Cobbetts Cpr part 18 request/CPR part 16.4.1

[Movingon]

Allyxia - your claim will be heard in your local court. When you fill in the allocation questionnaire you don't even need to mention it, because the claim will be allocated to your local court ANYWAY. If it is not, THEN you can write to the court with your objections to this... but you won't have to

[Movingon]

Not sure who would have informed you to fill out a Summary Judgement. If you've sent all the details, with your particulars of claim, respond to their letter (and a copy to the court) detailing what it is you have sent, the fact that it has been signed for, and the fact that it contained all the details they are asking for. Explain that you feel grossly intimidated by the Defendant's tactics and actions, and that you feel that it has a bearing on your case that they are willing to take such actions in order to deter you from claiming.

 

Hugs

 

You'll be fine, honestly. They're just trying to scare you and therefore you should stand firm against them. Don't call them, use the court to scare THEM!

[Movingon]

They will probably send you the same paperwork ANYWAY - they seem to be particularly unimaginative.

[Movingon]

Very little, as CPR Pt 18 does not apply to the Small Claims track, and if you HAVE provided them with all the information they need then even less chance.

 

I would write to the court with a strong rebuttal of Cobbetts' request and so on just to make sure that they do not succeed somehow.

[Movingon]

Nice one Kay!

[Movingon]

The (most excellent) reason not to is that Pt 18 of the Civil Procedure Rules does not apply to the Small Claims Track of the court. It's simply an attempt to make you go "Oooo this is all getting a bit scary - I think I'll fold and give up and fall over and cry and not claim any more." Obviously noone "in the know" is really going to behave like that.

[Movingon]

If a letter is "Without Prejudice" then it CANNOT be presented to a court without the Judge's leave. Which probably will not be granted. If it is "Without Prejudice Save As To Costs" then it can be presented to the Judge when allocation of costs are being decided; which is generally following the Judge's ruling/decision. Let's remember that the bank WILL NOT, under any circumstances, allow your claim to enter the courtroom; if they do, your first comment is to remind the judge that you are absolutely willing to pay Bank Charges just as soon as the Bank demonstrate their costs and that the charging structure accurately reflects them in each type of charge.

 

No - this is sabre rattling, intimidatory behaviour of the lowest, most despicable kind; and as long as you stand firm they will not prevail.

[Movingon]

POC = "Particulars of claim"

 

Andy

 

Oh, and thank you Tom for your swift and accurate answer to my question above.

 

No problem Andy! You're Welcome!!

[Movingon]

May as well send it to the court as well... no point pussy-footing around to be honest.

[Movingon]

the letter I got off Cap Quest today chasing me for Natwets debt of £200 - telling me Im going to prison!!!

 

Please please please tell me that this is true... I SO want to see the text of this letter so that I can assist you in composing a reply!!! Can I? Huh? Huh? Please? Huh? Can I? Huh?

[Movingon]

Good letter. It should at least set them thinking, if nothing else!

[Movingon]

If it's over £5k you can safely assume it will be Fast Track - and a "request for more information" is a request under CPR Pt 18. Especially with you being vulnerable to a Fast Track allocation. Do reply to their request; don't, however, put in any of the confrontational stuff.

 

Sue - the bank (as the defendant) have ABSOLUTELY NO RIGHT to "cross out small claims and put fast track". The case is allocated to a Track by a Case Management Judge as far as I can tell. This is just another trick by Cobbetts to try to intimidate you - and a blatant one at that. IF YOUR CLAIM IS LESS THAN £5000.01 (before interest and court fees) then it is ineligible for Fast Track except at the discretion of the Court. If the claim is for £5000.01 or more, then it is ELIGIBLE for Fast Track at the discretion of the court.

 

There is no "borderline". It's either eligible or it's not - but the court (and the court alone) have discretion to choose either way.

[Movingon]

No. It would be pointless and eventually they'll find out about the complaint the sensible way.

[Movingon]

This is what i had from the courts today with regards to the CPR18 request.

 

I don't have a clue what to do now, heres my thread and this is what i've been sending them etc and my progress.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/natwest-bank/32743-2nd-claim-natwest-contract.html

 

 

Print off the "Court Bundle" contained in the green section of the forum, and send it to the Court and the Defendant.

[Movingon]

Correction - the public would know the costs associated with Nat West's bank charges.

 

Answering the first four questions is simply a case of printing off the entire "Court Bundle" available on this site, the Excel Spreadsheet also so available (filled in with your charges and interest details), and a copy of the statements and/or bank printouts showing each statement.

 

Excellent development Mick - best of luck!

[Movingon]

Rimardo this depends on the details of your claim; post your request in your own thread with full details of the status of your claim, amount, etc etc etc.

[Movingon]

As long as you anticipate allocation to the Small Claims Track, and as long as you have not had an Order for Standard Disclosure from the Court, it's par for the course. The Judge and court staff will spot this immediately as an attempt to intimidate.

[Movingon]

Let us not forget that the solicitors are instructed very clearly by the Bank. It's my contention that Cobbetts are EXTREMELY uncomfortable (and rightly so) with the line that they have been asked to take by the Bank; and this dearth of comfort will lead to the breakdown of their relationship. They are being paid a fortune to do this, but in the end it won't be enough; they have the law society on their backs and a large proportion of claimants actually laughing at them (when they're not seething).

 

It's the BANK we should be directing our vitriol at - it's the BANK who drive this appalling behaviour, and it's the BANK who are breaking the Law. Cobbetts are unfortunately just another victim of the banks' complete arrogance; their total abandonment of any pretence at Customer Service.

 

Let's concentrate on bringing the BANKS down a notch or two, and look at the solicitors as just another brick in that wall.

[Movingon]

By the way - dunno if you lot are aware, but The Abbey and their solicitors have parted company quite recently...

[Movingon]

hi recieved cpr from cobbetts sent standard letter from here then 2 days later got aq fromcourts and another copy of cpr with it am i right in thinking i stil dont respond to cpr just aq claim is well under 5000

 

The court will tell you if they require a CPR response, on court paperwork. If you've sent the standard "Bog off you idiots you don't need it" response then that's all you need do.

[Movingon]

The court will tell you if they require a CPR response, on court paperwork. If you send the standard "Bog off you idiots you don't need it" response {with the schedule of charges} then that's all you need do.

 

In other words, "I refer the honourable gentleman to the reply I gave immediately above your question."

[Movingon]

...and the sarcasm slipped quietly by, into the night...

[Movingon]

WHOA! there. First of all, Matt, could you post your COMPLETE Particulars of Claim text either here or in your thread? We will then see whether or not Cobbetts have grounds for embarrassment. BTW - the only person - THE ONLY PERSON on this good Earth who can strike out your Claim is the Judge presiding over your Case. Cobbetts can (and may) respectfully request the Court that the claim be struck out - but they cannot strike out the claim themselves.

[Movingon]

Who has asked for this? The court, or Cobbetts? If it's Cobbetts, then send them the standard "Sod off until the court ask for it" letter - as long as your claim for charges only is less than £5000. Otherwise:

 

(a) The standard marketplace mark-up for services is approximately 100%. These services, being automated and applied to thousands of customers per day, are presumed to cost the bank a very small amount in the absence of evidence to the contrary and the cost to the consumer of £35 per transaction is presumed therefore to be unreasonable.

 

(b) See court bundle

 

© No formal assessment can be made of a reasonable price for these "services" without details of how much it costs the bank to provide them.

[Movingon]

Received notification of defence from MCOL Northampton County Court, also transfer of the claim to my local court, Buxton.

Included was the Allocation Questionnaire (small claims track) - straightforward other than sections D - Witnesses and E - Experts.

 

Has anyone proferred witnesses or experts?

In the small claims track (which I assume I am now on due to the AQ (N149) received) against the banks, does the judge make a ruling?

 

I'm not sure how these things work and can't find a reference. Apologies if there's any duplication...

 

The Allocation Questionnaire is used by the court to DETERMINE what track you're on, not NOTIFY you. You'll be notified when you get your hearing date.

 

Usually you will not be allowed to call expert witnesses, and unless you have someone who knows the details of your case from the bank's side, you will have no use for any other witnesses.