jim40031 vs Natwest

[jim40031]

Hi my old thread seem to have been removed for some unknown reason but never mind.

 

Basically the situation is as follows :-

 

Got my statements sent to me. Sent first letter requesting money back, recieved standard letter back saying no becuase they are fair. Sent second requesting my money back, received standard letter back saying no becuase the charges are fair.

 

Claim was Issued on the 11/05/06

 

Judgement was Issued by Default on the 31/05/06.

 

No response from NatWest (Defendant) so I have requiested a Warrant on the 30/06/06.

 

Does anyone know how long it will now take before I get my money ?, they have already had teh whole of June to act but not a sausage has happened.

 

I'm getting a little bit bored of waiting and teh interest is increasing on a daily basis.

 

Cheers

 

 

Jim

[lipscombe]

Hi Jim

 

I wonder why Nat West solicitors never contacted you? Seems strange to me - hope it means they have given up & are just going to pay us all - wont hold my breath though!!

 

Cant wait to see what happens in your case, I am just a little behind you.

They have filed a defence, got to wait til 10th July x

[jim40031]

Its happened, it's actually happened. Thankyou to all moderators and everyone else who inputs there comments to this site.

 

My warrant has been fulfilled. Basically this means that the bank have sent a cheque to teh courts for the full amount.

 

For some strange reason teh courts have to hold onto teh cheque for 2 weeks but I trust them ;-)

 

This will make such a difference getting this money back, it really will. My donation will be made as soon as my cheque is cleared. The courts tell me that I will get the cheque on teh 2nd or 3rd of August.

 

Whoopee !!!!!!!!!

[Ollie-Bollie]

That's brilliant news Jim - well done. All thanks to this wonderful site.

 

I am some way behind you but encouraged even more when you see results like yours!!

 

 

Am very very pleased for you.

 

:) :)

[jim40031]

There is much talk at teh moment about the banks requesting "set - aside" once the judgement has already been issued against them and a warrant is requested by the claimant. From brief chats that I have had with one of teh moderators it seems that the banks do this on a pretty much 100% basis nowadays, on teh notion that they can tell the courts that they never received teh paperwork.

 

This practice is obviously very devious and gives me an even lower opinion of the banks in question which as far as I'm aware is all of them, as they are basically attempting to ridicule our British court system, the very thing which they use actively when someone attempts to defraud or steal monies from them.

 

Anyway, my case did not go through this attempt at "step aside" procedure for some reason. I personally believe it's becuase I waited a full month between requesting Judgement by Default and Requesting the issue of a Warrant for my money. I feel that the bank decided that it would obviously fail in an attempt for set-aside as they woul dnot be able to convince that they had not received either teh Default Judgement or teh original claim in and had tiem to knock out a defense.

 

Would be interested to see what other peoples points of view on this would be and hopefully we can crack down on this pathetic "step aside" issue.

[orfoster]

So the step aside thing whats that exactly? Read the thread but its very hot. The banks are all very annoying and a pain in the %^£ but we are all getting our own back now i hope. I would be well cheesed if the court held onto my cheque after waiting all that time but i suppose the money is yours. Well done.

 

Please could you explain this set aside thing they are now trying to do?

 

 

Cheers.

[jim40031]

I dont know everything about this "step aside" by any means....Thank Goodness. If you get tied up in it then you really should read that thread, particurly the Abeey National one. That chap really went through hell and back.

 

Anyway, I feel that it is probably fair to say that at first we all thought that as soon as Judgement was given by default against teh defendant then we were quids in.....Well, as confirmed by my court, life is not quite so simple.

 

The defenedant can apply for set aside, which basically means that they still want to defend, but must give a reason for not defending within the required time limits. They have used excuses like they never received the Claim and therefore were simply unable to defend or say that they didnt have enough time to do so. There probably are more excuses but I dont know what they are.

 

I think that the set aside is either rejected or granted at a meeting (possibly with the judge) with both teh claimant and defendant present. You can both argue your points of view and the person/judge will then decide idf it can be granted or not.

 

I think that teh idea is a good one where the defendant is a much smaller business or individual as raising funds and knowledge for such things could obviously prove difficult. I cant think of any really decent excuse for a lareg orgainsation such as a bank though. **** bags.....