Hi its now 4 weeks since i asked the court to remove the stay from my case as Natwest failed to comply with the original Court Order until after the date given. I have just recieved a letter from Newark Cort which is an order telling me that the Stay Remains, but this Order came from the District Judge at Lincoln County Court. I'm so fed up ....all this time and now i have to wait until the test case concludes in february. I've done all i can.

Phew !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Still no wiser but wish i'd recieved it a day earlier. Any ideas guys?????? xxx:confused:

By Post To be placed before a District Judge as a matter of urgency Dear Sir We are instructed on behalf of the Defendant. We would be grateful if this letter and its attachments could be put before a District Judge as soon as possible. As you are probably aware. on 27th July 2007 proceedings were commenced between The Office of Fair Trading(OFT) and the Banks(the Test Case) in relation to charges paid by current account customers to the Banks in circumstances where the customers seek to make payments for which they do not have available funds (commonly known as Unauthorised overdraft Charges). The purpose of this letter is to request the stay of all unauthorised overdraft charges claims commenced against the Banks in this County Court, pending the final determination of the Test Case, insofar as such stays have not already been granted. You may be aware, not least from the reent significant media and press coverage, that the Banks are encountering a very large volume of complaints and claims brought by both existing and former current account customers in relation to unauthorised overdraft charges. The essence of the claims is to seek a refund of such charges paid by the customer, typically on the basis that the relevant charge was an unenforceable penalty at common law and/or unfair under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (the 1999 Regulations) We understand that the sheer volume of claims commenced has placed an extraordinary burden on the resources and administraion of the Court system, as well as on the Banks as participants in the litigation. In light of the continuing increase in the volume of these cases, the Banks and the OFT have sought to find a means of acheiving a quick, cost efficient, fair and orderly way of resolving through thr Courts what all acknowledge to be important and complex issues. The FSA has also been involved in this dialogue as a result of the FSA's regulatory responsibility as lead regulator of the Banks, in particular with respect to their handling of complaints. Accordingly, the Banks and the OFT agreed that the OFT should commence proceedings against the Banks for the determination of certain key issues relevant to the vast majority of these cases. On 27 July 2007, proceedings were issued in the Commercial Court for this purpose. Specifically, it is intende and agreed that the first stage of these proceedngs will encompass preliminary issues as follows; 1. the OFT has issued a claim for a declaration that the relevant contractual charging terms are not excluded from assessment for fairness under the 1999 Regulations by reason of regulation 6(2)(a)and/or(b) therto; 2. the Banks will counterclaim against the OFT for declarations that: (a) the relevant terms are in plain intelligible language, and: (i) relate to the definition of the main subject matter of the contract, and/or (ii) provide for renumeration for services supplied by the Banks in exchange, rather than payment of a sum by the customer for breach of a contractual duty owed to the Banks. and accordingly, are excluded from assessment for fairness under the 1999 Regulations by reason of regulations 6(2)(a)and/or (b) thereof, and, by reason of (ii) above, are not capable of amounting to a penalty at common law; (b) alternitively, if the relevant terms fail to be assessed for fairness under the 1999 Regulations, it is a necessary(but not sufficient) precondition to such terms being shown to be unfair within the meaning of regulation 5(1) of the 1999 Regulations that they be shown to be contrary to the requirements of good faith, and a declaration as to the true meaning of "good faith" for the purposes of the 1999 Regulation. We attach a copy of the Test Case litigation agreement and an example of the Claim Form for your information. The Commercial Court proceedingswill be progressed speedily with a view to resolvingthese key issues at trial. The timetable for exchange of pleadings is set out in the litigation agreement. The Case Management Conference has now been listed for 12 October 2007 and the trial for two weeks commencing on 14 January 2008. In order to address the recognised public interest in resolving these issues in an orderly way, the current claims and complaints environment needs to be addressed. As stated above, the purpose of this letter i to respectfully request that the Court stay this claim pending the outcome of the Test Case. The rationale for the agreement between the OFT an the Banks is set out (in part) in recital C of the litigation agreement. As recorded there, it is recognised that the issues involved are important and complex. This is reflected in the fact that the Preliminary Issues as set out above hace been listed for a two week trial in the Commercial Court. If it is necessary for to resolve the Substantive(which will only happenif the OFT succeeds on the Preliminary Issues) of the fairness and penal nature or otherwise of the charges it is anticipated that the trial of those issues would take significantly longer. The Banks submit that the appropriate forum for the resolution of these issues is the Commercial Court proceedings. Dealing with the issues raised in each County Court claim would not be an efficient use of resources and would also give rise to the risk of inconsistent judgments. You should be aware that the Financial Ombudsman Service has agreed not to proceed with consideration of the merits of relevant complaints that are reffered to it pending the final determination of the Test Case, and the Financial Ombudsman Service has confirmed it ill put on hold its own work on complaints aout these charges, pending the final determination of the Test Case. In addition, the FSA has conditionally agreed to grant the Banks certain rule waivers in relation to the regulatory requirements with respect to the handling of customer complaints. We attch a copy direction dated 27 July 2007 from the FSA and a copy letter dated 27 July 2007 from FOS for your records. We would draw your attention in particular to clause 12(12) of the FSA Direction, the effect of which is that, for litigation purposes, time will not run whilst the Direction is in effect. Finally , we understand that LJ Moore-Bick has written to Designated Civil Judges in relation to the Test Case and the ongoing handling of "live claims". We understand that in an exchange of e-mails between LJ Moore-Bick and the Designated Civil Judges, LJ Moore -Bick expressed the view that he would be surprised if a stay of the proceedings did not commend itself as the appropriate course in most cases pending a decision in the Test Case. In view of the above, would you please be so kind as to communicate your response to this request for a stay, as a matter of urgency. We envisage that, if you are minded to stay all claims , you may wish to have a discussion about practical issues, not least how new claims should be dealt with, and we would be very happy to discuss such issues with you. We confirm that a copy of this letter (without enclosures) has been sent to the Claimant. We look forward to hearing from you. Yours Faithfully Cobbetts LLP Enclosures 1. OFT Litigation Agreement dated 25 July 2007 2. Agreement between the OFT, the FSA and the Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc dated 26 July 2007 3. Test Case Claim Form filed 27 July 2007 4. FSA Direction dated 27 July 2007 5. FOS letter dated 27 July 2007 ded to stay all claims, you may

Hedgey, The letter from Cobbetts , received this morning. Claim Number: Our Client: Natwest You have reffered your complaint about bank charges for determination in court. Our Client believes the charges are reasonable, fair and transparent. Since you filed your claim in court a number of banks, includint The Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc, which owns Natwest, have become involved in legal proceedings with the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) in relation to bank charges which our client believes will resolve the legal issues regarding the fairness and legality of your bank charges. In so far as you have not already been given notice of such an application, you should be aware that the bank will be applyng to the court for an order to stay your claim until resolution of the banks proceedings with the OFT. As a esult your claim may have been or may be put on hold until the outcome of the proceedings is known. Given the test case the bank has asked the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) not to proceed with any other ases they are hearing until the test case is resolved. The FOS has indicated that as a general proposition it will not proceed with cases which rely on the legal issues being considered in the test case. The bank has asked the Financial Services Authority (FSA) to suspend the normal timetable for dealing with bank charges complaints, and the FSA has agreed to this request subject to conditions that protect your rights. The bank will keep you updated appropriatley about the proceedings with the OFT. You can check the latest position on the Banks website at NatWest - Test case - Overdraft Charges - Update. We can assure you that the Bank has registered and stored your claim. Please retain your bank records, as this will make it easier for you to support your claim on resolution of the test case. Once the legal proceedings between the OFT and the Banks are resolved, the bank will resolve your claim as quickly as possible applying the (test case) principles. As a general matter, the bank will ensure that your claim will not be adversely affected by any stay of your court proceedings. Please find attached a copy of the letter we have recently filed at court. Cobbetts LLP Now for the actual letter that was sent to the courts requesting a stay, dated 14th August.....4 days AFTER they were supposed to have complied with the Order ....so in reality... it should have already had Judgement passed in my favour as stated on the Order....

of course only i dont know how to do that .... sorry x

Hi, Hedgey, i wish i could get angry , i just feel down and resigned at the moment. I hate to ask this but i've looked at the template and cant seem to get my head round the wording for what i need to put in regarding the fact that my case should have been struck out for non-compliance and do i send another £35 with the letter and do i send a copy to Cobbetts? JXXXXXXX:(

Hedgey, i received the letter this morning.......all hope is lost IN THE NEWARK COUNTY COURT CASE NO: BETWEEN: …….. CLAIMANT V NatWest DEFENDANT On the 6th day of August Before District Judge Maw sitting at Newark County Court……….. Upon reading the file and upon it appearing that the issues in this case are to be considered by the Commercial Court in case number 2007 Folio 1196. On the Courts own initiative IT IS ORDERED THAT 1. This case is stayed with immediate effect pending the final determination of the case in the Commercial Court. Any listed hearings in this case are vacated and will not take place. 2. Either party may apply to the Court to lift the stay. Any application must be served on the other party and be supported by evidence why the case should proceed before the determination of the Commercial Court ase. 3. Unless the Court has given directions in the meantime the Defendants must apply on notice to the Court for directions not later than 3 months after the determination of the Commercial Court case. 4. This order having been made on the Court’s own initiative, either party may apply to vary or revoke it provided the application is made not later than 7 days after service of the Order. 5. Explanation. The very many cases about bank charges that are being brought raise issues of principle that need to be decided by the High Court, in particular whether bank charges that have been paid can be recovered because the contract with the bank imposes an unlawful penalty, or because the terms of the contract are unfair and infringe legislation. The Office of Fair Trading and several banks are co-operating to have the major issues that arise in many of the cases decided by the High Court. The Commercial Court decision should be known by February 2008. It is appropriate for this case and many other cases to await the decision of the Commercial Court.

thanks Hedgey, ill see if its in the post tomorrow and do that. Thanks again, ill be sure to keep you updated. xxxxx X

Help ! Hedgey, phoned the court this morning and have been told that Natwest applied for a Stay , while the outcome of the OFT case is concluded, last monday and the Judge has granted it. The courts are a week behind getting the orders out They will be sending it out to me today Is there anything i can do now???????????????????My luck seems to be falling apart

thankyou so much Hedgey you're a star and i couldn't have got this far without you. I'll let you know what happens. Have a great weekend XXX

Thanks again, i'll do that first thing, what info will i need with me as i'd like to be able to do it there and then I'll keep my fingers crossed tho...you never know do you :-| xxx

Is it because i first filed online at MCOL?

Hi Hedgey, thanks for that. Have just got my Notice of Issue out and its only one sheet there is nothing to fill in????

Well , its day 14 of the 14 days Natwest were given by the judge and i've heard nothing from either natwest or the court. Any ideas what i should do now as i'm beginning to think my case has been fogotten or i should have done something ?

lol...... Now you can see why i need all the help i can get

Hi, i'd love to be of some help to you but........listen to the man who knows, ie; Hedgey Thats what i've been doing. XXXXX

Hi, Like you i searched this site for help and found it to be a great source of info and support. I dont think that any "freezes " will be happenng overnight so i would think you're ok there. As far as my claim goes.......well, although i'm hopeful i still have everything crossed and am just waiting for the postie sometime over the next 2 weeks although i still feel nervous that something will go wrong even at this late stage and i'll have to go to court. Here's hoping it doesn't come to that. Keep positive about your claim and as you're not that far behind me i'm sure you'll be fine. Keep looking at my posts as i will update as soon as i hear anything Good Luck

Thanks Hedgey......i'll keep my fimgers crossed then and wait . Thanks for gettin me this far....its made all the difference. i'll update when anything else happens xxxxxxxxx

Hi Wendy, thats what i thought but didnt want to get my hopes up incase id got it wrong ............. still nervous that Nastywest will make an example of my claim and i'll have to attend court......... Thanks for clarifying it for me.xxxx

]Hi, well i paid my court fees last week and have been waiting for the dreaded court date, but recieved this letter this morning from the court. Can anyone tell me what it means and what i need to do next. Before DISTRICT JUDGE MAW sitting at Newark County Court EX PARTE IT IS ORDERED THAT The Court of its own motion is considering striking out the Defence in this action as an abuse of process. The basis for this is the fact that the Defendant is settling all claims of this nature where Claimants are seeking reimbursement of Bank Charges, with no claims proceeding to a contested hearing. The Court considers the authority of Mullen-v-Hackney Borough Council (1997) 2 A11ER 906 relevant. If the Defendant objects to the proposed strike out it is ordered to file, within 14 days of the date of service of this Order, a schedule setting out all claims of this type in England and Wales which have proceeed to a final contested hearing, and the outcome of such hearings, together with a schedule of all such claims which it has compromised before final hearing, after proceedings have been issued. Upon receipt of any such objections the Court will consider listing the claim for an on notice hearing of the strike out issue. In the absence of any such objections being filed in time, the Defence will be struck out and judgement entered for the amount claimed by the Claimant, together with the appropriate costs claimable on the small claims track.

thanks,i'll try. I've read so much yet again i'm just confusing myself

Thankyou for that, its just sometimes i feel like a very small fish in a gigantic ocean. Rather overwhelming to think about. xxx

You are good to me I've redone my schedule of charges will i need to send the updated copy to Cobbetts and to the court?

Hi sorry ,im getting a bit twitchy at the thoughts of going to court. I'll have patience. Thanks again....good job you're around to stop me messing up. xxxxxxxxxxxx

would it be worth sending another letter to cobbetts such as this in the meantime? It has come to my attention that as of xx/xx/07, that an Allocation Questionaire may not be required in this case. I am mindful of the vast number of claims with which you are currently dealing. In order to more speedily resolve this matter, I am willing to accept the sum of £xxxx . I do not agree to waive my rights in respect of any other actions, nor do I agree to a clause of confidentiality. I hope to hear from you very soon so that a reasonable conclusion to this claim might be achieved. I am sure that the courts would approve of our settling this matter in a timely manner and without their further intervention. For your records, I enclose another copy of my schedule of charges. I look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, or am i best to just leave it?