedule of charges and have that ready but really am lost now even though Ive got this far and dont know what to write back:-?

    Similar Threads:
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0

  2. #2

    Default Re: Help! 12 Page Letter Recvd From Cobbetts

    Its just a high and mighty request used by lawyers to confuse you its exactly what they ask in all the words " a request for further information" i.e. state exactly what charges you are asking for back and list and no refernce to each one one your bank statemnts.CPR18 used to be for the fast trackicon and above in county courticon... Rule 27 has been added to take in the small claimsicon track.
    Its a stalling tactic just send them what they ask for.



    Sparkie 1723


  3. #3

    Default Re: Help! 12 Page Letter Recvd From Cobbetts

    This is a request for further information which is not required for small claimsicon, so write back stating this, only reply if the court orders you.

    If you have sent them a schedule of charges and particularised your claim correctly that should be enough.


  4. #4

    Default Re: Help! 12 Page Letter Recvd From Cobbetts

    Sorry to disagree paulwlton,

    That is why Cobbetts have added CPR rule 27.2(3) This rule now applies to the small claimsicon Court, I hate Cobbetts but they are right in this inst, if it is not complied with the court will lean towards the RBOS a little. I,m fighting Cobbetts in a multi track case, its another stall tactic used by them but it must be complied with.

    Sparkie1723

    Follows
    0
    Following
    0

  5. #5
    Basic Account Holder
    Do you record your calls?
    You'll regret it if you don't.




    Follow Real_CAG on Twitter
    Cagger since : Nov 2006

    Posts
    960

    Default Re: Help! 12 Page Letter Recvd From Cobbetts

    Hi there

    Is this not just another stalling tactic? Basically, Cobbetts know that the charges are unlawful. You have asked for them to give you the exact cost of what it costs to administer the "offence". Their failure to do so means that they are not giving YOU the information you require in order to pay them what they are due. Therefore, until they come up with the exact figure you are exercising your rights. Did you send the original spreadsheet which hightlights each and every one of the charges you are claiming for?

    I would familiarise yourself with all the contractual information you need to defend the case. You will find all the relevant stuff on this forum.

    I hope this makes sense.
    Annie


    Follows
    0
    Following
    0

  6. #6

    Default Re: Help! 12 Page Letter Recvd From Cobbetts

    Quote Originally Posted by Sparkie1723 View Post
    Sorry to disagree paulwlton,

    That is why Cobbetts have added CPR rule 27.2(3) This rule now applies to the small claimsicon Court, I hate Cobbetts but they are right in this inst, if it is not complied with the court will lean towards the RBOS a little. I,m fighting Cobbetts in a multi track case, its another stall tactic used by them but it must be complied with.

    Sparkie1723
    When was this altered to apply to small claimsicon, i may be reading something out of date, i am led to beleive standard disclosure and requests for further information were excluded.

    3)The court of its own initiative may order a party to provide further information if it considers it appropriate to do so.

    Follows
    0
    Following
    0

  7. #7

    Default Re: Help! 12 Page Letter Recvd From Cobbetts

    hiya paulwlton,
    I am not sure of the date but if you go to the county courticon web site find CPR rules and the CPR 27.2(3) it states exactly what cobbetts have requested, Cobbetts aren't daft they know the legall technicalities of to pat, as I've said Im involved fighting them in a big way,
    regards
    Sparkie1723


  8. #8

    Default Re: Help! 12 Page Letter Recvd From Cobbetts

    I have read the rule and i'm reading a book on small claimsicon which state further information and standard disclosure are excluded, however if you havn't set your claim out that could be a problem and the other side could request further information for clarification, but has i understand it it must be complied with by order of the court only, same as the claimant asking for standard disclosure.

    I am also in litigation and back in court Thursday.


  9. #9

    Default Re: Help! 12 Page Letter Recvd From Cobbetts

    Is any of this claim pre 6 yearsicon?. I f yes then i would respond to this request. Let me know and i will post you a good response.

    Paul


  10. #10
    Basic Account Holder
    Do you record your calls?
    You'll regret it if you don't.




    Follow Real_CAG on Twitter
    Cagger since : May 2006

    Posts
    63

    Default Re: Help! 12 Page Letter Recvd From Cobbetts

    Hi its for £1000.00 and £30.00 of the charges do fall outside the 6 yearsicon - so I'm guessing that would need something about the limitations act if I were to continue to include them?
    I'm guessing this will follow the small claimsicon track anyway?

    Partics of Claim were on MCOL:
    Claimant had an account with the defendant over 6 years which is run on their standard terms and conditions. The claimant is claiming £1000.00 taken by the defendant in way of charges for the last 6 years. The bank's charges are a disproportionate penalty and therefore unenforceable as they are contrary to common law. Further, as a disproportionate penalty they are invalid under the Unfai(Contracts)Terms Act 1977 s.4 and the Unfair termsicon in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. Para8 and sch.2(1). In the even 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. The bank was asked to justify their charges but they have declined to do so. The claimant claims interest under s.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at 8% a year from the date of each charge to 04/12-2006 of £300.00 and also interest at same rate up to the date of judgement or earlier at £0.25 per day.
    Thanks for the help here
    SL56

    Follows
    0
    Following
    0

  11. #11

    Default Re: Help! 12 Page Letter Recvd From Cobbetts

    This was my response, you could alter to suite.

    I would also, state that s5 places no restriction on your claim has s32 should be invoked.




    Response to CPR part 18icon Request.

    1. In your claim you state that the banks charges are a disproportionate penalty and therefore unenforceable as they are contrary to common law.

    2. Please provide the following particulars in support of your claim:

    2.1 Please specify 2.1 clause(s) pursuant to which the charges were applied?

    The clauses pursuant

    D.1.2 The overdraft limit should not be exceeded and we may refuse to pay a cheque (or allow any other payment or withdrawal) which could have that effect. If we do pay a cheque, (or allow any other payment or withdrawal) which results in the overdraft limit being exceeded, it will not mean that the overdraft limit has changed, which would have the same effect.


    D.1.3 (b)carry out a payment instruction in any form [e.g. issue a cheque or make a card transaction on the account] which, either through exercise of our discretion to pay the item on presentation for payment or through payment being guaranteed to a third party, results in the account becoming overdrawn when no agreed overdraft limit is in place or which results in the overdraft limit being exceeded in either case, this will be treated as a variation to the contract [i.e. not revoking and replacing any earlier agreement] under which overdraft facilities are provided by us, either with our prior agreement or which arise through exercise of our discretion to pay items presented for payment being guaranteed to third parties.


    D.1.7 We will confirm to you if we are to charge a fee for arranging an overdraft limit. If a fee is payable, we will debit it to the account on which we have made the overdraft available either on the date of the confirmation or shortly afterwards. You will also be responsible for paying any costs incurred by us in connection with the overdraft whether as a result of you breaking the terms of agreement or not. These costs will include (but not limited to) costs of taking and discharging any security; taking steps, including court action, to obtain payment; enforcing and/or preserving our rights under any security held for the overdraft facility; tracing you if you change address without notice and communicating with you if you break the terms of the overdraft arrangement. If such costs remain unpaid then we may debit them to the account on which we have made the overdraft available.



    H. 3 you (and any additional cardholder) must not use the card if to do so would overdraw the account without our prior agreement, or would increase any borrowing on the account to more than we have agreed.


    2.2 Please specify weather the charges applied were due to a breach of contract by the claimant.

    When a bank customer exceeds their overdraft limit, they are breaking a term of their contract with the bank, i.e. that they should not do anything that causes their account to break the overdraft limit. This may be explicitly stated in the original agreement that the customer signed when opening the account or it may be implicit in the way that the account is supposed to be operated.

    If the bank says that there is an “agreed overdraft limit” it is implicit that anything above this amount is “not agreed” and, therefore, the customer is breaking the contract by causing the limit to be breached.

    2.3 Please identify in each case the particular breach of contract (by reference to appropriate term(s) of the contract) that the charge related to.

    Unarranged overdrafts
    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 we send your statement to you.

    Unarranged borrowing – paid referral
    If we pay a debit drawn on your account which results in or increases an unarranged overdraft, a paid referral charge is incurred and will be payable on the 6th business day of the following month and the account will be debited on that date.

    Unauthorized transaction fees - Unpaid items.
    Payable when a cheque, standing order or direct debiticon is not paid due to there being insufficient funds available in your account.

    Unauthorised transaction fees- 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 in the account.

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

    3. In your claim you state that the charges are: invalid under the unfair (contracts) Terms Act 1977 s.4 and Unfair termsicon in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 Para. 8 and Sch.2 (1) (e) and unreasonable within the meaning of the supply of goods and services Act 1982 s.15.

    4. Please specify all of the facts relied on by the claimant in support of the contentions in paragraph 3 above, and in particular please identify the contractual provision(s)that the claimant alleges are invalid by reference to UCTA/the regulations.





    D. 1.8 If you exceed the overdraft limit, charges will be payable as detailed in the promotional leaflet insert relating to the account. This insert can be obtained from any of our branches.

    The above says the Defendant can levy a charge detailed in the "promotional leaflet". If this clause has the effect of the customer paying more than the banks actual loss, then it would fail the test of reasonableness, as per section 4(1).


    Under section 4(1) of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977, it states that, “A person dealing as consumer cannot by reference to any contract term be made to indemnify another person (whether a party to the contract or not) in respect of liability that may be incurred by the other for negligence or breach of contract, except in so far as the contract term satisfies the requirement of reasonableness".


    It is unlikely that a court would find this indemnity clause to be reasonable, given the strength of the bargaining position of the claimant, an individual consumer, in relation to the defendant, a multi £million organisation, and given that the contract terms were pre-drafted and not individually negotiated.

    Further the defendant may state that the charges are a genuine pre- estimate of its liquidated losses and that this estimate need not exactly reflect the actual losses.

    However, the losses should be reflective of the contract between the claimant and the defendant specifically and not the losses of a contract between any other parties and the defendant.

    Where the contract has been in force between the two parties it would be reasonable for the pre-estimate to reflect very accurately the liquidated losses incurred when the claimant breached the terms of the contract between the defendant and claimant since there is evidence as to those losses.


    The defendant may state that under Section 7 of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations 1999 (UTCCR99) that their prices do not have to be fair, and that they are NOT subject to the scrutiny of a court.
    This implies they can set them at whatever level they like - £100 for going over an overdraft limit? £150.00 for not paying a direct debt. The defendant would then imply that their charges can be uncapped and unregulated.

    However the Sale of Goods and Services Act 1982, sec 15.2 clearly states that the sum must be fair and reasonable. Is a 3000% mark up fair when the average mark up on the High Street is 100%?

    This is an unfair term within the contract because it allows the defendant to charge any price they wish for a service - which is far in excess of the cost or value of the service.

    Further under the UTCCR99, Sec 2 Par 1 states that

    “A term that allows a party to unilaterally raise the price, or for a price to be determined on delivery is unfair.

    And, Para. 8 sch. 2 (1) (e) states that
    A term requiring any consumer who fails to fulfil his obligation to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation is unfair.

    Further Para.5.(1) states that
    A contract term which has not been individually negotiated is unfair if it causes a significant imbalance in the parties' contractual rights and obligations, to the detriment of the consumer.

    The Claimant specifically pleads that the charges debited to the Claimant’s account by the Defendant are automatically unfair because, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties’ rights and obligations under the contract (which the Claimant pleads is invalid in any event) to the detriment of the Claimant. “Good faith” (as defined by the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999) means that that the Defendant must deal fairly and openly with the Claimant. The Defendant has not dealt fairly and openly with the Claimant. Further, as the contractual term (i.e. each and every charge debited from the Claimant’s account according to the “contract” entered into by the parties pursuant to the Defendant’s terms and conditions, as well as the terms and conditions themselves) was not individually negotiated and was drafted in advance, the Claimant was unable to influence the substance of the term, making it unfair. In the absence of a breakdown of the Defendant's liquidated losses and/or actual costs of each and every charge applied to the Claimant's account, the contractual term in force at the time of the charge forced the Claimant to pay a disproportionately high sum to the Defendant in compensation for the Claimant’s alleged failure to fulfil his obligation



    It is not for the claimant to reply as to what charges would have been reasonable. This decision will be made by a judge at the final hearing of this matter.



    Statement of Truth


    The Claimant believes that the facts stated in this CPR Part 18 request are true.


    Signed……………………..

    DATED this 28th day of November 2006.

    Follows
    0
    Following
    0

  12. #12
    Battleaxe
    Guest

    Default Re: Help! 12 Page Letter Recvd From Cobbetts

    Something I noticed, Cobbetts claim in the their Defence they are representing another bank not RBSicon

    Our Client: National Westminster Bank PLC >>(HOWEVER THE CLAIM IS AGAINST RBS??)

    Shouldn't this be brought to the Court's notice immediately?


  13. #13

    Default Re: Help! 12 Page Letter Recvd From Cobbetts

    I think it just goes to show that cobbetts seem to be snowed under with claims at the moment.


  14. #14
    Battleaxe
    Guest

    Default Re: Help! 12 Page Letter Recvd From Cobbetts

    If they are snowed under, then their reply to the claim could be a proforma template and they haven't really read the claim. Couldn't it be argued that they have made a mistake in their reply to the court and as such apply for the defence to be thrown out and wasting the court's time?


  15. #15
    Basic Account Holder
    Do you record your calls?
    You'll regret it if you don't.




    Follow Real_CAG on Twitter
    Cagger since : May 2006

    Posts
    63

    Default Re: Help! 12 Page Letter Recvd From Cobbetts

    Great replies! Arent NatWest and RBSicon the same company though?

    Ive just spoke to the local court (its just been transferred to) and they say just to wait for the allocation questionnaireicon and point it out in that.

    So would you say CPR 18 and 27.2(3) arent relevant ?
    I have to say I'm with you Paul on this one as it what Cobbetts have stated is exactly what you have quoted from the DCAicon.gov.uk publication of CPR rules.
    Therefore it would only be relevant if the court choses to give that direction?

    Follows
    0
    Following
    0

  16. #16
    Battleaxe
    Guest

    Default Re: Help! 12 Page Letter Recvd From Cobbetts

    RBSicon own Natwest, and your accohnt is with RBS niot Natwest, maybe I am whistling at the wind with this, but if they can't get which bank they are acting for right, what else is wrong with their argument?

    I am only picking holes here, but wrong bank named in their Defence or perhaps this is correct? I am not versed in the Law, wish now I had continued my studies in that area. hard enough getting my head around Torts.


  17. #17
    Basic Account Holder
    Do you record your calls?
    You'll regret it if you don't.




    Follow Real_CAG on Twitter
    Cagger since : May 2006

    Posts
    63

    Default Re: Help! 12 Page Letter Recvd From Cobbetts

    Have to agree with you there Battleaxe it is quite worrying (for RBSicon haha) that they cant even get the Clients name right.

    Ive drafted this together from what I believe is the situation with regards to the CPR Request.

    Can anybody comment on this please before I send it off

    -----------
    Response to CPR part 18icon Requests/Costs/etc


    Claim No: 6QXXXXXX

    Dear Ms. Burgoyne,

    I acknowledge receipt of the defence posted on behalf of Royal Bank Of Scotland 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 claimsicon 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. I have todate received two part settlement offers from your Client, thus showing that full particulars of my claim have been received, as your Client would not have entered into discussions of settlement from figures plucked out of thin air. However, for clarity, I confirm the charges I am claiming were applied to the following account:

    Account name ---------------
    Account number xxxxxxxxxx
    Sort code xxxxxxxxx.

    I enclose a copy of the schedule of charges, previously issued to your Client on two separate occasions. This schedule now includes the revised amounts of interest pursuant to s.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at 8%.

    Your faithfully
    ----------------------------------------
    thanks again
    also do you think a revised POCicon is necessary?

    Follows
    0
    Following
    0

  18. #18

    Default Re: Help! 12 Page Letter Recvd From Cobbetts

    Quote Originally Posted by Battleaxe View Post
    Something I noticed, Cobbetts claim in the their Defence they are representing another bank not RBSicon

    Our Client: National Westminster Bank PLC >>(HOWEVER THE CLAIM IS AGAINST RBS??)

    Shouldn't this be brought to the Court's notice immediately?
    This is exactly what they've done with my RBoS claim too - I've asked the court to write to Cobbetts to correct it, but am also going to include it in my Reply to Defence. The notice of acknowledgement of service actually stated that the Defendant's name was changed to RBoS

    SL56 - your Defence appears quite similar to mine, with the big exception that I didn't get a part18 request.

    Here's the link to CPR 27.2:
    PART 27 - THE small claims TRACK

    As you can see, in 27.2 (1), "The following Parts of these Rules do not apply to small claimsicon –"
    (f) clearly states " Subject to paragraph (3), part 18icon (further information);"

    Now, paragraph (3) is "The court of its own initiative may order a party to provide further information if it considers it appropriate to do so" - very clearly it's the court that has to order it, not Cobbetts.

    That said, if you've filed with MCOL, did your friend send the full details of all the charges (e.g. spreadsheet printouts, statement copies, etc..) right after submitting online? If not, then that's probably what they're getting at with the request. MCOL doesn't give enough space to properly particularise a claim (IMHO) and certainly doesn't give you the opportunity to attach anything to your claim form.

    Cheers

    Michael

    Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law.

    Please see the following copyright statement
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0

  19. #19
    Basic Account Holder
    Do you record your calls?
    You'll regret it if you don't.




    Follow Real_CAG on Twitter
    Cagger since : May 2006

    Posts
    63

    Default Re: Help! 12 Page Letter Recvd From Cobbetts

    Thanks Michael - yes it was MCOL but I only got round to sending cobblers and the court copies of charges when i replied to cobbets - then i sent them both copies

    If no new defence is submitted i will bring it to the attention of the court that its for RBSicon and not Natwest as they have said!

    thanks
    SL56


  20. #20
    Basic Account Holder
    Do you record your calls?
    You'll regret it if you don't.




    Follow Real_CAG on Twitter
    Cagger since : May 2006

    Posts
    63

    Default Re: Help! 12 Page Letter Recvd From Cobbetts

    Righto theyve submitted a defence and Im set to return the aqicon by monday 29th (I ignored the original AQ from northampton as it was transferred to local court (hope I did this right?!?!))

    Now cobbets have made an offer of 55% and Im going to need to reply telling them where to go!

    Does anyone have any suggestions and can you comment on on the AQ above?

    regards


Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Reclaim the Right Ltd. - reg.05783665 in the UK reg. office:- 923 Finchley Road London NW11 7PE
We use cookies to personalise content and ads and to provide social media features. We also share information about your use of our site with our advertising and analytics partners. See details