TheCobbettSlayer v NatWest ***WON***

[The cobbett slayer]

After much deliberation I came up with the following and emailed it to Cobbetts this afternoon

 

 

 

I refer to your letter of 2nd February 2007.

 

I do not agree with your suggestion that the loan agreement is not relevant to the offer made as the offer only relates to interest payments made and fails to address the issue of further interest payable under a continuing arrangement. Also, the statements show a loan principal of £11000. Only £5800 of this was paid into the current account, substantially less than the amount claimed in charges. It is therefore essential to both the claim and the defence that the scope and purpose of the loan be clearly established.

 

I would remind your client of it’s obligation under Section 77(1) and Section 78(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 to provide a true copy of the agreement. Should your client require me to do so I will issue a formal request and make payment of the statutory fee of £1.00. Failure to comply with that request would result in further litigation, which I would bring to the attention of the Court dealing with the present matter.

 

I have not at this stage drawn to the attention of the Court the breach in the order of Judge Reeson, in that your client’s Standard Disclosure was not dated or served until 2nd February 2007. I assume that it is your client’s intention to comply with the order of Judge Wyatt dated 17th January 2007 and look forward to receiving the response to my request.

 

Yours lovingly

 

The Cobbett Slayer

 

(I made the last bit up - I didn't really sign it like that;) )

[stan5131]

That'll wipe the smile off their faces lol

[The cobbett slayer]

It's very quiet.

 

I expected some sort of a reply by return of post given that they only have until Saturday to respond to my Part 18 request.

 

Still, in the words of the song "Silence is golden"

[fire fox]

Or "no news is good news". Keeping fingers crossed for you.Can you apply for a strike out if they dont repond by Sat? Bye the way I have all my court docs nearly finished now. Strange how it all clicks into place in the end.

[natwesttookmymoney]

"Strange how it all clicks into place in the end."

 

Isn't it, though?

 

Welcome to the next stage, Tony!

 

I was up in your neck o' the woods a couple of weeks ago, visiting Bentley. They wouldn't let me take any of their cars out for a test drive. (Mutter, mutter, mumble, grump)

 

Westy

[fire fox]

Bentley ah. My other half drools over the baby blue convertible in the reception every time we pass and complained big time when it wasnt under the tree at Xmas. Bless.

Sorry for invading your space Paul!!!

[fire fox]

Any news? Thought their deadline was up tomorrow?

[The cobbett slayer]

Nothing today.

 

If theres nowt in the post tomorrow I'll spend the weekend drafting up a witness statement for an application to strike out.

 

I'll exhibit the standard disclosure dated 2 weeks after the date that Counsel for the Defence informed the court in closed hearing that it would be filed, cite the failure to respond to my request under Part 18, contrary to the order of 17th January, and that the defence to this part of my claim doesn't meet Part 16.2 of CPR.

 

Doesn't leave them a lot to go on!

[fire fox]

Nope you are right it doesnt! This could mean you are nearing the end! Lets hope.

[natwesttookmymoney]

Nothing today.

 

If theres nowt in the post tomorrow I'll spend the weekend drafting up a witness statement for an application to strike out.

 

I'll exhibit the standard disclosure dated 2 weeks after the date that Counsel for the Defence informed the court in closed hearing that it would be filed, cite the failure to respond to my request under Part 18, contrary to the order of 17th January, and that the defence to this part of my claim doesn't meet Part 16.2 of CPR.

 

Doesn't leave them a lot to go on!

 

Hi, Paul

 

16.2 deals with the claim - do you mean 16.5?

 

W

[The cobbett slayer]

Thanks Westy yes I do

 

I would have read it again before I did the statement but good spot!

[The cobbett slayer]

I'm thinking about a slightly different approach.

 

The witness statement covers the basics - late response to standard disclosure order in spite of Counsels reassurances to the Judge, no response to Part 18 request contrary to the order of 17th January and defence does not meet CPR 16.5 (thanks again Westy).

 

I'm a little reluctant to make another application and just wonder if I should just ask the court manager to place the file before the DJ for review. That way it will be of the courts own motive if they strike out and Cobbetts won't be served before it goes in front of the DJ.

 

Either way, I'm going to do something tomorrow!

[gizmo111]

Could try ringing the court to see if cobbetts ahve corresponded with them at all and not included you in the loop. This is one of Citi's favourite games.

[Guest Zooman]

Hi Paul,

 

Well done mate.

 

I would not write to the court yet, if you make an application as you say you can bear the costs, but their is a simple way to reduce your costs risk.

 

A letter to your mates at cobblers.

 

Dear Sir

etc etc

 

Your clients have so far failed to comply with the court order of the xx to disclose xxx by 9 feb make by Judge XX.

 

I would be grateful if by return if you would advice on the date your client expects to have complied with the above said order.

 

Beaware if your client has not complied with this order in full by 4pm Wednesday 23rd of February or explained good reason as to why they can not comply by 4pm Wednesday 23rd of February and given a date they will comply by, {I will bring the failure to the courts attention}{will make an appliction for summary [judgement][to strike out the defence and summary judgement]} due to your clients failure to comply with the court order.

 

I await your clients position by return.

 

Yours,

Paul

 

What this does IMO is puts your in the position of a reasonable party that has explored other possibilities before you have wrote to court.

[petrafyde]

Hi Paul,

 

Well done mate.

 

I would not write to the court yet, if you make an application as you say you can bear the costs, but their is a simple way to reduce your costs risk.

 

A letter to your mates at cobblers.

 

What this does IMO is puts your in the position of a reasonable party that has explored other possibilities before you have wrote to court.

 

That looks to be a nice subtle approach, and one which I would most definitely consider using in your position, I think. I'm sure you'll do the right thing anyway, good luck, still rooting for you.

[The cobbett slayer]

Hi Paul,

 

Well done mate.

 

I would not write to the court yet, if you make an application as you say you can bear the costs, but their is a simple way to reduce your costs risk.

 

A letter to your mates at cobblers.

 

What this does IMO is puts your in the position of a reasonable party that has explored other possibilities before you have wrote to court.

 

Hi Zoo, Petra et al.

 

I did that a week ago (see post 354) and gave them fair warning so I think I've been fair with them.

 

All the letters between us since the partial settlement have been on a without prejudice basis anyway so will probably never see daylight if it goes to court.

[The cobbett slayer]

Well heres the guts of it. I've not filed an application, just a letter to the Court Manager requesting a review. I want the court to deal with this on its own motive

 

1. I am the claimant in this matter.

2. Judgement in Default was issued on 11th September 2006 when the Defendant failed to acknowledge service of the claim. The Defendant subsequently applied for judgement to be set aside quoting “oversight” for its failure to respond. This application was allowed.

3. On 9th November 2006 the Claimant served upon the Defendant a request for further information under CPR Part 18. The Defendant did not respond to this request and an application was made by the claimant for an Order.

4. A further application was made on 28th December 2006 by the Claimant as the Defendant did not make standard disclosure by the 22nd December 2006, this being the date the Claimant believed to be the latest date for disclosure.

5. The applications referred to in paragraphs 3 and 4 were listed for hearing on 17th January 2007.

6. On 11th January 2007, the Defendant made a payment to the Claimant of £10,878.97 in partial settlement of this claim.

7. Before Deputy District Judge Wyatt, Counsel for the Defence argued that there is an ambiguity in the allocation order and that the latest date for disclosure was 19th January 2007. Deputy District Judge Wyatt accepted this argument and took assurance from Counsel that the Defendant was in a position to make disclosure and would do so by 19th January 2007.

8. I attach a copy of the Defendants disclosure by list. Contrary to the assurances made by Counsel for the Defence, this document was not dated or served until 2nd February 2007. The disclosure is in the opinion of the Claimant deliberately vague as it does not contain reference to any specific documents that the Claimant may wish to inspect.

9. At the hearing of 17th January 2007, it was ordered that the Defendant reply to the Part 18 request made by the Clamant on 9th November 2006 by 10th February 2007. The Defendant has not replied and is therefore in breach of the order.

10. I refer to paragraph 6 of the Defence, which deals specifically with the outstanding matters of the claim. The Defence does not comply with CPR 16.5(2), in that when denying an allegation it does not provide the Defendants reasons for doing so and does not provide an alternative version of events. At the hearing of 17th January 2007, Deputy District Judge Wyatt informed Counsel for the Defence of this fact. The Defendant has not served an amended Defence on the Claimant. It is the case of the Claimant therefore that the Defendant is unable to support its denial.

11. It is the belief of the Claimant that the breaches referred to in Paragraphs 2, 7 & 9 above are deliberate. The Defendant has no wish to respond to the Part 18 Request of 9th November 2006. The Defendant is almost exclusively represented by Cobbetts LLP in cases of this nature and usually settles cases for the full amount just before the court trial date, ensuring that the Defendant does not have to justify its charges regime. This practice wastes a considerable amount of court time.

12. It is the belief of the Claimant that the court should seek to give effect to its overriding objective and strike out the Defence at this stage so that no more valuable court resources are wasted and respectfully requests that this matter be placed before a District Judge for review.

[thecornflake]

Well heres the guts of it. I've not filed an application, just a letter to the Court Manager requesting a review. I want the court to deal with this on its own motive

...

 

 

Nice letter. Living up to your name I see. Can't wait to see their reply to this one.

[mcuth]

Well heres the guts of it. I've not filed an application, just a letter to the Court Manager requesting a review. I want the court to deal with this on its own motive

 

Nice one mate, think that should do the trick

 

Cheers

 

Michael

[fire fox]

Good luck with that one. Sounds good. Keep us posted.

Tony

[Guest Zooman]

Paul, you can not send that to the judge, if you write to the judge to bring something to his attention it has to be just that. You can not send a witness statement to a judge in this manner and then also make a request to strike out, that is nothing more then an application on the cheap. It has to be one of 2 things a simple letter that says simply that the defendant has not complied with the order of xx date, or an application.

 

Plus you previous letter does mention the court order, but the one above is different, as it clearly shows that you are going to act by xx date and if they do not respond to the letter they will never get costs at any hearing to decide if the claim should be struck out, you can not expect people to read between the lines, the court will not do this, you must be clear in your actions.

 

I would be shocked if a judge made anything other then an order giving them 14 further days, to comply from the day he sends any order. Play the system correctly and you have a very good chance of getting a summary judgement, play it like this and you can not expect anything and only hope for the unlikely.

[The cobbett slayer]

Zooman

 

I acknowledge your greater experience of the court system and if I have made a mistake then so be it. We all do it. The wording of the statement was very carefully thought through so as not to appear to be an application.

 

Perhaps I should have posted the covering letter to the court manager which is simply a REQUEST that the case be put back before a judge for direction. As I understand it, the court manager is at liberty to refuse such a request if it is in breach of procedure and I will be informed. There is no request to strike out, simply a statement that I beleive it would be appropriate for the court to do so.

 

I will have to wait and see now. If the court manager does not place the file before a judge then I will have to make an application. Incidentally, I'm fee exempt so all applications are "on the cheap"

[The cobbett slayer]

I have received an offer today which I am going to accept. When I have more time over the weekend I will explain more and I won't keep you hanging on too long but I have reached a reasonable conclusion to my claim.

[Lula]

As long as you are happy with it Paul that is the only thing that matters - CONGRATULATIONS and I look forward to hearing all the gory details

[Guest ian cognito]

Well done Paul, you have put up a noble fight, glad you're able to put it to rest xx