Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Good Law Project are trying to force HMG to release details of how Sunak's hedge fund made large profits from Moderna. Government ordered to disclose Sunak’s hedge fund emails - Good Law Project GOODLAWPROJECT.ORG Good Law Project has won a battle with the Treasury after it tried to suppress emails between Rishi Sunak and the hedge fund he founded.  
    • Nick Wallis has written up the first day of Angela van den Bogerd's evidence to the inquiry. I thought she was awful. She's decided to go with being not bright enough to spot what was happening over Fujitsu altering entries on the Horizon system, rather than covering up important facts. She's there today as well. The First Lady of Flat Earth – Post Office Scandal WWW.POSTOFFICESCANDAL.UK Angela van den Bogerd, on oath once more It is possible that Angela van den Bogerd and her senior colleagues (Rodric Williams, Mark Davies, Susan...  
    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Natwest: Advice Needed for Claiming Back Charges


resonate
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5306 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

When is the AQ due to be submitted?

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi Everyone.

 

So it has been over 7 days since I sent a request to amend my POC. I kindly asked to hear back from them within that timeframe. However, I haven't heard anything. My questions are...

 

  1. Shall I now fill out a N244 form and send to court? (I have already sent them the amended POC ahead, in triplicate).
     
  2. I know I have to pay a fee for this, but would I get this money back should I ever win?
     
  3. If so, do I add this fee to the Total Claimed now?
     
  4. Shall I hand in my AQ at the same time as the N244, because the deadline is quickly approaching?

 

It's so crazy. The fees and interest alone will now amount to about £160 (not including the £45 they paid to make counterclaim), which is half of what I started claiming for in the first place! Why on earth do they bother with all the hassle and expense?

 

Loads and loads of thanks! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. I don't feel I can use what's in that link though, because I don't fully understand it. As I mentioned,

 

11. In the premises the terms imposing the charges are unfair within the meaning of Regulation 5 (1) and thus not binding on the Claimant under Regulation 8.

 

seems randomly placed, it's not clear what Regulations it's referencing and it's unclear where sections 8, 9, 10 even are. I can't send something that's inconsistent :confused:. I've seen so many examples of what one should put in POC for bank charges that I'm not sure what's right or wrong and I'm very confused.

 

The regs are the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations. (Sorry not to get this answer to you until now.:oops:)

 

Hi Everyone.

 

So it has been over 7 days since I sent a request to amend my POC. I kindly asked to hear back from them within that timeframe. However, I haven't heard anything. My questions are...

 

  1. Shall I now fill out a N244 form and send to court? (I have already sent them the amended POC ahead, in triplicate).YES
     
  2. I know I have to pay a fee for this, but would I get this money back should I ever win? Officially no, but if you ever get as far as doing a wasted costs order it might be worth trying for.
     
  3. If so, do I add this fee to the Total Claimed now? No.
     
  4. Shall I hand in my AQ at the same time as the N244, because the deadline is quickly approaching?No reason why not.

It's so crazy. The fees and interest alone will now amount to about £160 (not including the £45 they paid to make counterclaim), which is half of what I started claiming for in the first place! Why on earth do they bother with all the hassle and expense?

 

Loads and loads of thanks! :)

 

They bother in the hope that you'll give up.:rolleyes:

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it would be ok, and shows the judge that NW are not being particularly co-operative in trying to resolve the issues.;)

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Brill. Keep us posted.;)

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hi everyone, long time no write. I hope you're all well.

 

Except for the court allowing the amendment to my POC, there has been no further news on this claim. However, I have a burning question:

 

I saw an advertisement by Natwest in the newspaper last week which was about how they are reducing overdraft charges in October. I was appalled by it, to say the least. After stating that they believe their charges are fair for so long, they have suddenly reduced them by up to 86%. Outrageous. My question is: is it OK to send a letter to them with words to this effect, or should I not because a court claim has already gone through their solicitors?

 

How can they ever win this bank charges battle after pulling a stunt like this? Surely it shows that they know the charges were always unfair!

 

Thanks!

Resonate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
Hi everyone, long time no write. I hope you're all well.

 

Except for the court allowing the amendment to my POC, there has been no further news on this claim. However, I have a burning question:

 

I saw an advertisement by Natwest in the newspaper last week which was about how they are reducing overdraft charges in October. I was appalled by it, to say the least. After stating that they believe their charges are fair for so long, they have suddenly reduced them by up to 86%. Outrageous. My question is: is it OK to send a letter to them with words to this effect, or should I not because a court claim has already gone through their solicitors?

 

How can they ever win this bank charges battle after pulling a stunt like this? Surely it shows that they know the charges were always unfair!

 

Thanks!

Resonate.

 

If you are BUMPing this, then writing such a letter is futile, by all means do it, but nothing meaningfull will come of it.

 

Most of the banks appear to have reduced their charges (in anticipation of them being decided unfair) or maybe they have not and only just re-structured them!

Edited by GuidoT

If I have been helpful please click on my star and add a comment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...