Alejandro vs Natwest (solicitor acting as defence has requested info from me?)

[alejandro79]

Hello,

 

I am (hopefully) nearing the end of my battle with the NatWest to claim back £1770+ in charges covering the last 2 year period.

 

Originally I sent my preliminary letters to two different offices at NatWest - Manchester and Wimbledon.

 

I received two separate responses from each offices.

 

Wimbledon offered me £219 as a good will gesture.

Manchester offered me £500 as good will gesture.

 

This shows the inefficiency of the NatWest, as the two offices obviously haven't spoken to each other. I think the organisation of the Natwest, as a company is pathetic.

 

I decided to process my claim through Manchester Crown Court. I sent in my application as a hard copy paper application (not through the Moneyclaim website). I had to pay £120 in court costs.

 

The NatWest have now appointed a solicitor based in Manchester to act as defence for this claim, which they have not accepted.

 

I have today recived correpondence stating that they now require further information from me, as listed below:

 

=================================

 

 

TheReQuest

1. In your claim you state that the charges are: "unenforceable by virtue of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999, the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and the common law".

2. Please specify all of the facts relied on by the Claimant in support of the

contentions in paragraph 1 above, and in particular please identify (a) the section(s) of The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 ("UCTA 1977"); (b) the regulations of The Unfair Contract Terms in Consumer Regulations 1999 ("the Regulations"); and © the principles of common law relied upon by the Claimant in alleging that the contractual provision(s) referred to are unenforceable. Please also identify the contractual provision(s) that the Claimant alleges are unenforceable by reference to UCTN the Regulations.

Dated: 7 September 2006

 

==================================

 

I am totally confused by all this legal talk and really don't know how I shoudl respond to this?

 

Can anyone help please?

 

Thanks, Alejandro....

[kydcarmen]

Hi, well unfortunately i can't help but maybe you should have a look at jonni2bad, his thread has some legal links and it may have some that you need.

[Plutos]

Alejandro, you are in almost exactly the same position as a number of us on this site. This response is absolutely standard from Natwest, and you shouldn't let it intimidate you. Please take a look around at some other threads (plutos vs Natwest, Carrie vs Natwest, Chris vs Natwest, Clark vs Natwest, and Isobel Daily's thread called "help needed" for a start). See what we've been discussing and then post any questions back on here.

 

Good luck!!

 

Plutos

[Isobel Daly]

Alejandro, This is standard prcedure. Their lawyers must be working overtime!! If your claim is under £5000 then you do not have to reply to their request to complete the CPR part 18. They have no legal right to ask you for this. I have sent the standard in response to you defence........... blah blah. Enclose a copy of your bank charges you are claiming and also yout Account name, Account no and sort code. They are trying to delay people up by saying they do not have this information. Good luck - we are all in the boat.

[Plutos]

Alejandro, This is standard prcedure. Their lawyers must be working overtime!! If your claim is under £5000 then you do not have to reply to their request to complete the CPR part 18. They have no legal right to ask you for this. I have sent the standard in response to you defence........... blah blah. Enclose a copy of your bank charges you are claiming and also yout Account name, Account no and sort code. They are trying to delay people up by saying they do not have this information. Good luck - we are all in the boat.

 

Amazing stuff isn't it. We're sending them the information that they originally provided to us themselves! Ridiculous.

 

I've just posted the letter I intend to send over on my thread (plutos vs Natwest). Take a look and see what you think. We're exactly at the same stage!

 

Plutos

[danler]

Hi, I am exactly the same stage as you, not knowing how to answer the request. I sent a letter back to them saying I was not prepared at this time to answer the Part 18, however Natwest have sent me a letter again asking for this information - mainly the information you have above.

 

Here is what they have asked me

----------------------

recieved a letter from Cobbetts after thier standard defence about CPR 18 and request for further information. I replyed back to Cobbetts and said that I as not prepared at this time to answer their CPR 18. I also included a breakdown of my charges applied to my account.

 

I have just recieved another letter from them saying I should serve a full and detailed reply to point 3 to 6 of their request.

 

Here are the points

 

3. In your claim you state that "the bank's charges are a disproportionate penalty and therefore unenforceable as they are contrary to common law".

 

4. Please provide the following particulars in support of your claim :

4.1 Please specify the clause(s) pursuant to which the charges were applied

 

4.2 Please specify whether the charges applied were due to a breach of contract by the Claimant

 

4.3 Please identify in each case the particular breach of contract (by reference to appropriate term(s) of the contract) that the charge related to.

 

5. In your claim you state that the charges are "invalid under the Unfair (Contrats) Terms Act 1977 s.4 and Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 Para 8 and Sch.2(1)(e)" and unreasonable within the meaning of the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 s.15"

 

6. Please specify all of the facts relied on by the Claimant in support of the contentions in paragraph 5 above, and in particular please identify the contractual provisions(s) that the Claimant alleges are invalid by reference to UCTA/the Regulations.

--------------------------

I looked through the Royal Bank Of Scotland as they use Cobbetts and look at the thread hello......help. They have sent a letter back to Cobbetts saying that in all corispondence with Natwest and Cobbetts theu feel they have provided enough information and will only answer their request when the court asks them to do so. It's quite a good letter and I will be adapting it for myself, and it will be in the post on Monday. Good luck and keep us informed.

 

Danler