Cobbetts Defence Received...Help/Advice/Translation Required PLEASE!

[Steveo28]

Morning All,

 

I have a £2K claim with NatWest which I originally submitted via an N1 Form to my local County Court in early September. My Particulars of Claim were detailed, and I also attached a full listing of all the transactions I am reclaiming.

 

Anyway, Cobbetts filed their defence on Friday (Oct 6th), surprise, surprise, the 28th day; the letter I received reads as follows:-

 

**********************************************************

 

DEFENCE

 

1. This defence is filed and served without prejudice to the Defendant's case that the Particulars of Claim do not disclose resonable grounds for bringing a claim against the Claimant to recover the bank charges (and interest thereon) referred to in the Particulars of Claim or any other sum(s). In the event that the Claimant does not properly particularise his claim then the Defendant will apply to strike out the claim and/or for summary judgement in respect of the same.

 

2. On allocation the Defendant invites the Court to direct that there be a case management conference in order for the Court to consider the making of appropriate orders to give the Claimant the opportunity to properly particularise his claim.

 

3. No admissions are made as to what charges have been debited to the Claimant's bank account.

 

4. In relation to the allegation that th e contractual provisions pursuant to which the have been applied are unenforceable by virtue of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 ("UCTA 1977") and/or the Unfair Contract Terms in Consumer Regulations 1999 ("the Regulations") and/or the common law, the Claimant is required to identify:

 

4.1

(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; and

 

4.2 the contractual provision(s) that the Claimant allege are invalid by reference to UCTA 1977 and/or the Regulations.

Until such time as these sections/regulations/provisions are identified the Defendant cannot (save as appears below) plead to the allegation referred to in paragraph 4 above. The Defendant therefore reserves its right to plead further to the allegation once (and if) the Claimant identifies the relevant contractual information.

 

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.

 

 

**********************************************************

 

Although this is what I expected from reading through the forums, I am struggling to understand the terminology/legal jargon it contains, as I'm sure is the intention. :? (Paragraph 2 is of particular concern to me as I haven't yet seen this mentioned elsewhere).

 

Please can someone translate it for me, and advise me on what I do next?

 

Should I expect an Allocation Questionnaire from the Court this week?

 

Is their correspondence to me a CPR Part 18 Request, or would they specifically ask for this by name if this were the case??!

 

Also, please can someone reassure me by confirming that this is their standard Defence?

 

Many Thanks in Advance...

[livelylad]

Morning All,

 

I have a £2K claim with NatWest which I originally submitted via an N1 Form to my local County Court in early September. My Particulars of Claim were detailed, and I also attached a full listing of all the transactions I am reclaiming.

 

Anyway, Cobbetts filed their defence on Friday (Oct 6th), surprise, surprise, the 28th day; the letter I received reads as follows:-

 

**********************************************************

 

DEFENCE

 

1. This defence is filed and served without prejudice to the Defendant's case that the Particulars of Claim do not disclose resonable grounds for bringing a claim against the Claimant to recover the bank charges (and interest thereon) referred to in the Particulars of Claim or any other sum(s). In the event that the Claimant does not properly particularise his claim then the Defendant will apply to strike out the claim and/or for summary judgement in respect of the same.

 

2. On allocation the Defendant invites the Court to direct that there be a case management conference in order for the Court to consider the making of appropriate orders to give the Claimant the opportunity to properly particularise his claim.

 

3. No admissions are made as to what charges have been debited to the Claimant's bank account.

 

4. In relation to the allegation that th e contractual provisions pursuant to which the have been applied are unenforceable by virtue of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 ("UCTA 1977") and/or the Unfair Contract Terms in Consumer Regulations 1999 ("the Regulations") and/or the common law, the Claimant is required to identify:

 

4.1

(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; and

 

4.2 the contractual provision(s) that the Claimant allege are invalid by reference to UCTA 1977 and/or the Regulations.

Until such time as these sections/regulations/provisions are identified the Defendant cannot (save as appears below) plead to the allegation referred to in paragraph 4 above. The Defendant therefore reserves its right to plead further to the allegation once (and if) the Claimant identifies the relevant contractual information.

 

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.

 

 

**********************************************************

 

Although this is what I expected from reading through the forums, I am struggling to understand the terminology/legal jargon it contains, as I'm sure is the intention. :? (Paragraph 2 is of particular concern to me as I haven't yet seen this mentioned elsewhere).

 

Please can someone translate it for me, and advise me on what I do next?

 

Should I expect an Allocation Questionnaire from the Court this week?

 

Is their correspondence to me a CPR Part 18 Request, or would they specifically ask for this by name if this were the case??!

 

Also, please can someone reassure me by confirming that this is their standard Defence?

 

Many Thanks in Advance...

 

 

Hi this is the standard defence, dont panic! You dont have to reply to the CPR part 18 as it has little or no relevance in the small claims also only the judge can order disclosure. Also you will recieve an AQ just complete it and send it back any problems pm me.

[Lager_Lou]

... but their defence doesn't actually specify CPR 18 anywhere does it? Surely Cobbetts would have to say they are asking for info in relation to CPR 18 if this is what they are after?

 

All confused.... Lager_Lou

[Steveo28]

Thanks for the replies, but to be honest I'm none the wiser...

 

As Lager_Lou says, thay don't actually mention the term CPR Part 18 Request?

 

What should my response to Cobbetts be??

 

PLESE HELP ME, I REALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO NEXT??!

[livelylad]

ok check out this link it will help with para 2 also check out thread in your forum and bigcols in rbs as cobbetts represent both banks.

[livelylad]

ok check out this link it will help with para 2 also check out thread in your forum and bigcols in rbs as cobbetts represent both banks.

 

sorry forgot the link

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/mercantile-court-cases-stays/35132-mercantile-cmc-18th-october.html

[gizmo111]

Thanks for the replies, but to be honest I'm none the wiser...

 

As Lager_Lou says, thay don't actually mention the term CPR Part 18 Request?

 

What should my response to Cobbetts be??

 

PLESE HELP ME, I REALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO NEXT??!

 

CPR part 18 request is usually hiddent on the back of the last page of the defence - and somewhere in the defence they will say they have asked for this to help you! Bless em

[gizmo111]

1. This defence is filed and served without prejudice to the Defendant's case that the Particulars of Claim do not disclose resonable grounds for bringing a claim against the Claimant to recover the bank charges (and interest thereon) referred to in the Particulars of Claim or any other sum(s). In the event that the Claimant does not properly particularise his claim then the Defendant will apply to strike out the claim and/or for summary judgement in respect of the same.

 

 

What did you actually put in your particulars?

[darthbane2k]

1. This defence is filed and served without prejudice to the Defendant's case that the Particulars of Claim do not disclose resonable grounds for bringing a claim against the Claimant to recover the bank charges (and interest thereon) referred to in the Particulars of Claim or any other sum(s). In the event that the Claimant does not properly particularise his claim then the Defendant will apply to strike out the claim and/or for summary judgement in respect of the same.

 

 

 

What did you actually put in your particulars?

 

dont worry - this is simply their latest tactic. They know claims submitted via MCOL are not overly detailed due to space limitations of the website. simply send a more detailed PoC with your next correspondence too them.

[Steveo28]

Cheers again for the replies to date...

 

In answer to some of the points raised:-

 

- I entered my claim via the N1 route, not MCOL.

 

- There is no mention of a "CPR Request" anywhere on the document from Cobbetts. The text is as above, plus the formailities above and below.

 

- My Particulars of Claim were as follows:-

 

1. The Claimant had an account xxxxxx ("the account"), sort code xx-xx-xx, with the Defendant which was opened on or around 5th October 1995.

 

2. During the period in which the account was operating the Defendant debited numerous charges to the account in respect of purported breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant and also interest on the charges once applied. The Claimant understands that the Defendant contends that the charges were debited in accordance with the terms of the contract between itself and the Claimant.

 

3. A list of the charges applied is attached to these particulars of claim.

 

4. The Claimant contends that:

 

a) The charges debited to the Account are punitive in nature; are not genuine pre-estimate cost incurred by the Defendant; exceed any alleged actual loss to the Defendant in respect of any breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant; and are not intended to represent or related to any alleged actual loss, but instead unduly enrich the Defendant which exercises the contractual term in respect of such charges with a view to profit.

 

b) The contractual provision that permits the Defendant to levy such charges is unenforceable by virtue of the Unfair Contract Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations (1999), the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and the common law.

 

5. Accordingly the Claimant claims:

 

a) the return of the amounts debited in respect of charges in the sum of £1,800 and any interest charged thereon;

 

b) Court costs

 

c) interest persuant to section 69 County Courts Act at a rate of 8% per year from 17th December 2004 to 5th September 2006 as set out on the attached list of charges of £118.06, or at such a rate and for such periods as the court deems just and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgement or earlier payment at a daily rate of £0.40p.

 

I suppose they want me to quote them the actual relevant sections of the 2 Acts I entered in my Particulars?

[gizmo111]

Cheers again for the replies to date...

 

In answer to some of the points raised:-

 

- I entered my claim via the N1 route, not MCOL.

 

- There is no mention of a "CPR Request" anywhere on the document from Cobbetts. The text is as above, plus the formailities above and below.

 

- My Particulars of Claim were as follows:-

 

1. The Claimant had an account xxxxxx ("the account"), sort code xx-xx-xx, with the Defendant which was opened on or around 5th October 1995.

 

2. During the period in which the account was operating the Defendant debited numerous charges to the account in respect of purported breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant and also interest on the charges once applied. The Claimant understands that the Defendant contends that the charges were debited in accordance with the terms of the contract between itself and the Claimant.

 

3. A list of the charges applied is attached to these particulars of claim.

 

4. The Claimant contends that:

 

a) The charges debited to the Account are punitive in nature; are not genuine pre-estimate cost incurred by the Defendant; exceed any alleged actual loss to the Defendant in respect of any breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant; and are not intended to represent or related to any alleged actual loss, but instead unduly enrich the Defendant which exercises the contractual term in respect of such charges with a view to profit.

 

b) The contractual provision that permits the Defendant to levy such charges is unenforceable by virtue of the Unfair Contract Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations (1999), the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and the common law.

 

5. Accordingly the Claimant claims:

 

a) the return of the amounts debited in respect of charges in the sum of £1,800 and any interest charged thereon;

 

b) Court costs

 

c) interest persuant to section 69 County Courts Act at a rate of 8% per year from 17th December 2004 to 5th September 2006 as set out on the attached list of charges of £118.06, or at such a rate and for such periods as the court deems just and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgement or earlier payment at a daily rate of £0.40p.

 

I suppose they want me to quote them the actual relevant sections of the 2 Acts I entered in my Particulars?

 

Looks like - perhaps they have given up on the part 18 - as no one ever sends them one!

[Steveo28]

So do I need to provide them with this info?? Or can requests for additional info only come from the Court??

 

And does the fact they have requested a Case Management Conference mean one will definitely take place??

 

The bar stewards have got me rattled!!!!

[gizmo111]

So do I need to provide them with this info?? Or can requests for additional info only come from the Court??

 

And does the fact they have requested a Case Management Conference mean one will definitely take place??

 

The bar stewards have got me rattled!!!!

 

They have invited the court to call a cmc upon allocation - to be honest I am not sure what you do next - cobbetts are trying lost of little tactics in order to get cases struck out - maybe PM a mod or keep bumping this until one replies

[vileda]

Have a bump on me

 

I'm interested in this as I'm submitting a claim as soon as I've scraped enough cash together.

 

Thanks

Vileda

[Michelle542]

So do I need to provide them with this info?? Or can requests for additional info only come from the Court??

 

And does the fact they have requested a Case Management Conference mean one will definitely take place??

 

The bar stewards have got me rattled!!!!

 

Hi

I've received the same letter as you from Cobbetts last friday and I'm confused what to do next. Mine is a business account and received charges for £3000 which I then had to convert into a loan and they charged me £110 to arrange the loan and charge £80/£90 every 3 months in interest. So i would really love to get the money back.

 

Michelle

[Steveo28]

*bump*

 

Any more thoughts please on what I do next??!

[Guest littlesally]

No matter how many times I read through all that, my brain shuts down!!!

Absolutely no help to you, but I can give you a bump.

Sorry

[Lager_Lou]

*BUMP* Hello again... any luck?

 

Have you sent a PM to a mod? I can see this being an issue all of us Nat West claimants are going to need to know about if this is Cobbet's new defence tactics.

 

Lager Lou

[Steveo28]

Nope, still no luck??! Really starting to brick it now - I need to acknowledge my receipt of their defence at the very least...

 

I've PM'd "Bankfodder", but I imagine he's a very busy man....

 

Can anyone tell me the Moderator of this forum to PM??

 

 

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGH!!!!

[stef1]

Hi

 

I am currently awaiting a court date after receiving a defence from Cobbetts representing the RBS..... In their defence they are stating that the particulars of Claim was lacking information and that therefore the claim be struck out.

 

They couldn't even be bothered to file the Allocation Questionnaire on the due date (two days late) which would indicate how arrogant these guys can be.

 

My claim is for 4k+....over a six year period. I have followed the procedure of reclaiming the charges step by step and am amazed that is has got this far and as the court date looms nearer I must confess to feeling apprehensive. Has anyone else actually gone to court and had a settlement?

[Bigredbus]

Hi,

I am now waiting for Cobbetts reply. Throughout this site we've seen many different particulars of claim. Ones clearly stating sections of law applied to our cases and others lacking in clarity, which leaves an open door to Cobbetts to stall on. I have used the following particulars of claim:

 

Claimant has account xxxxxxxx, xxxxxx with Defendant from xx/xx/xx conducted on their standard terms and conditions. Claimant is claiming the rturn of £xxxx.xx taken by Defendant's charges over x years. The defendant's charges are a disproportionate penalty and therefore unenforcable as they are contrary to common law. They are also invalid under the Unfair Contracts Terms Act 1977 s.4 and under under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999, para.8 and sch 2.1.e. In the event that the charges are not a penalty they are unreasonable within the meaning of the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 s.15. Defendant has declined justification of charges despite repeated requests. Claimant claims interest under s.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% a year from xx/xx/xx to xx/xx/xx of £xxx.xx and also interest at same rate up to the date of judgement or earlier payment at a daily rate of 8 pence.

 

[Steveo28]

*bump*

 

Pleeeeeeeeeeeease help!

[Bigredbus]

Looks like your PoC aren't enough descriptive, referencing to specific sections of laws. I read few threads where the claimant amended his PoC, being more precise about references to law. I am sorry for not being able to direct you to those threads but I read them recently...

[Lager_Lou]

Hello again

 

Why don't you send Cobbetts a letter confirming receipt, repeating your POC but in more detail (using Redbus's wording, or look at Plutos' thread for an example), enclose another copy of your charges stating how rubbish they are as you've already sent it to them once, the bank twice and pointing out that the bank could have supplied it to them in any case seeing as how they are working for them, and then cc it to the court.

 

I'm not sure about the legal procedure - whether you NEED to respond to their defence in such detail? I've read a lot of threads but I'm not sure how to respond to their point 4.1 when they go on about you proving that they have broken contract law.... it's all a bit beyond me.

 

Sorry I can't be of more help

[Steveo28]

Thanks Bigredbus, and to everyone else who has responded, your help is very much appreciated...

 

I need to reply to acknowledge the receipt of their Defence, so have now come up with the following letter in response:-

 

***********************************************************

Cobbetts LLP

Ship Canal House

King Street

Manchester

M2 4WB

10th October 2006 By Post & E-mail

Re: Claim No: XXXXXXX

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUESTED

 

Dear Sir

I acknowledge the receipt of the defence posted on behalf of National Westminster Bank plc.

 

In response to your queries, using the same numbering as per your defence for simplicity:-

4.1

a) the relevant sections of The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 are 3 and 11 and Schedule 2

b) the relevant regulations of The Unfair Contract Terms in Consumer Regulations 1999 are 5, 6, and 8, and Schedule 2, 1.

c) the principle of common law that the claimant relies upon is relating to liquidated damages and penalties in contracts.

Having now identified the relevant contractual information as requested, I trust that my claim can now proceed to court.

For clarity, I confirm that the charges I am claiming were applied to the following account:

Account Name: Mr xxxxxxxxx

Account No: xxxxxxxx

Sort Code: xx-xx-xx

Full details of each and every charge applied to the account are already in the possession of the Defendant, from whom I obtained the information prior to this claim. However details of all charges, the amounts, dates debited and a description of each is attached.

I will forward a copy of this letter to Hereford County Court for their records.

Yours faithfully

***********************************************************

PLEASE CAN SOMEONE REASSURE ME THAT THIS IS OKAY AND THE RIGHT COURSE OF ACTION??