Loopyloopy v Natwest

[shakespeare62]

Hi Lisa

 

I am a bit amazed that you state there are no penalty charges on the statements are these true statements originiating to when the first part of the loan was advanced? ie Oct 2002.

Are you now in possession of the loan account statements?

 

Regards

 

Andy

 

Re Andy's query here is a useful guide on identifying the different RatsNest charges (refer to posts #42 & #43 on the link below) :-

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/184290-flyboy80-rbs-shoosmiths-charging-3.html#post1989053

Edited March 23, 2009 by shakespeare62

[AndyOrch]

Thanks Lisa

 

I really cant stress enough how important this papertrail is,its become so complicated hence Snatchwest amalgamating your entire borrowings and then hiding under the 25K rule which as I have stated was abolished in the amendemts to the CCA 2006 and implemented in 2008.They dont have any agreement because you never consolodated the previous into the the fresh borrowing if you had Hubby would recall and they would have the paperwork to prove.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[loopyloopy]

The previous arrangment had been through our local CAB.

My husbands payments with payplan didnt start until April 2008 This is when I think he panicked as received the claim forms.

April 2008 Payplan paid IRWIN MITCHELL SOLICITORS £51.62

May 2008 Payplan paid IRWIN MITCHELL SOLICITORS £132.69

 

Im going through all old statments now to try and see if i have missed any charges as previously I wasnt really looking for them.

 

Thanks all for your continued support.

[loopyloopy]

Looking at the last debit/credits for loan payments on the account

 

Feb 2004 NWB loan funds 20,150.00 CREDIT

Feb 2004 repay loan 4,691.09 DEBIT

Feb 2004 repay loan 10,154.99 DEBIT

My Understanding looking at it is Natwest Put 20,150.00 Into my husbands current account then withdrew the previous debts of 4,691.09 and 10,154.99 to clear those loans.

Thus total borrowing being 20,150.00.

 

On the loan statement they have started at 34,536,00, When I previously questioned this with the solictors they said its because although 20,150 was alledgedly borrowed they add all the interset they would have gained had the loan been paid over the full term.. So if we had paid the 20,150.00 by instalments of 287.80 for 10 years 287.80*120 months=34536.

 

Also out paper trail is rubbish mainly due to the house fire where we lost everything in 2007

[shakespeare62]

Forget the 25k limit it was abolished in 2006 if memory serves me correct.

 

you're right of course, It was abolished by the Consumer Credit Act 2006.

 

The Consumer Credit Act 2006 (CCA2006) introduced a number of new regulations which are outlined below:Credit Agreements over £25,000

Credit Agreements over £25,000

 

In April 2008, the financial limit of £25,000 was removed for new agreements so now all consumer credit agreements (unless specifically exempt), regardless of value, are regulated under the Act. This significantly increases protection for consumers.

However, business lending up to £25,000 will continue to be regulated to protect the most vulnerable business borrowers who do not have access to main stream lenders. Agreements over £25,000 which are wholly or predominantly for business purposes are exempt from CCA regulation to ensure that larger organisations are not impacted disproportionately by the regulation. For more information, contact the OFT.

 

I've copied the above snippets from Berr (half way down the page on the following link :-

 

Consumer Credit Act 2006 - BERR

[AndyOrch]

you're right of course, It was abolished by the Consumer Credit Act 2006.

 

The Consumer Credit Act 2006 (CCA2006) introduced a number of new regulations which are outlined below:Credit Agreements over £25,000

Credit Agreements over £25,000

 

In April 2008, the financial limit of £25,000 was removed for new agreements so now all consumer credit agreements (unless specifically exempt), regardless of value, are regulated under the Act. This significantly increases protection for consumers.

However, business lending up to £25,000 will continue to be regulated to protect the most vulnerable business borrowers who do not have access to main stream lenders. Agreements over £25,000 which are wholly or predominantly for business purposes are exempt from CCA regulation to ensure that larger organisations are not impacted disproportionately by the regulation. For more information, contact the OFT.

 

I've copied the above snippets from Berr (half way down the page on the following link :-

 

Consumer Credit Act 2006 - BERR

 

 

 

 

Andy

[steven4064]

Does this change operate retrospectively or only apply to new agreements?

[shakespeare62]

Playing Devils Advocate tho' just wondering if the Judge would say that the changes only apply to agreements after that section came into force i.e. after April 2008 ...

[AndyOrch]

Retrospectively Steven

 

 

Andy

[shakespeare62]

Retrospectively Steven

Andy

 

Fantastic ...is there any source we can quote about the retrospective issue in case you're not around ? Is it in a schedule or an order somewhere ? (No rush to reply cos the main issue is to help Loopy...it would be nice to know at some point..)

[AndyOrch]

Playing Devils Advocate tho' just wondering if the Judge would say that the changes only apply to agreements after that section came into force i.e. after April 2008 ...

 

Irrespective Shakespeare Lisa.Hubby did not take a loan out of the value of the P.O.C if she had there would be paperwork to prove it was a fresh loan this, as i have stated was an amalgamated amount through a period from 2002 - 2007 and should be reflected in the summons.Therefore the 25 k rule is neither here nor there

 

Regards

 

Andy

Edited March 23, 2009 by Andyorch

[AndyOrch]

Try this Shakespeare

 

 

 

 

will be subject only to the FSMA regime and the original agreement will

remain under the jurisdiction of the CCA. The two agreements will be

treated as separate and distinct, rather than being notionally combined

into a single agreement by virtue of s82(2).

i) Modified Agreements

In the CCA, there are provisions (under section 82) for dealing with the

situation where an existing credit agreement (either regulated under the CCA

or not) is varied or supplemented by a new contract. The effect of those

provisions is that firstly, the existing credit agreement and the later modifying

agreement are to be treated as one combined agreement; and secondly, if the

existing credit agreement is regulated, then the modifying agreement is to be

treated as a regulated agreement.

 

 

In the CCA, there are provisions (under section 82) for dealing with the

situation where an existing credit agreement (either regulated under the CCA

or not) is varied or supplemented by a new contract. The effect of those

provisions is that firstly, the existing credit agreement and the later modifying

agreement are to be treated as one combined agreement; and secondly, if the

existing credit agreement is regulated, then the modifying agreement is to be

treated as a regulated agreement.

 

 

 

Andy

[loopyloopy]

I have been through all the statments, I had previously highlighted all charges but because they only add up to £240 I didnt think it would help as the sum of money is alot more.

Looking through the statments NATWEST just kept increading my hubbys overdraft without even looking at affordability then charging intrest monthly for being overdrawn, he was regularly £2,000 overdrawn with a monthly income was below £1000 a month.

 

I have Natwest's AQ here it reads:

Given the rules require you to try to settle the claim before hearing do you want to attempt to settle at this stage YES

If yes do you want a one month stay YES

Would you like the court to arrange a mediation appointment NO

NO REASONS GIVEN WHY.

Is there any reason the claim needs to be heard at a particular court NO

you are expected to comply with the relevant pre-action protocol have you done so? NO

Explain: THERE IS NOT A RELEVANT PRE-ACTION PROTOCOL HOWEVER THE CLAIMANT HAS ACTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE OVERRIDING OBJECTIVE.

What amount of the claim is in dispute 27946.18

Have you made any applications in this claim? NO

Witnessess: REPRENSENTATIVE OF THE CLAIMANT

Witnness to what facts: ALL FACTS IN DISPUTE

Do youy wish to use expert evidennce at the trial or final hearing? NO

Which track do you consider is most suitable for your claim: MULTI TRACK

How long do you estimate the final hearing will be? 1 DAY

Have you attatched proposed directions you think appropriate for the managment of the claim? NO

What is your estimated costs incurred to date: £200

What do you estimate your overall costs are likely to be: £2500

 

 

That is all the sections they have filled in..

[AndyOrch]

Ok Lisa typical Mitchells AQ response seen one seen them all:rolleyes: Where are their Directions?

 

Ok now what did you put in yours and did you do yours first or after seeing the Claimants AQ?

 

Andy

[loopyloopy]

I did mine first as they time was running out and we got a bit panicked.

 

Do you want an attempt to settle at this stage? NO

 

Reasons: I do not deny or admit this claim, without copies of the relevant Consumer Credit agreement or documentation that the claimaint is basing their claim on I am unable to settle the claim. I have requested copies of the documentation and was informed they would be forwarded on to me but am yet to receive any.

 

Location of trial YES

MEDWAY COUNTY COURT, This court is suitable due to travelling distances and other commitments if not suitable any court in the kent area will also be fine.

 

Pre action protocols: No

No relevant pre-action protocols

 

What amount of the claim is in dispute: 27946.18

 

Witness Name: Mr Loopyloopy

Witness to: Whole claim in dispute

Expert evidence NO

Track FAST TRACK

Costs: WE LEFT THIS BLANK AS WASNT SURE WHAT TO WRITE....

[loopyloopy]

Our AQ was really poor, Im ashamed of it now as I really didnt look into it well enough, At the time I was really ill with being pregnant.

[AndyOrch]

Ok Lisa thats excellent btw you dont pay costs as the defendent that is the duty of the Claimant did you not give any directions? did the Claimant give any?

 

Lesson for the future should you find youselves in this predicament again always wait for the Claimant to lead and you respond.Litigation is as much about mindgames as law

 

 

Andy

[loopyloopy]

We handed our directions in a few days before the directions hearing after we received natwests Below are ours, natwest and what the judge agreed to in the hearing, however since we have been informed it is on the multi track.

 

NatWest directions for hearing 10th January

1. the claim is allcated to the fast track

 

2. The claim is stayed for three months for settlement and norrowing of the issues.

 

3. The parties will inform the court within 7 days if the matter is settled at the end of this period otherwise the following directions will commence;

 

4. there be exchange of evidence by standard list by 4pm on 23 april 2009

 

5. any requests for inspection of documents to be made by 4pm on 07 may 2009 with documents to be suplied by 4pm on 14 may 2009

 

6. There be simultaneous exchange of witneess statements by 4pm on 11 June 2009;

 

7. The parties shall file their listing questionaires by 4pm on 09 July 2009 to innclude an agreed case summary;

 

8 the trial to be listed for the first oped date thereafter;

 

9. 7 das prior to the trial the artes shall file and serve an agreed trial bundle

 

10. THe parties shall file and serve skeleton arguments at least 3 days prior to the trial.

Our Directions:

1 The Claimant shall not later than 4:00pm on (date) (being a date 2 weeks from the date of the making of the case management directions) deliver to the Defendant a verified true copy of each of the following documents that the Claimant seeks to rely up on.

 

(a) The executed regulated consumer credit agreement made between the defendant and Claimant.

(b) the default notice

© a full and complete statement of account covering the period beginning with the day of the making of the agreement and ending on the date of the commencement of this case.

(d) Notice of Assignment

 

2 In the event that the Claimant shall fail to comply with paragraph 1 of this order the claim shall stand struck out and the Defendant shall be at liberty without further order to apply to this court for judgment and for costs on the standard basis to be subject to detailed assessment proceedings if not agreed.

 

3 In the event of compliance with paragraph 1 of this order this case shall be allocated to the fast track and

 

4 The Defendant shall be at liberty to file and serve a consequentially Amended Defence by 4:00pm on (date) (being a date 6 weeks from the date of the making of the case management directions).

 

5 There shall be a stay of proceedings from (date) (being a date 7 weeks from the date of the making of the case management directions) until (date) (being a date 11 weeks days from the date of the making of the case management directions) to enable the parties to settle.

 

6 Standard directions for the notification of the result of mediation to the court office where after in the event of mediation failing,

 

7 Standard directions for the disclosure of documents and exchange of witness statements with no provision for expert witness evidence; date for hearing with a time estimate of 2 hour.

The directions the Judge agreed to:

the claim is allocated to the fast track

 

they claim is stayed for three months for settlement and narrowing of the issues

 

the parties will inform the courts by 9th april if settled

 

There be an exchange of evidence by standard list by 4pm on 23rd april

 

any requests for inspection or document to be made by 4pm on 07 may

2009 with documents supplied by 4pm on 14 may 2009

 

there be simultaneous exchange of witness statements by 4pm on 11 June 2009

 

CMC not phone hearing 45 minutes 23rd June.

[loopyloopy]

Someone kindly on here helped me prepare the directions as I think I only found out I needed them about 2 days before the hearing when I received NATWES'S. Good job Im not a solicitor and work on the other side of the law lol

[shakespeare62]

Thanks Andy (re your post #62 above)- I see the amendments to section 82 have been updated in the online version (UK Statute Law Database) of the CCA 1974)

[AndyOrch]

Thats fine Lisa

 

Ok I now have the full picture ( sorry for the barrage of questions but i have to know the fine detail)

 

Ok what we need now is for you to take time an create a manual statement of all payments /amount and date made after the the Claimants figure.

 

Also to compartmentalise the dates of each of the adavance /amount and date.Will be easy if you have the loan account statements.

 

Post up when this is complete and we will then prepare a new Disclosure list (after recieveing the Claimants of course) and throw a few spanners into Mitchells wheels.

Just post in the meantime if anything else transpires Lisa of if you are unsure of anything in the meantime.

 

I trust the above will help put your mind at ease in the meantime

 

Regards

 

Andy

[loopyloopy]

I did this for a previous post, Is this the kind of thing you are looking for. They claim the loan was taken out on the 10th Feb 2004 so anything from then on is what they are claiming..

All credits and debits relevant from statements.

Oct 2002 NWB loan funds 6,729.88 CREDIT

Nov 2002 NWB loan funds 1,519.09 CREDIT

dEC 2002 NWB loan funds 12,400.00 CREDIT

dEC 2002 rEVERSE eNTRY 12,400.00 DEBIT

May 2003 NWB loan funds 5,000 CREDIT

July 2003 NWB loan funds 5,000 CREDIT

July 2003 To repay Loan 5,176.22 DEBIT

July 2003 NWB loan Funds 5,000 CREDIT

July 2003 loan adjustement 5,000 DEBIT

Feb 2004 NWB loan funds 20,150.00 CREDIT

Feb 2004 repay loan 4,691.09 DEBIT

Feb 2004 repay loan 10,154.99 DEBIT

 

 

Total Credit= £55,798.97

Total Debit= £37,400.22

Payments made to the loan account

oct 02 205.72

dec 02 260.40

jan 03 260.40

feb 03 260.40

mar 03 260.40

apr 03 260.40

may 03 260.40

jun 03 260.40

July 03 260.40

July 03 137.37??? (nwb personal loan two payments same day)

aug 03 260.40

Sep 03 260.40

Sep 03 105.00 ??? (nwb personal loan two payments same day)

Oct 03 260.40

Oct 03 105.00 ???? same as above

Nov 03 260.40

Nov 03 105.00 ??? same as above

Dec 03 260.40

Dec 03 105.00 ??? same as above

Jan 04 260.40

Jan 04 105.00 ??? same as above

Feb 04 260.40

Feb 04 105.00 ??? same as above

March 04 287.80

April 04 287.80

May 04 287.80

Jun 04 287.80

Jul 04 287.80

Aug 04 287.80

Aug 04 60.00 (clear loan arrears)

Sep 04 287.80

Oct o4 287.80

Oct 04 35.00 (clear loan arrears)

Nov 04 287.80 (clear loan arrears)

Nov 04 287.80

Dec 04 35.00 (clear loan arreas)

Dec 04 287.80

Jan 05 287.80

Feb 05 287.80

March 05 missing statement

April 05 missed payment

May 05 No payment taken

June 05 287.80

July 05 287.80

Aug 05 287.80

oct 05 287.80

oct 05 287.80 (2 payments made)

june 06 450.00 (taken from loan statement)

june 06 150.00

jul 06 150.00

aug 06 150.00

sep 06 150.00

oct 06 150.00

nov 06 150.00

dec 06 150.00

feb 07 150.00

march 07 200.00

April 07 100.00

july 2007 300.00

 

[loopyloopy]

Andy,

 

What happens if I do not receive one from the claimant by the 29th April as the judge ordered. Will I not also get penalised for not sending one??

[loopyloopy]

Also the only loan account statment I have is the loan account for the loan they are claiming for from the 10th feb 2004.

I have requested the previous loan statments but have been told we are not allowed them as the claim is for a new loan taken out in 2004 not for the old ones if that makes sense.

I really need to try and go to bed now as im sure the baby will be up in a couple of hours but I will check back in tomorrow.

Thanks for all your help this evening.

Lisa

[AndyOrch]

Andy,

 

What happens if I do not receive one from the claimant by the 29th April as the judge ordered. Will I not also get penalised for not sending one??

 

Dont worry Mitchells are pretty prompt in their paperwork (the paperwork that exsisits that is)

Plenty of time to prepare but i tend to let the Claimant lead lets see what they are prepared to disclose (gives you an idea what they have and dont have)

The N265 Disclosure list is the last tool in your armour after the AQ to frighten them and make them run for the hills,lets use it wisely

 

Regards

 

Andy