Jump to content


Sm03art V's Natwest £3000


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5253 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

  • Replies 55
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi all again been awhile, Got my letter from the courts today, staying Corbetts are going to defend all of my claim!, hope ive done everything right!!!

 

Guess ill have to wait for the big white envelope to drop on the mat!

 

But they have till the 15th Sept now :evil: So suppose they will wait till then :-x and put it in at the last minute.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive put my claim in to the courts!, but ive claimed debit interest...... Corbetts have not been in touch yet, only to say, they have acknowledge my cliam.... Do I:-

 

 

A; Have to start again?

 

B; Change particulars of the claim?

 

c; Sit and wait to see what Corbetts do?

 

I know the MODS are going to shout, but did read that interest was a debatable and claim it..... Please help.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Hi there finally got my defence,

Now i know ive messed up, in claiming interest and the odd avantage gold subscritpion. But what do i do now....ive hit a brick wall, please help!

Defence

 

1. This defence is filed and served without prejudice to the defendants case that the particulars of claim do not disclose reasonable grounds for bringing a claim against the claimant to recover bank charges (and interest thereon) referred to in the particulars of claim or any other sum(s)

 

2. No admissions are made as to what charges have been debited to the claimants bank account.

 

3. In relation to the allegation that the contractual provisions pursuant to which the charges have been applied are invalid pursuant to the Unfair contract terms act 1977 (UCTA 1977) and/or the Unfair contract terms in consumer regulations 1999 (the regulations) and/or section 15 supply of goods and service act 1982 (SGSA)

 

3.1 In relation to the case of the claimant that the contractual provisions are invalid pursuant to section 4 UCTA 1977 then it is the case of the Defendant that the section is not applicable as any contractual provision relating to charges does not relate to the defendants liability for negligence or breach of contract.

 

3.2 In relation to the case of the claimant that the contractual provisions are invalid pursuant to the regulations the defendant pleads as follows;

 

3.2.1 Schedule 2 to the Regulations is an Indicative and non-exhaustive list of terms which may be regarded as unfair (emphasis supplied).

 

3.2.2 The regulations have no application because the charges amount to payment for services provided by the defendant and the adequacy (or otherwise) of consideration paid under a contract for services is not issue to be judged by reference to principles of fairness under the regulations.

 

 

3.3 In relation to the case the claimant that the charges are unreasonable within the meaning of SGSA section 15 the defendant pleads as follows;

 

3.3.1 The claimant is required to plead and prove the necessary factors (referred to in section 15 SGSA) concerning the contract between the Claimant and the Defendant which men that pursuant to SGSA section 15 there is an implied term that the claimant pay a reasonable charge for the service under the contract

 

3.3.2 Further the Claimant is required to plead and prove (a) that the bank charges which have been debited are unreasonable; (b) all facts and matters relied upon by the claimant in support of this case and © what charges would have been reasonable.

 

3.3.3 In the circumstances no grounds are disclosed for a claim that the defendant has acted in breach if SGSA section 15.

 

3.3.4 In the circumstances (save a appears below) the defendant is unable to pleaded to this allegation beyond denying that it has acted in breach of SGSA section 15 as alleged or at all. The defendant reserves its right to plead further to this allegation once (and if) the defects in the pleaded case referred to in paragraphs 3.3.1-3.3.3 above are addressed.

 

3.3.5 It is the case of the defendant that contracts between the claimant and the defendant does not fall within SGSA section 15 because (a) the consideration for the service would be determined by contract between the claimant and defendant and (b) was not left to be determined in a manner agreed by contract or determined by the course of dealings between the claimant and defendant.

 

4. The claimant’s schedule of charges refers to fees interest and debit interest The claimant is not legally entitled to recover interest on his account in conjunction with 8% interest pursuant to section 69 county courts act 1982, as the claimant is effectively claiming double recovery interest from the defendant.

 

5. Save as hereinbefore appears the defendant joins issue with the claimant on his claim(s) and denies that it is liable to the claimant as alleged or at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there finally got my defence, from Cobbetts

Now i know ive messed up, in claiming interest and the odd avantage gold subscritpion. But what do i do know....ive hit a brick wall, please help!

Do i need to amend my Particulars of Claim or Just send them a new schedule charges......

 

Defence

1. This defence is filed and served without prejudice to the defendants case that the particulars of claim do not disclose reasonable grounds for bringing a claim against the claimant to recover bank charges (and interest thereon) referred to in the particulars of claim or any other sum(s)

 

2. No admissions are made as to what charges have been debited to the claimants bank account.

 

3. In relation to the allegation that the contractual provisions pursuant to which the charges have been applied are invalid pursuant to the Unfair contract terms act 1977 (UCTA 1977) and/or the Unfair contract terms in consumer regulations 1999 (the regulations) and/or section 15 supply of goods and service act 1982 (SGSA)

 

3.1 In relation to the case of the claimant that the contractual provisions are invalid pursuant to section 4 UCTA 1977 then it is the case of the Defendant that the section is not applicable as any contractual provision relating to charges does not relate to the defendants liability for negligence or breach of contract.

 

3.2 In relation to the case of the claimant that the contractual provisions are invalid pursuant to the regulations the defendant pleads as follows;

 

3.2.1 Schedule 2 to the Regulations is an Indicative and non-exhaustive list of terms which may be regarded as unfair (emphasis supplied).

 

3.2.2 The regulations have no application because the charges amount to payment for services provided by the defendant and the adequacy (or otherwise) of consideration paid under a contract for services is not issue to be judged by reference to principles of fairness under the regulations.

 

 

3.3 In relation to the case the claimant that the charges are unreasonable within the meaning of SGSA section 15 the defendant pleads as follows;

 

3.3.1 The claimant is required to plead and prove the necessary factors (referred to in section 15 SGSA) concerning the contract between the Claimant and the Defendant which men that pursuant to SGSA section 15 there is an implied term that the claimant pay a reasonable charge for the service under the contract

 

3.3.2 Further the Claimant is required to plead and prove (a) that the bank charges which have been debited are unreasonable; (b) all facts and matters relied upon by the claimant in support of this case and © what charges would have been reasonable.

 

3.3.3 In the circumstances no grounds are disclosed for a claim that the defendant has acted in breach if SGSA section 15.

 

3.3.4 In the circumstances (save a appears below) the defendant is unable to pleaded to this allegation beyond denying that it has acted in breach of SGSA section 15 as alleged or at all. The defendant reserves its right to plead further to this allegation once (and if) the defects in the pleaded case referred to in paragraphs 3.3.1-3.3.3 above are addressed.

 

3.3.5 It is the case of the defendant that contracts between the claimant and the defendant does not fall within SGSA section 15 because (a) the consideration for the service would be determined by contract between the claimant and defendant and (b) was not left to be determined in a manner agreed by contract or determined by the course of dealings between the claimant and defendant.

 

4. The claimant’s schedule of charges refers to fees interest and debit interest The claimant is not legally entitled to recover interest on his account in conjunction with 8% interest pursuant to section 69 county courts act 1982, as the claimant is effectively claiming double recovery interest from the defendant.

 

5. Save as hereinbefore appears the defendant joins issue with the claimant on his claim(s) and denies that it is liable to the claimant as alleged or at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi there finally got my defence, from Cobbetts

Now i know ive messed up, in claiming interest and the odd avantage gold subscritpion. But what do i do know....ive hit a brick wall, please help!

 

Do i need to amend my Particulars of Claim or Just send them a new schedule charges......

 

Defence

 

1. This defence is filed and served without prejudice to the defendants case that the particulars of claim do not disclose reasonable grounds for bringing a claim against the claimant to recover bank charges (and interest thereon) referred to in the particulars of claim or any other sum(s)

 

2. No admissions are made as to what charges have been debited to the claimants bank account.

 

3. In relation to the allegation that the contractual provisions pursuant to which the charges have been applied are invalid pursuant to the Unfair contract terms act 1977 (UCTA 1977) and/or the Unfair contract terms in consumer regulations 1999 (the regulations) and/or section 15 supply of goods and service act 1982 (SGSA)

 

3.1 In relation to the case of the claimant that the contractual provisions are invalid pursuant to section 4 UCTA 1977 then it is the case of the Defendant that the section is not applicable as any contractual provision relating to charges does not relate to the defendants liability for negligence or breach of contract.

 

3.2 In relation to the case of the claimant that the contractual provisions are invalid pursuant to the regulations the defendant pleads as follows;

 

3.2.1 Schedule 2 to the Regulations is an Indicative and non-exhaustive list of terms which may be regarded as unfair (emphasis supplied).

 

3.2.2 The regulations have no application because the charges amount to payment for services provided by the defendant and the adequacy (or otherwise) of consideration paid under a contract for services is not issue to be judged by reference to principles of fairness under the regulations.

 

 

3.3 In relation to the case the claimant that the charges are unreasonable within the meaning of SGSA section 15 the defendant pleads as follows;

 

3.3.1 The claimant is required to plead and prove the necessary factors (referred to in section 15 SGSA) concerning the contract between the Claimant and the Defendant which men that pursuant to SGSA section 15 there is an implied term that the claimant pay a reasonable charge for the service under the contract

 

3.3.2 Further the Claimant is required to plead and prove (a) that the bank charges which have been debited are unreasonable; (b) all facts and matters relied upon by the claimant in support of this case and © what charges would have been reasonable.

 

3.3.3 In the circumstances no grounds are disclosed for a claim that the defendant has acted in breach if SGSA section 15.

 

3.3.4 In the circumstances (save a appears below) the defendant is unable to pleaded to this allegation beyond denying that it has acted in breach of SGSA section 15 as alleged or at all. The defendant reserves its right to plead further to this allegation once (and if) the defects in the pleaded case referred to in paragraphs 3.3.1-3.3.3 above are addressed.

 

3.3.5 It is the case of the defendant that contracts between the claimant and the defendant does not fall within SGSA section 15 because (a) the consideration for the service would be determined by contract between the claimant and defendant and (b) was not left to be determined in a manner agreed by contract or determined by the course of dealings between the claimant and defendant.

 

4. The claimant’s schedule of charges refers to fees interest and debit interest The claimant is not legally entitled to recover interest on his account in conjunction with 8% interest pursuant to section 69 county courts act 1982, as the claimant is effectively claiming double recovery interest from the defendant.

 

5. Save as hereinbefore appears the defendant joins issue with the claimant on his claim(s) and denies that it is liable to the claimant as alleged or at all.

 

hi dont panic , check out the RBS forum including bigcols thread and westable

 

 

 

 

 

I am not a legal expert my advice is given without prejudice and is purely my opinion only. If you are in doubt please seek professional advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just been back to court today, with my N244 and amended N1 all with the new amounts. They said i should get them back in the next 3-4 days.

 

Also they said that the AQ allocation Questionare was sent on friday.....umm still havent received it? It has to be in on the 2nd Oct.

 

Never mind ill keep an eye on that one.

 

Again a really big thanks you! to Karnevil and her friend blue.!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Allocation Questionaire received today and filled in correctly (hopefully). Be off to Chester CC on Monday to hand it in. Hopefully ill receive my amended N1 form back from the courts after filling in my N244. Then ill send that to Cobbetts. Oh hopefully there be light at the end of the tunnel!!!!!!!!

 

Thanks again to this wonderful site and especially Karnevil. 8)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well surprise surprise. That one looks identical to the defence Mrs Roadrally received from Cobbetts aside from the interest paragraph. Don't Panic, the worst you might have to do is amend your claim, Read the FAQ's and go buy a copy of the small claims guide book (Buy it from this site - the profits help to fund the hosting costs) believe me it's worth every penny.

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 threads merged - please stick to one thread!

Opinions given herein are made informally by myself as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

received my amended N1 claim back from the courts today, nicely stamped, but ive only received one of the three i put into the courts, i guess they keep one, but i thought i was meant to send the amended claim to NatWest, have the courts sent it off to NatWest for me?

 

there is a sheet stapled to the amended n1 it tells me the judge, and beneath that it says IN ORDER THAT: The claimants be granted leave to amend the claim.

 

Whats going on!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Hi all, just to keep you posted, got a letter of cobbetts the other day, basically saying that i would lose in court etc, and then in the middle of the letter they offer me a goodwill gesture of £1,150, sent them a letter turning this down,

 

deadline for the settlement was the 12th oct 2006....

 

so fingers crossed now!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hadnt heard a thing, so thought i would call the courts, Cobbetts hadnt even filed there AQ,

What happens now then, they should of filed it on the 2nd Oct 2006

 

Any reply will be helpful

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hadnt heard a thing, so thought i would call the courts, Cobbetts hadnt even filed there AQ,

What happens now then, they should of filed it on the 2nd Oct 2006

 

Any reply will be helpful

 

File for judgement in default ASAP.

 

If they hand in their AQ before you hand in an Application for judgement in default the court won't grant your application.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...