Tumble v Natwest ** WON **

[paulwlton]

I think it is always worth asking the question - especially when the law may be open to interpretation. I have to say personally that I believe it was put into the Act as a safeguard from mistakes by either party - and would wish to see case-law to back up the view that it does not.

 

It is also important to remember that the issue of bank charges is totally different from most other situations.

 

In 99.9% of contracts, the customer has a choice about whether to pay - and makes the decision based on whether the invoice / DD notification / quotation / offer is reasonable.

 

In the case of bank charges the money is just taken from the account without any option being given to the customer as to whether they agree. In this case I would not see that the customer could make a "mistake", the duty of care must surely rest with the bank.

 

Without clear case-law to the contrary, I do believe that any argument is worth deploying - providing that it is not the ONLY argument that you have in your armoury.

 

Alan i too believe mistake should be applied either way but case law regarding this is one sided and until this issue is decided in an higher court then the lower courts will allways follow.

[tumble]

I have only just discovered how to blob someones reputation , so im just going to do some blobbing

[Parkvale]

Tumble you are a true blobber.

[tumble]

Arr thanks , there you go have a blob;)

[Parkvale]

[TANZARELLI]

Hi Tumble this may be off some use to you et al:

 

http://www.whcg-law.co.uk/docs/whcgdoc040903c.doc

 

Tanz

[tumble]

That is the strangest thing I was just viewing the exact same thread !!!!

Thankyou just as you posted.

 

Great minds hey !!!

Thankyou

[Michael Browne]

Or this maybe:

http://www.adamsamuel.co.uk/pdf/vcunningham.pdf

[tumble]

sorry Michael this link is saying file not found- any suggestions

 

Thanks

[TANZARELLI]

Or this maybe:

http://www.adamsamuel.co.uk/pdf/vcunningham.pdf

 

Hi Michael,

 

Could you re do link as it keeps coming up with File Not Found

The requested URL was not found on this server.

 

Tanz

[Michael Browne]

Sorry, you're right. Try this:

Vincent Cunningham v Friends Provident | This is Money

[tumble]

ok got it - interesting , ill see if i can apply it

 

Thanks

[TANZARELLI]

Sorry, you're right. Try this:

Vincent Cunningham v Friends Provident | This is Money

 

Thanks Michael,

 

I'll have a read of that.

 

Tanz

[tumble]

Ive just been reading through a defence from cobbetts where once again they are citing section 5 LA on a seperate case. The claim date commences is between February 2001 and May 2006. The date of service is 23 March 2007 , my statements were originally ordered in Oct 2006 and missing statements were only sent out just prior to Dpa action. Also customer relations were handling an aspect of it which meant I delayed court action . I have all the evidence to support this.

 

If this introduction to section 5 continues surely its an abuse of the act . By stalling the banks are not only saving money in interest but also by time barring some of the claim by not providing the necessay evidence in order for people to proceed sooner. It all absolutely stinks.

[TANZARELLI]

I agree tumble however, I don't think they have a leg to stand on really.

[Guest NATTIE]

but cobbetts are getting something from someone.......NatWest have to pay them more $$$$$$$$$$$$$$

[tumble]

I have telephoned cobbetts today and forwarded an email. It just seems so ridiculous to be preparing a case for £333 when I know full well the cheque will arrive before the court date. I need to concentrate on a much larger claim . This is my correspondence today , to which I received a reply

 

Dear Mrs Shingler,

 

Further to our conversation today, this email is to confirm that I have informed you that I am prepared to accept the remainding balance of the claim, I will allow seven days for a response , however if you fail to contact myself in the said time period I will advise you that I will prepare a schedule of costs (cpr 48.7) under cpr 27.14.

 

Yours Sincerley

 

Tumble

 

COBBETTS REPLY

 

 

Hi XXXXXXX

Many thanks for your telephone call and email. I confirm that I will forward your offer to our client immediately for an urgent response and keep you updated of any further instructions that we received.

 

I hope to be able to get back to you by tomorrow at the latest and will diarise a chase for further instructions.

 

Many thanks and kind regards

 

Laura

 

 

 

VERY informal and friendly dont you think ?

[tumble]

reply came within seconds !!!!!!!

[Parkvale]

Was it signed with kisses ?

[tumble]

lol:rolleyes:

[Josamolly]

just subscribing.. worked hard haven't you, well done for getting this far and i'm sure you will get a result before the weekend..

 

Jos

[tumble]

ok - Cheque has arrived for full amount, however with conditions . Am I to understand that should I cash the payment that the conditions would stand. Should I cash the cheque ?

 

Thanks

 

Tumble

[TANZARELLI]

ok - Cheque has arrived for full amount, however with conditions . Am I to understand that should I cash the payment that the conditions would stand. Should I cash the cheque ?

 

Thanks

 

Tumble

 

Phone them and state that you don't agree with (confidentiality) or whatever the condition is and then state you will accept the offer but without any terms, then score out what you don't agree with and send the acceptance letter back.

 

Tanz

[tumble]

Thanks Tanz- I did that and they agreed so got paid out with no conditions !!!!!!!!!!!!!

[TANZARELLI]

Thanks Tanz- I did that and they agreed so got paid out with no conditions !!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Good work.

 

CONGRATS