It was priceless. "Why don't you take one of these cases to court and get a judgement to stop all these claims?" "We prefer to carry on dealing with the claims as we have so far (i.e. paying them)" Smile? - I laughed and laughed.

Well done Tony - great news

Think it was my amended particulars of claim and part 18 request that probably swung it - apart from the banks not having a leg to stand on that is. When I get the cheque I will post the text for use by other NatWesters or give it to BF to do with as he wishes since I suspect it will apply to similar T&Cs from other banks Many thanks for the congratulations. It feels good to have that cash back.

I wouldn't worry about it if the offer to settle is in writing. If you accepted then they are bound. I would submit the allocation q without the fee. The court will just write to you and ask for it, giving a time limt by when it must be paid. Then you will have time to see if the payment is received in the bank. Hope this helps

Quite right your majesty

Agree with the points made. BAG CAG doesn't own the process of recovering charges. As Dave said its purpose was to empower - it has done that in spades and it won't be long until the survey shows over £1,000,000 recovered and that's just a fantastic achievement about which those who set up this site should be rightly proud. And with the MOds and our continuing interest the site will continue to empower. Its up to the individual whether they want to DIY or pay someone else to do it. All I would say is that the process is simple enough and with the help available here most should be able to DIY. Also I wouldn't entrust the job to someone who couldn't demonstrate to me that they had indemnity insurance to cover their own negligence, particularly if they are dealing with court proceedings, time limits etc.

Good luck with it - following your thread with interest. NW have just settled my claim for cosiderably more than yours in full so stay with it.

Yes and Yes

I meant the solicitors Neo And they did - just called me to settle in full

Take heart friends. We are all at almost the same stage and I got a phone call from Cobbetts 10 minutes ago settling in full - just over £4500 Don't blink - even CrapWest WILL settle. :) :) :)

Phone call from Cobbetts 10 minutes ago - SETTLED £4.5 k Man am I going to get ****ed this weekend :) :) Can a MOD change the title of this thread to show full settlement please? Survey done - another donation on its way

Many congratulations

Great stuff - congratulations

Yes. Allocation questionaires have been filed so hoping for a nice letter any day now

We are all here to help Lash Keep us posted

Much quicker today

Yep - large ones I got the same letter - in exactly the same terms - at exactly the same stage. Told them to sod off. They are dealing with these claims in bulk - bet there are thousands by now. All of the defences, Part 18 requests and offer letters are exactly the same. There's some monkey at a PC just filling in people's names and addresses and sending them out.

The lender lends the money at a loss of usual profit for the period in question. So your loan is x% lower than the lender's usual variable rate, or they give you a thumping great cashback at the start, or whatever...... The redemption penalty usually gets smaller as time passes - i.e.as the lender's losses come to an end - the low rate period/cashback period will be designed by the lender so that when the period expires the "loss" is made up - that's why you have to stay in for x years or pay a penalty. I wouldn't worry about other borrowers - the loss relates to the specific contract between the lender and the borrower and the "loss" is incorporated in that agreement and made up by the borrower staying and paying for a defined period.

For my part I think Robertxc and Surreyscouse have good instinct. Mortgage redemption works rather differently than appears in post no. 8 above - you are not locked into a mortgage agreement for the term. There is an equitable right of redemption that attaches to mortgages - the borrower is entitled to redeem the mortgage at any time. This right arose many years ago to deal with unsavoury money lenders. What used to happen was that a borrower would grant a mortgage to a lender which would be repayable on x date in the future. The borrower at that time was only entitled to repay on that date. The borrower would make all the mortgage repayments (if any were due since many mortgages were simply loans with interest repayable in full one one day in the future) and then on the last day, the day for repayment, the lender would dissapear for the day so that the borrower could not make the repayment. Result? Thr borrower was in breach and the lender repossessed a property where the borrower was wanting to make the final repayment. Hence the court of equity introduced the equitable right of redemption so that this unsavoury practice could be stopped. (End of history lesson lol ) But what is a mortgage agreement? It is a contract. What is an early redemption penalty? It can only be a liquidated damages clause. The lender effectively gives you some benefit (lower interest rate) that causes a loss to it (you pay less interest for a period than the ususal rate) and for which a damages clause applies if you redeem during the given period (early redemption). The lender expects over the course of the given period to keep your business and makes a loss if you leave before the period expires. So, the lender suffers loss. What is the loss and is it the same amount as they actually charge? If not it may be a penalty clause and (fanfare) unenforceable. Keep us posted Surreyscouse - best of luck and will be following with interest (not that I have a redemption penalty to reclaim but just generally )

Yep Ive noticed a dramatic slow down on the site recently both from home and at work. Havent posted much recently because its pretty unusable for me at the moment

Well done - and I hope this signals a change in policy from CrapWest

It's not an abuse of the court process or the court or the bank acting in an underhand way. The rules specifically provide for a defendant who has had default judgment entered against him to apply to set it aside. If the defendant is able to satisfy the court that the judgment should be set aside then that's what happens and let's face it the hurdle is pretty low. It's a means of setting aside a default where the issues were not properly tested and there is "some" merit in the defence. It's not surprising that some of the proceedings being issued against these banks are being overlooked or misfiled. There must be thousands of claims being dealt with. If my bank wrote to me after I'd got a default judgment offering to pay the claim in full in exchange for an agreement to set aside the judgment I'd sign it immeditely and get my money - after all that's what it's all about isn't it? As for confidentiality - that's up to the individual. Some might feel that keeping the details confidential and getting their money now is preferable to going back to square one with a set aside and new directions about filing a defence - thus putting the claim back a month or two.

They offered me about 50% - you know what the answer was Allocation questionnaires submitted by both parties end of last week.

Thats a useless defence. No service argument. They say that charges are for breaches of the agreement and represent administrative costs and that these are consideration for advancing further credit? What about refused items? They are effectively saying "the charges are penalties but they are not penalties"

Years ago I had pesonal loan with NW - it was in those T&Cs that I maintained a NW current account to pay the loan payments from. Wasn't a problem since I've been with NW 15 years - must need my head tested