SabreSheep Vs Natwest + Moorcroft / ** Satisfactory Conclusion **

[fletch70]

The fact that moorcroft wrote back to you (I assume promptly) saying that you had to contact the creditor directly would I believe cover them. As you have now sent a S78 request to Pratwest will start that 12+2 days clock ticking. No doubt they will write back asking for a signature, that seems to be what they do. I personally told them to go stuff and they didn't need one as they had been writing to you at your current address.

As for what you get back, well

A copy or a reconstituted copy of the compliant agreement that you would have signed (an application form is not enough although they may claim that the PTS were on the reverse)

Then a copy of associated terms and conditions at inception as well as associated terms and conditions at termination. On top of that a statement of account i.e saying how much you owe. Pratwest have been quite difficult with me.

 

 

One of the problems is that if you send an I&E showing that you have no disposable income , quite rightly they wonder how you can afford even £1 . If family are helping you out they would expect you to include that although even if hell froze over I wouldn't.

 

Wait and see what comes back

[SabreSheep]

Natwest will not be asking for my sigature again. They just apologised for doing that with my sar request.

 

Also i thought MC had a responceability to pass request on no?

[SabreSheep]

Prelim already sent anyway so MC cannot do anything as its now directly in dispute with NW

[ims21]

Natwest will not be asking for my sigature again. They just apologised for doing that with my sar request.

 

Also i thought MC had a responceability to pass request on no?

 

For info -

 

From the FCA Consumer Credit Handbook...

 

(3) If the recipient considers that another person is the lender or owner, the recipient should either inform the applicant of who it considers is the correct recipient or pass the request on to that person.

 

CONC 13.1.3 http://fshandbook.info/FS/html/handbook/CONC/13/1

 

As Moorcroft do not own the debt and are not part of NW, as has been said you do not have to deal with them at all.

[SabreSheep]

Good info. Thanks for that

[fletch70]

Thanks IMS, was just about to post that, bit of a huge monster the FCA handbook.

 

Thanks for the clarity on NW not owning Moorcroft, I was originally surprised to read that

 

From my experience they will fairly quickly pass it back if you stick to your rights

[SabreSheep]

17/05/14 Letter received from Natpest dated 14/05/14

 

Not upholding complaint as they explained all charges at account opening and they believe them to reflect the cost that arises from being over limit or paid late etc etc. As expected.

 

Issuing LBA today. Same letter but adding line acknowledging their previous letter and changing last sentence to "If payment is not received within 14 days I *Will* proceed to the courts for recovery along with any additional costs incurred.

[SabreSheep]

OK here is my first "forum safe" draft of my POC

 

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

New POC Natwest (N1)

Claim No [ ]

 

IN THE [xxxxx] county court

 

 

 

BETWEEN

 

[Mr Flibble (Not real name for forum purposes)]

Claimant

 

and

 

 

-National Westminister Bank PLC

 

 

Defendant

 

 

 

 

PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

 

 

1. The Claimant entered into an agreement (“The Agreement”) with the Defendant on or around 26/08/2001, whereby the Defendant was to advance credit facilities to the Claimant under a running credit account, Account no XXXX-XXXX-XXXX-XXXX ("The Account").

 

2. The Agreement essentially consisted of the Defendant providing the Claimant with a credit card (“The Card”) which would allow the Claimant to make purchases and receive cash advances on credit. In return the Defendant was entitled to charge interest at the published rate.

 

3. The Agreement was a Regulated Agreement for the purposes of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

4. At all material times the contract was subject to the Defendant’s standard terms and conditions which could be varied from time to time.

 

 

Summary

 

5. Throughout the course of the Agreement, the Defendant has added numerous default charges to the Account for the Claimant’s failure to make the minimum payment on the due date and or for exceeding the credit limit and or if a payment is returned. (Full particulars are set out in schedule 2).

 

6. The default charges were applied in accordance with the standard terms of The Agreement which were:

a) A penalty payable on breach of contract and thus unenforceable: and

b) An unfair term under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (“The Regulations”) and therefore not binding on the Claimant.

 

 

7. The Claimant is accordingly entitled to repayment of the sums wrongly added to the Account.

 

The Charges

 

 

8. The standard Terms of the Agreement in substance provided as follows:

(a) The Defendant would provide the Claimant with the Card. The Claimant was entitled to use the Card to make purchases and receive cash advances up to a credit limit (“the Limit”) set by the Defendant. The Defendant could unilaterally change the Limit by giving the Claimant notice in writing.

(b) The Defendant was entitled to charge interest on the purchases and cash advances at the published rate.

© The Claimant was to pay the minimum payment of 2.25% of the amount owed or £5 (whichever was the greatest) by the due date as notified in the monthly statements.

(d) The default charges applied are listed in detail in schedule two.

Penalty

 

9. The amount of the Charges exceeded any genuine pre-estimate of the damage which would have been suffered by the Bank in relation to the Claimant’s transgressions.

 

10. In the premises the Charges were punitive and a penalty and thus unenforceable at common law.

 

The Regulations

 

 

11. At all material times the Claimant was a consumer within the Regulations.

 

13. At all material times the terms of the Agreement providing for the Charges were unfair within regulation 5 of the Regulations in that contrary to the requirement of good faith they caused a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations to the detriment of the Claimant.

 

14. without prejudice to the burden of proof, the Claimant will refer to the following matters in support of the contention that the terms are to be assessed as unfair as at the time of the conclusion of the Agreement, and of each revision to the Standard Terms.

(1)The terms relating to Charges were standard terms; they would not be individually negotiated.

(2)The Charges were a penalty for breach of contract.

(3)The Charges exceeded the costs which the Bank could have expected to incur in dealing with the exceeding of the credit limit, late payment or returned payment.

(4) Accordingly the Charges were a disproportionate charge incurred by the Claimant for their failure to meet their contractual obligation and thus within the ambit of Schedule 2 (1) (e) of the Regulations and indicative of an unfair term.

(5) As the Bank knew, the Charges were of subsidiary importance to the customer in the context of the Agreement as a whole and would not influence the making of the Agreement.

(6) As the Defendant knew, the Claimant had no means of assessing the fairness of the Charges.

(7) In the premises, the effect of the Charges would be prejudicial to the customer who incurred them, and cause an imbalance in the relations of the parties to the Agreement by subordinating the customer’s interests to those of the Defendant in a way which was inequitable.

 

15. without prejudice to the burden of proof, the Claimant will contend that the terms’ imposing the Charges are not core terms under regulation 6 of the Regulations and relies on the following matters.

(1) The assessment of fairness does not relate to terms which define the main or core subject matter of the Agreement.

(2) The assessment of fairness does not relate to the adequacy of the price or remuneration as against the goods or services supplied in exchange (in other words, whether or not the relevant services were value for money).

(3) The Charges are correctly described as default charges by the Defendant in the key information provided to new customers.

 

16. By reason of the said matters the terms were not binding under regulation 8 of the Regulations.

 

17. The Defendant wrongly applied Charges to the Account totalling some £XXX.XX between 15/04/2004 and 12/10/2012 Particulars appear from Schedule 2.

 

18. 09/05/14 the Claimant demanded repayment of the sums wrongly applied.

 

19. The Defendant has not repaid them or any of them.

 

And the Claimant claims;

 

 

(1) A declaration that the sums totalling £936.00 have wrongly been applied to the Account. Some of these charges are older than the normal 6 years but are claimed by virtue of s32 (1) c Limitations Act 1980 as per Kleinwort Benson v Lincoln City Council.

 

(2) Payment of the said sum of £948.00 and interest in restitution of £4031.17 as per Sempra Metals v Inland Revenue Commissioners.

 

(3) Interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum on the amount claimed (daily rate of £0.02109%) until judgment or sooner payment.

 

(4) Court costs of [ xxxx].

I believe that the facts stated in these particulars, comprising of x pages, are true.

 

Dated

 

 

 

Signed Mr Flibble

 

 

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

My main problem is at the moment I do not have the CCA to refer to (just eh application form)

I shall upload that shortly. I am awaiting a cca request though.

 

 

I would be grateful for links to other Natwest CC claims and better POC's. I have 14 days to get this ready

[citizenB]

I have had a quick search and dont seem to be able to find any PoCs for Nat West CC charges, Sabre

[SabreSheep]

Ho hum. This means Im on untested ground then.

[SabreSheep]

OK lets see if this attachment works better

[citizenB]

Your attachment, is that all that you were provided with.. there should be terms and conditions.. ?

 

Was there any PPI on this card ?

 

 

With regard to your Particular of Claim, I imagine it will be pretty much the same as, for example, B/shark..

[SabreSheep]

Thats what came with my SAR request.

I am waiting on a cca responce from NW.

 

Gonna be interesting how nw respond to this process.

[citizenB]

Ah righto, my apologies.. I thought this was part of the CCA request.

 

You are entitled to receive in respect of that..

 

Copy of or truthful reconstruction of the agreement.

Terms and conditions at both inception and at default (if there was one) and current. If there have been any variations then you are entitled to receive copies of the variations as well.

Statement of account showing how the balance shown has accrued to identify default/penalty charges

[SabreSheep]

I await full compliance failure with baited breath heh

[SabreSheep]

Here is the Natwest response to my CCA request.

 

Is it enforceable or not and if not why not

[SabreSheep]

Bugger have I put this post in the wrong place? Someone move it please

[SabreSheep]

OK new thread started for people wanting to pick apart my CCA

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?425188-Natwest-CCA-request

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Can't see anything wrong personally I have a NW CC account this appears to be identical, everything is there imo.

[citizenB]

Can you confirm that the terms and conditions are those that were at the time of inception or are they current. It appears from their letter that they say they only have to provide current t&cs.. not so..

 

For an s78 request to be satisfied you are entitled to...

 

Copy or or truthful reconstruction of the agreement.

Terms and conditions from both inception and at teh time of default or currently. If the t&cs were varied, then copies of the variations also to be provided.

 

Statement of account showing how the balance has accrued.

 

You can obtain statements via an SAR request for the cost of £10.00..

 

Have they been sending you "Notice of Sums in Arrears" at least once a year since 2008 ?

[citizenB]

If you can, you might want to reduce the file size of your upload..

[SabreSheep]

Hi

 

OK statements I have ALL of them. They supplied them all to me when I did a SAR request

 

1) The letter saying *1.Sign your card" and T+Cs on the reverse are current t+c's

2) The large number of pages making up "copy T+C's I do not recall ever seeing it before. However 4.4i and iV make reference to paying "late payment charge and also other transactions that break this agrement" but I am not seeing anywhere in the T+C's that actually lays these out which I would of thought the original agreement would have to. 11.1 makes references to me having to pay additional charges as detailed on the reverse of "your statement"

 

3) for "terms varied" does that mean every time they rate jacked me?

 

4) Notice of sums in arrears? I believe they sent default sum notices .

[citizenB]

 

2) The large number of pages making up "copy T+C's I do not recall ever

seeing it before.

 

These should have been present at the time of signing the agreement.

 

I am trying to locate an example of "Notice of Sums in Arrears". I think they have to be headed as such.

 

However, you can have a read of andyorch's article on these to see if what you have received is correct.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?161927-Amendments-Default-Notices-CCA-1974-from-Oct-1st-2008&highlight=Notice+of+Sums

[SabreSheep]

Thank you, will have a read.

If its any help judging by the "application" it looks like it may have been a postal application

[citizenB]

Thank you, will have a read.

If its any help judging by the "application" it looks like it may have been a postal application

 

Aha..yes indeed it says to seal round the gummed edges at the side.. in which case, it is unlikely the terms and conditions would be with that because the reverse of the application would have been their address