Hi to all,

This is my first post so here goes!

If your anything like me,then this is a minefield,I am trying to claim back charges off RBS. I am going through the MCOL process & requested judgement on 31st May, It was rejected, as at the last minute the RBS entered a defence.

The RBS wrote to me the same day requested "further info & clarification" in accordance with "CPR Part 18 and CPR 27.2(3)" stating I should repond by 13th June.

How should I respond to this request?

What are "CPR18" and "CPR27.2(3)

In there defence they are asking me to "identify the contractual provisions" and also the "appropriate terms of the contract" relating to charges made.

I take it this means T's & C's dating back 6 years.

Where can I get these, in the time scale mentioned?

Any help would be very much appreciated as I feel they are bullying me out of my own money!

dooumm,

If your claim is below £5,000 then you do not need to do a CPR18 response.http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/natwest-bank/35672-cobbetts-cpr-18-request-4.html

CPR 27part 2.3 Before allocating the claim to the Small Claims Track and giving directions for a hearing the court may require a party to give further information about that party's case.

Good luck.

Parkvale,

Thanks for your reply I will continue to read through the threads and hope some of the info sticks.

It's really comforting to know others have been or are in the same position as myself and there efforts will help me get through this(I hope!)

cheers,

doo'umm

Can anyone help me on this,

dooumm v RBS,

After recieving the transfer notice from MOCL to my local court (manchester) I have sent 2 nudge letters to Cobbetts Ltd with no response,

So now I am about to send Bookworm's Draft Order request, along with Lateralus's cover letter to the court.

Do I need to send a copy to Cobbetts as well:confused:

You don't have to but it is polite/etiquette to do so.

I would advise you to send a copy to them.

I have merged your threads please stick to this one.

I have just recieved, today, a letter from the court it states:

IT IS ORDERED THAT:-

1. Claimant shall by 4.00pm on Friday 3rd Aug. 2007 file and serve replies to the attached request for information in default of which the claim shall stand Struck out without further Order.

2. Should the Claimant comply with the Order the court shall send Allocation Questionnaires to the parties for completion.

_______________

There's nothing else attached to the order.

Do I take it that I now have to respond to Cobbetts defence as this is the only other thing that the courts have sent me previously (attached to the transfer notice)

I have previously sent cobbetts and the court a copy of my schedule of charges so I am unsure how I should respond to this order

Also, would it now be wrong for me to send the draft order request and covering letter to the court and cobbetts.This was going to be my next move:-?

Just when I thought I was getting the hang of all this:-|

Phone the court for clarification as to what they're asking you to respond to, but it sounds as though you've been ordered to complete and return the CPR part 18 response. Have a look through this thread for some tips on this http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/natwest-bank/67743-natwest-final-stage-i-2.html#post583665 (although I'm sure there are plenty of threads in the RBoS forum that will have some tips on this as well!)

Don't send the draft order for directions yet - point 2 of the court order (as posted above) states that an AQ will be sent to you (and Cobbetts) once you've returned the completed CPR 18. Once you receive the AQ, you can then complete it and attach the draft order for directions.

Hedgey06,

Thanks for your help with this,

I will phone the court today to see what they say and will post their reply on here.

I had a look on this site yesterday for any advice on how to respond to the order but failed to find the one you have given me.

I did find one letter, but it seemed to me to be more of a stroppy letter than the well constructed reply you have found for me.

Thanks again, onwards and hopefuuly upwards!

I have been told by the court that it is "the request for more info" on cobbetts defence letter that I must respond to.

I am going to use the reply that hedgey06 found for me, with my own details and schedule of charges included.

Does it look ok as it is.

The Request

1. In your claim you state: “Between XXXXXX and XXXXXX the Defendant debited numerous charges from the Claimant’s account”.

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.

I refer the Defendant to the attached spreadsheet/document I have prepared in which I have entered the requested information

2.2 In relation to each charge please identify (a) the date when the charges was charged; (b) the amount of the same; and © the reason(s) given for the charging of the same.

I refer the Defendant to the attached spreadsheet/document I have prepared in which I have listed the following:

(a) the date when each charge was charged;

(b) the amount of the same; and

© the reason given by the Defendant 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?

The Claimant is aware that each charge has been debited by the Defendant from the Claimant’s account pursuant to the terms and conditions signed by the Claimant when the account was opened. However, please see my replies below.

(b) If yes; please explain why the Claimant contends that the same should not have been charged?

The Claimant does not contend that the same should not have been charged; merely that the charge made should have represented the Defendant’s liquidated losses and not the fixed charges applied by the Defendant according to the terms and conditions in force at the time the charge was made.

© If no; is it the case of the Claimant that the same should have been charged in this amount?

This is exactly the Claimant’s case. Each charge debited by the Defendant from the Claimant’s bank account should not have been charged in the amount that was charged. It is the Claimant’s case that each charge is a disproportionate penalty in that each charge does not truly represent the actual cost to the Defendant. The Claimant reminds the Defendant that it has been put to strict proof in previous correspondence and/or the Particulars of Claim that the amount charged for each charge debited does truly reflect the Defendant’s costs and that they are not making a profit from such charges – in the absence of any documentation to support the Defendant’s contention that each charge debited represents the Defendant’s liquidated losses, the Claimant contends that the Defendant has no defence to the claim that each charge is disproportionate and therefore unenforceable in common law, or by the previously claimed Acts, Statutes and Regulations pleaded.

(d) If yes; please explain why the claimant contends that the same should not have been charge in this amount and identify the sum the claimant contends should have been charged.

The Claimant cannot specifically reply to this request in that the amount that should have been charged cannot be specified because the Defendant has failed to reply to the Claimant’s request for a breakdown of costs incurred by the Defendant in applying charges to the Claimant’s account. The Defendant’s contentions that the charges are fair, reasonable and transparent are denied because of this material failure to disclose this information. Had the Claimant been made aware of the breakdown of each and every charge debited, the Claimant would have been able to reply to this particular request.

(e) If no; please state the claimant case.

The Claimant has already stated a case in the Particulars of Claim (or as amended) and repeats the same claims as if they were repeated in this reply. The Claimant also refers the Defendant to the answer at 2.3© above.

3. In your claim you state that the charges are "an unfair penalty under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999”.

3.1 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 regulations of the Unfair Contract Terms in Consumer Regulations 1999 ("the regulations”) replied upon by the Claimant in alleging that the contractual provision(s) referred to are unenforceable

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.

If the defendant contests this does not amount to a breach of contract the claimant will contest that charges appear to represent an unfair term of contract which is contrary to 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).The claimants account falls within the ambit of Regulation 5 of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 as I am a consumer. These charges constitute an unfair penalty under reference to paragraph 1(e) of schedule 2 of the said regulations:

Indicative and non-exhaustive list of terms which may be regarded as unfair - 1. Terms which have the object of effect of - (e) requiring any consumer who fails his obligation to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation.

I'll get somebody to check it over just in case

Looks fine to me.

Copies to the court and Cobbetts. Keep a copy for yourself

Thanks Michael, you're a star. xx

Again, thanks for your help.

I will be sending the response by recorded delivery tomorrow.

Watch this space.

Cheers,

dooumm