Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • A key member of the US central bank, Raphael Bostic, tells the BBC rates might only ease "at the end of 2024".View the full article
    • A key member of the US central bank, Raphael Bostic, tells the BBC rates might only ease "at the end of 2024".View the full article
    • OK, thanks, I won't wait for them. On a side note, some of the posts on here are a bit frustrating, I read through five pages or so of someone going through the court process rooting for them as I'm reading, then nothing, not heard of again. Left here wondering what the outcome was, lol!
    • Hello Caggers,   I've been trying for years to get an old EE account wiped off my credit file. It was opened in 2013 and almost immediately defaulted but was shown as "Payment Arrangement" ever since. I contacted EE by telephone in 2022 and was advised it had not been wiped because there was still £69 owing, I paid it and thought it would correct once the CRA's updated their reporting cycle. However, it has still not been removed. I made a formal complaint on 27/03/2024 and have had contact with the executive team who advised that  "EE account ......... has now been deleted from the Credit File as it failed to close as it was reporting the payment arrangement set up despite, as advised this failing which should have resulted in a further default showing.  Please be advised the deletions we have completed take 24 hours to update if a paid service is used to view the Credit File. If the customer uses one of the free services to view the Credit File, the recordings update in 24 hours but the changes can take up to 30 days to be visible on a new copy of the Credit File. I have requested compensation and been advised by EE that another team are looking into this. That was almost 2 weeks ago and there has been no contact since, despite me chasing it. I do not want to go to court and would rather settle this amicably. However,I have been advised that I might have a claim for aggravated damages due to the length of time the incorrect reporting has been on my file and the fact that I told EE about this issue and paid the demanded outstanding amount of £69 almost 18 months ago. Should I just wait for EE to reply or should I start building my case against them? Is their statement admissible as evidence of their blame or do I need to dig a bit more? I made a DSAR which was initially rejected as having no data found yet. I trawled my e-mails from 2013 and found the account number and mobile number, I'm now awaiting the result of my 2nd attempt at DSAR. I have very little in the way of proof of actual loss except a mortgage refusal e-mail from HBOS in 2015. I have also had high interest loans and credit over the last 10 years but again cannot directly attribute this to this one specific error. There were other items on my credit file that could also have contributed to a low credit score too and I'm not out to cash in on anything. I want to make sure I don't end up shooting myself in the foot for any obvious reason and would appreciate any help from anyone who has had similar experience with breaches of DPA.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
        • Like
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Cobbetts defence!!


pezza01
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6341 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Help needed....

 

I recieved cobbetts defence this morning, with it being the 29th day!

Here is the outline of the defence:

1. Particulars of claim do not disclose reasonable grounds for bringing a claim against the to recover the bank charges (and interest thereon) referred to 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 the contractual provisions pursuant to which the charges have been applied are unenforceable by virtue of the 'UCTA 1977' and/or the 'Unfair Contract Terms in Consumer Regulations 1999' and/or the common law, the claimant is required to identify:

4.1 a) the section(s) of UCTA 1977; b) the regulations of The Unfair Contract Terms in Consumer Regulations 1999; and c) 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 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 claimant on his claim and denies that it is liable to the claimant as alleged or at all.

 

This is signed by.... Lynsey Clare Burgoyne

 

I was expecting to get the CPR18 or something, i dont know what i should do? Shall i reply to Cobbetts... if so, what should i include?

Any help would be greatly appreciated, i would be gutted if the case got stuck out!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Help needed....

 

I recieved cobbetts defence this morning, with it being the 29th day!

Here is the outline of the defence:

1. Particulars of claim do not disclose reasonable grounds for bringing a claim against the to recover the bank charges (and interest thereon) referred to 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 the contractual provisions pursuant to which the charges have been applied are unenforceable by virtue of the 'UCTA 1977' and/or the 'Unfair Contract Terms in Consumer Regulations 1999' and/or the common law, the claimant is required to identify:

4.1 a) the section(s) of UCTA 1977; b) the regulations of The Unfair Contract Terms in Consumer Regulations 1999; and c) 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 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 claimant on his claim and denies that it is liable to the claimant as alleged or at all.

 

This is signed by.... Lynsey Clare Burgoyne

 

I was expecting to get the CPR18 or something, i dont know what i should do? Shall i reply to Cobbetts... if so, what should i include?

Any help would be greatly appreciated, i would be gutted if the case got stuck out!

 

 

That sounds pretty similar to mine, but Mine had somewhere...To assist the claimant with the proper particularisation of his claim, the defendant serves with this defence a request made persuant to CPR Part 18.....

 

Do you not have any reference any where to CPR 18?

 

I also received "request for further information and clarification" and on there is specifically asked mt to respond to the cpr part 18 by a certain date?

 

Do you not have any thing like that?

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the abbreviation for Money Claim Online

IF MY COMMENTS HAVE HELPED PLEASE CLICK MY SCALES

 

Don't be like the banks - give a little back

 

 

:D NAT WEST - WON - £4282.36:D

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

I've put in a pretty comprehensive response to this letter in charlie_spencer's thread.

Have a look there.

Westy

Westy

 

 

 

If you like my post, click the scales!!

 

Nov 1 2006 Preliminary letter

21 Feb 2007 - cheque arrived for charges+DEBIT interest +Statutory Interest! Hurray!

Read all about it: natwesttookmymoney - v- NatWest

DONATE AS MUCH AS YOU CAN TO KEEP THE SITE GOING.

 

What can you claim? Vampiress has a good idea:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/69877-what-can-you-claim.html

Anything I say is just a suggestion. I'm a bigmouth, not a lawyer!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

I've put in a pretty comprehensive response to this letter in charlie_spencer's thread.

Have a look there.

Westy

 

 

cheers mate, but i cant seem to find charlie_spencer's thread... where abouts is it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had word for word the same defence as you - don't worry. Simply acknowledge receipt as they have asked you.

 

Oh so this is just a standard defence, you think? What happend next in your case?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, Pezza

sorry for the delay - had some work to do (and food to eat).

The thread is here (http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/natwest-bank/48884-partial-offer-rejected-subsequently.html#post392013)

As well as the response, take on board what Allyxia says about keeping the paperwork down!

Hope it helps!

Westy

Westy

 

 

 

If you like my post, click the scales!!

 

Nov 1 2006 Preliminary letter

21 Feb 2007 - cheque arrived for charges+DEBIT interest +Statutory Interest! Hurray!

Read all about it: natwesttookmymoney - v- NatWest

DONATE AS MUCH AS YOU CAN TO KEEP THE SITE GOING.

 

What can you claim? Vampiress has a good idea:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/69877-what-can-you-claim.html

Anything I say is just a suggestion. I'm a bigmouth, not a lawyer!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have to say, I had exactly the same defence I think, as listed in my thread....

 

Innocent vs Natwest...need a double check....

 

No request for cpr18 either, like lager lou

 

Have got a copy of my defence, my response letter and my aq that i completed within the thread too...

 

All's fine, relax....

 

 

Cheers

 

Innocent ;)

:D CLICK MY SCALES IF I HAVE BEEN USEFUL :D

*

BARCLAYCARD WON £307

*

CAPITAL ONE WON £2.1k

*

NATWEST WON £3.4k

*

LLOYDS TSB CURRENT

Start 26/4 LBA 7/6 conLBA 22/1 N1 12/3 AQ 3/5/07ONHOLD

MORE THAN/ LLOYDS MCARD

Start 2/11 CONTL LBA 15/1/07 NOW RE-RESEARCHING

MONUMENT VISA

Start 1/11 CONTL LBA 15/1/07 NOW RE-RESEARCHING

NATWEST BUSINESS

RESEARCHING

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, Pezza

sorry for the delay - had some work to do (and food to eat).

The thread is here (www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/natwest-bank/48884-partial-offer-rejected-subsequently.html#post392013)

As well as the response, take on board what Allyxia says about keeping the paperwork down!

Hope it helps!

Westy

 

Cheers Westy, your diamond mate!

 

so this is the letter i'v come up with, using the references you made in the above link... what do you think?

 

Cobbetts LLP

Ship Canal House

King Street

Manchester

M2 4WB

07th December 2006

ADITIONAL INFORMATION REQUESTED

 

Dear Sir/Madam

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 Claimant refers to the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977, particularly but not limited to sections 3 and 11 and Schedule 2. (See attached reference’s marked 4.1a)

(b) The Claimant refers to the Unfair Terms In Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 particularly but not limited to Regulations 5, 6 and 8 and Schedule 2, 1 e) (see attached reference’s marked 4.1b)

© The Claimant refers to the common law relating to liquidated damages and penalties in contracts. It is an established principle that a party acting in a fiduciary role or with fiduciary responsibility has to place the interests of the party to which it has such responsibility above its own interests. A fiduciary must not put their personal interests before the duty, and must not profit from their position as a fiduciary, unless the principal consents. I it is the Claimant's contention that the Defendant has established and operated its regime of charges as a profit-making scheme, rather than as a means of reclaiming its genuine liquidated losses. The Claimant has asked the Defendant to supply details of its genuine costs and losses incurred in the management of its account and the Defendant has, thus far, failed so to do. The principle has been established and upheld in many cases (see attached reference’s marked 4.1c)

 

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. X XXXXX

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 Northampton County Court for their records.

 

Yours faithfully

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great stuff. ;)

IF MY COMMENTS HAVE HELPED PLEASE CLICK MY SCALES

 

Don't be like the banks - give a little back

 

 

:D NAT WEST - WON - £4282.36:D

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, Pezza

Yes, that looks good to me - with a couple of typos to correct.

Para marked ©, fifth line, you start the sentence 'I it is"

Aye, it is the claimant's contention but i suggest it should be 'It is...':)

Second, apostrophe s. I bugbear of mine. Plurals - as in references - don't have an apostrophe. You've put 'reference's' a couple of times. Find all and replace with 'references'. And any other plurals I may have missed.

 

Yours learnedly:D

Westy

Westy

 

 

 

If you like my post, click the scales!!

 

Nov 1 2006 Preliminary letter

21 Feb 2007 - cheque arrived for charges+DEBIT interest +Statutory Interest! Hurray!

Read all about it: natwesttookmymoney - v- NatWest

DONATE AS MUCH AS YOU CAN TO KEEP THE SITE GOING.

 

What can you claim? Vampiress has a good idea:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/69877-what-can-you-claim.html

Anything I say is just a suggestion. I'm a bigmouth, not a lawyer!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, Pezza

Yes, that looks good to me - with a couple of typos to correct.

Para marked ©, fifth line, you start the sentence 'I it is"

Aye, it is the claimant's contention but i suggest it should be 'It is...':)

Second, apostrophe s. I bugbear of mine. Plurals - as in references - don't have an apostrophe. You've put 'reference's' a couple of times. Find all and replace with 'references'. And any other plurals I may have missed.

 

Yours learnedly:D

Westy

 

Cheers for that westy! I'm a nightmare with typos....

The letter has been sent off to Cobbetts, first class recorded.

Just phoned MCOL to find out where to send a copy to the court, and apparently they have sent me a copy of the defence cobbetts gave them along with AQ. So i should just wait for that, before sending anything into the court.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Will probably come with a Notice of Transfer of Proceedings, which means it'll be transferred to your local court.

IF MY COMMENTS HAVE HELPED PLEASE CLICK MY SCALES

 

Don't be like the banks - give a little back

 

 

:D NAT WEST - WON - £4282.36:D

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...