TheCobbettSlayer v NatWest ***WON***

[alanfromderby]

The crucial part of this is the Standard Disclosure, as the bank must provide a list of ALL the documents relating to the case. This means that they will have to notify details of documents that prove their argument that the charges are lawful, AND documents that support the argument that they are not.

 

If they fail to list any documents that support their defence, then you can make an application to have their defence struck out - as I have done with Bristol & West.

 

Of course, it is very likely that they will fold before December 22nd - but don't count on it.

[The cobbett slayer]

I'm counting on nothing Alan but we'll see.

 

Any ideas what I should be including in my disclosure. The only document that I seem to be relying on is Bank Statements showing the charges being debited and these are already in the possession of the defence

 

Paul

[alanfromderby]

You need to include everything that you would wish to rely on in court - so largely it would be the documents that make up the court bundle:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/33060-basic-court-bundle.html

 

My disclosure ran to around 300 documents - of course, you only need to send a list according to the order in your case, but you would need to get the documents together in case they are required.

 

Also, keep receipts for copying etc., and a record of time spent. As the case has been allocated to multi-track, you may need to file an application for costs - especially if you have to issue an application for strike out.

[natwesttookmymoney]

I agree with AlanfromDerby - I think the crucial day is Disclosure Day, 22 December. They either have to come up with proof that their charges are

in line with their costs - for each and every item you've claimed for - or they can't present any such case come the day. Keep us posted (I'm sure you will) but I'd expect you'll hear something from them before then.

 

Good luck

westy

[ataction]

I believe you will also need a timetable analysis of the history of the case. This is quite a good prompt for court anyway...actually that is included in the Court Bundle, but a very useful tool.

[The cobbett slayer]

Well - I got back from the Xmas protest and p*** up to find a very nice letter from Cobbetts offering me 75% subject to confidentiality and withdrawal of my claim.

 

I have graciously accepted as an interim payment and will continue until I get the full amount.

 

There will be a turkey in the Shieber household this Christmas:D

 

I'll keep you posted on the rest.

[livelylad]

Hopefully these fools will pay the full amount soon Paul. Best of luck mate.

[Guest ian cognito]

Good step forward Paul, keep at 'em obviously having their doubts now!!!

 

Can't you stretch to a goose, tradition and all that.

[caro]

I assume the confidentiality clause will be crossed out in your acceptance.

[Maggiebroom]

Hi Paul

 

have just read all your thread.

What a story

 

And what a good christmas if all goes as planned.

 

best of luck mate - dont let the b******s grind you down

 

maggiebroom:)

[The cobbett slayer]

Can't you stretch to a goose, tradition and all that.

 

Actually Jan we are having a goose at the brother in laws. I will now be providing the champagne and caviar.

 

As for confidentiality Caro - as you may have noticed on Friday - I talk too much:D

[The cobbett slayer]

Now the serious stuff.

 

The judge has ordered disclosure by 22nd December. Is it a good idea for either myself or Cobbetts to apply for a stay of the order for a period of say 28 days (as per the option on the AQ) as we may now be able to reach a negotiated settlement?

 

I really hope it wont take that long to reach agreement on the final amount but I really don't want to do a 200 page disclosure unless I absolutely have to.

 

Incidentally, there is a very interesting paragraph in Cobbetts letter regarding refinancing of unauthorised bank borrowing. I'm not going to post it on here just yet as it's crucial to my final settlement and as we all know Big Brother is watching but it might just give some other members a good grounding for claims similar to mine and I will definitely post it once I get it all sorted out.

[natwesttookmymoney]

Hi, Paul

 

I would suggest that you don't ask for a stay of the disclosure and, if they apply for one, to vigorously oppose it.

 

Disclosure is the point at which they have to reveal their actual costs

and to advise of the documents they'll be using to defend their charging regime and levels.

 

It's unlikely they will do so because, as well know, the bank's true costs are nowhere near their charges. So they won't want to disclose. But, if they decide to do so, then you (and, I trust, we) will be able to see exactly what they reckon their services and activities are. We'll be able to have a look at it and compare it with the reality - including the evidence in the Northern Ireland report that charges on personal accounts are an important source of income - i other words, they're profiting from their regime, and it's unlawful to do so.

 

Best wishes

 

Westy

[alanfromderby]

Totally agree....by applying for a stay you will take the pressure off them.

[mcuth]

Yup, another one on the "don't do a stay" side

 

Cheers

 

Michael

[The cobbett slayer]

I'm very tempted to force disclosure as it will certainly help others but to be blunt I'm not going to prejudice my settlement.

 

Just spoken to my dad who used to work for the High Court and he has suggested that I offer Natwest a stay of the disclosure order by consent (we both agree to the stay).

 

I was talking to BF about this on Friday and he agreed that for me to force disclosure would be a real milestone for CAG but not at the expense of delaying my own claim.

[mcuth]

I'm very tempted to force disclosure as it will certainly help others but to be blunt I'm not going to prejudice my settlement.

 

Just spoken to my dad who used to work for the High Court and he has suggested that I offer NatWest a stay of the disclosure order by consent (we both agree to the stay).

 

I was talking to BF about this on Friday and he agreed that for me to force disclosure would be a real milestone for CAG but not at the expense of delaying my own claim.

 

I can't say I blame you for that Paul - but if they know they have another month (for example) to play with, then the skeptical part of me says that the chances are that they'll drag the negotiations out that long anyway. Full disclosure would be a PITA to go through, but let's face it, it's a much bigger threat to them than it is to you.

 

It's not like they're paying up 75% with the 25% payable on condition of avoiding disclosure is it?

 

Cheers

 

Michael

[natwesttookmymoney]

Hi, Paul

 

I may be missing something so please excuse me if I seem thick.

 

You've asked them to explain or justify their charges. It's been a cornerstone of the case that they aren't justifiable. They have failed to provide you with evidence to the contrary. Not just you but thousands of others.

 

You've given them adequate opportunity to discuss your claim meaningfully before you started the action. They didn't take it and you were obliged to commence legal proceedings.

 

I don't understand how not agreeing to a stay of disclosure or opposing it is going to help you. That's first and foremost - you. No-one's asking you to be a martyr nor to prejudice your claim but we'd all, I'm sure, be gobsmacked if they actually went to disclosure and were prepared to justify their charges as realistic reflection of their costs. They have not done so in any case at all so far. No bank has and this site knows of thousands of successful cases, totalling approaching £4 million.

 

So it's on the historic basis that one thinks that you're turning into the home straight and agreeing to a stay of disclosure serves only the bank's interest, not yours.

 

Or is there something I've missed?

 

Best

Westy

[natwesttookmymoney]

Looking back through the thread, the only thing I can see that is possibly open to discussion is whether you're claiming the same thing twice - the loan plus interest you had to take out to consolidate the charges, and the charges (plus interest) themselves.

I'm not sure I've got that right though. Please correct me.

Westy

[The cobbett slayer]

Like I said, I'm not prepared to disclose what they actually said about loan agreements until I get that one sorted but I will post it when they settle.

 

I'm not going to mention a stay. They have 3 weeks before they have to disclose so I'll keep the pressure on and see what happens.

[mcuth]

Actually Paul, I was just going to say, as well as them having 3 weeks to get a cheque issued, you've also got 3 weeks to decide whether negotiations are going well enough to apply for a stay anyway

 

Cheers

 

Michael

[natwesttookmymoney]

Fair enough, Paul.

Sheers, matey, and good luck - keep us posted (which I'm sure you will!!)

Westy

[The cobbett slayer]

Just an update - there's nothing to update!!!

 

I wrote back to Cobbetts last week clarifying my position on the loan and accepting the offer made as an interim payment and guess what - nothing.

 

I suspect that they are going to drag it out as close to 22nd as possible or possibly request confidential disclosure of costs. If they don't settle, I do now have a hearing on 17th January for my application for an order that they respond to my Part 18 request.

 

My standard disclosure will be ready in plenty of time - the question now is, will theirs?

[Lula]

makes you want to spit doesn't it Paul do they get extra lessons at law school on prevarication and obfustication?

[The cobbett slayer]

A little help please guys.

 

I'm just preparing my disclosure for the court (because they haven't paid me yet!!!) and I'm a little confused.

 

The court order states:

 

3. Disclosure is limited to standard disclosure by 4pm on 22nd December 2006

 

4. The latest date for delivery of the lists is 19th January 2007

 

What's the difference. If you make the disclosure surely the list is delivered and served at that time.

 

Thanks

Paul