Bandit v NatWest - The Full Story And Finally**WON**

[sbb1979]

I believe from other threads that their request using CPR Part 18 does not stand up if the case would be using the small claims track. They may be claiming that they don't know which track it will go through because of the fact that they claim that they don't know which account and therefore which charges you are claiming for.

 

I've seen in another thread where the Claimant had clearly stated on a number of occasions which account the charges being claimed related to, but Cobbetts still claimed that they didn't know this. There was a good letter there stating that they do know which account it is, but telling them again all the same and also telling them that as they could tell it was going through small claims then the CPR Part 18 request is merely bullying and that he will bring that to the attention of the court. I'll try and find it or maybe one of the Mods know's which one I'm talking about.

 

Stick in there! The end is in sight!

[cumbria123]

This is one I found earlier:

 

Dear Sir or Madam:

 

Claim No:

 

 

 

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

 

I am not prepared at this stage to answer the CPR Part 18 Request. I anticipate that the claim will be allocated to the small claims track and would not then expect to have to deal with a Part 18 request since these are specifically excluded under Part 27 unless the court specifically orders me to do so of its own initiative

 

Furthermore I consider that the CPR part 18 request is intimidatory and I intend to bring the intimidation to the notice of the court. However, for clarity, I confirm the charges I am claiming were applied to the following account:

 

Account Name:

 

Account number:

 

Sort Code:

 

 

Please also find enclosed a breakdown of all charges I am claiming.

 

Yours sincerely

 

but have a look to see if there are any others.

[sbb1979]

That's the one that I was thinking of. Its a nice letter because its short, to the point and doesn't give in to there bullying tactics - it puts them in their place, but in a reasonable way.

 

Its reasonable too in that you do give them your bank account details.

[Its WAR]

Pretty well the same defence I received a couple of weeks ago. Except I have applied to amend my particulars of claim and I will have to serve the summons again. I might even get another (identical) defence.

[the_toilet_bandit]

Big A4 envelope arrived today from HMCS Weymouth,

Dear Mr Bandit

 

Re: Toilet Bandit -v- National Westminster Bank Plc

Case No.:6WY00633

 

We enclose a copy of the defence and request for further information filed in the above matter. The case has been referred to the District Judge for directions

 

Yours sincerely

 

Issue Section

Ext 521

 

and enclosing another copy of defence and CPR18.

 

Will send off letter on Monday cuz currently moving house at the mo...

 

[unplugs the comp]

 

Bandit

[Movingon]

Don't forget that CPR18 is only valid for claims OUTSIDE the small claims regime... you don't HAVE to answer. You could just not reply to their letter at all. Or you could reply saying that you are not required to answer except at the Court's own discretion and that you consider their request intimidatory; and that this will be brought to the attention of the Judge.

[bs0lth]

Hi Bandit

 

I sent off a letter to Corbetts similar to yours, got a letter back saying that the judge could ask for this information... yadda yadda... however, I decided when i went to the Court to drop off my AQ that it might be an idea to answer the CPR and put in one of my own asking for a break down in charges etc. Im working to the same time scale as Laffar and Timmc. Now this is where the three off us differ.. Ive had a 50% offer that arrived four days after I sent Corbetts a copy of my CPR 18 response... Ive refused it (of course) but laffar and Tim both havent recieved anything from them... I would have thought that they would as both of their claims are smaller than mine.

 

I would suggest that you answer it, you never know it might speed up your claim.

 

I will let you know what happens here, but you dont seem to be that far behind me. Everything had to be filed here by the 25th so hopefully things might just start to move

 

Good luck

 

Lynne

[foaf26907]

This has been an extremley helpful & detailed thread. After getting a full refund pretty promptlt from Halifax I proceeded with Natwest as well. The 28 days are actually up on 3rd Aug so I'm glad I have the detailed info you've provided & everyone else has contributed in case I need it as well. Cheers & good luck

[Its WAR]

This is what I replied to Cobbets, simply asking them similar questions, taken from elsewhere on these forums:

I understand you have asked for a detailed schedule individually listing all charges and interest levied. I have of course provided you with the totals and believe this is sufficient for your clients to exactly understand the details of my case. Particularly, as your clients have always been fully aware of all charges they have made to my account and indeed, my calculations have been taken directly from information they have supplied me. I suggest you obtain a schedule from your clients as to their confirmation of the charges they have made and interest levied. By so doing, you can compare their list of stated charges and interest with my total which I shall forward in due course. I shall of course require a copy of their schedule and calculations if it transpires the figures are disputed.

I would also like to draw attention to your claim that I have not supplied NatWest with my account details. As I am sure you can see, the account number and sort code are included in previous correspondence. Both yourselves and NatWest have been supplied with all of the details necessary to move this claim forwards.

 

I refer to your comment stating that the Court of its own initiative may order a party to provide further information if it considers it appropriate to do so. I am aware that the Court can order certain and further information from both parties, I simply take offence that you appear to have attempted to obtain this information by using carefully worded arguments suggesting we are under strict obligations to obey your requests rather than the Courts. With this in mind, I see no reason why I should be sending you any further information relating to this case. As mentioned earlier in this letter, it is the Court that decides whether or not any further information is required, not yourselves. Your request is certainly intimidating to any claimant in person and is designed to ‘encourage’ them to withdraw their claim as being too complicated to continue.

Where the Court orders such detailed information, I shall request reciprocal documentation from your clients detailing those same charges and interest to which I am reclaiming along with evidence to confirm the exact costs to which your clients have been subjected and from which they have added profit margins to arrive at the eventual charge made to my account for each and every charge.

If you feel it other than an abuse of the process to request for further information in the manner you requested it, I have no difficulty in making a reciprocal request.

On the advice of other claimants, whose claims have been successful in identical circumstances to mine and who have been passed onto yourselves by NatWest, I will be sending a copy of this letter, along with all other letters that you have sent me to the Court. I will also be sending them copies of the letters, which clearly show the account details that you claim I have not yet supplied.

 

Please find my request pursuant to CPR part 18 you are asked to respond by 1st August 2006.

 

 

• In relation to each and every breach by the Claimant which resulted in a charge being levied as confirmed by the Defendant in its Defence please provide full details (with all relevant supporting documentation) of:
   
   
  a) any letters, telephone calls, or incidents of manual intervention into the account in respect of each and every charge claimed by the Claimant in the Particulars of Claim;
   
  b) how charges are applied to the account (whether automatically or by some other means) and when;
   
  c) the Defendant’s assessment of the cost to it of sending any letter making any telephone call or otherwise administering the account, with details of how the cost to the Defendant is calculated and what items of expense are included, or such other costs as are foreseeable in the context of contractual damages and the remoteness thereof and which can be specifically identified and defined and which can be reasonably attributed to each and every breach on the part of the Claimant;
   
  d) the justifiably objective principles upon which all such costs are calculated and result in the specific level of each charge levied by the bank in respect of each of the breaches which resulted in the charges now claimed by the Claimant.
   
   
  2. Where the Defendant avers that the charges are applied in return for the provision of a banking service to the Claimant:
   
  a) Please identify each and every such service referred to in the defendant’s terms and conditions and identify the charges, by reference to those terms and conditions, that the Claimant is required to pay for each service identified.
   
  b) Please confirm what steps are taken by the defendant in providing the alleged services referred to in the defence. Please provide copies of all notes, memoranda, or other information retained by the defendant to demonstrate the provision of the alleged services to the Claimant.
   
  c) Please confirm whether charges are applied automatically.

Please note however, I consider that upon allocation this case will be referred to the Small Claims Track, accordingly I consider your CPR Part 18 request to be intimidatory as Part 18 would not apply. Having been in touch with other Nat West claimants I am aware of your recently devised tactics and attempts to cause claimants in person to give up. I shall not be responding to your requests designed to intimidate. I shall of course respond to the order of the Court leaving the matters to be settled by the court.

Yours faithfully

[MARTIN3030]

Good points but looking over personal

 

You do not have to submit to their intimidation

 

Make the Judge aware of it by all means.

Between me you and everyone reading.........we know you are gonna win.

We know they wont defend.

We lmow their contempt for the courts.

 

On That basis you are almost there.

The frustration must be overwhelming but ride it out.

[the_toilet_bandit]

grrrr @ stoopid ISP apparently my new flat doesn't exist yet!! still they gave me a dialup number to use.....

 

anyway, I wrote this to them:

 

Dear Sir or Madam

 

Claim No: 6WY00633

 

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

 

After consulting with a few colleagues, at this stage of time I am not prepared to answer the CPR Part 18 request. I am anticipating that this claim will be allocated to the Small Claims track and would not then expect to have to deal with a Part 18 request as these are specifically excluded under Part 27 unless the court specifically orders me to do so of its own initiative. If the court does order me to answer the Part 18 request, then I will do so.

 

Furthermore I consider that the CPR Part 18 request at this stage is intimidatory and I intend to notify the court of this. However, for clarity, I confirm the charges I am claiming were applied to the following account:

 

Account Name: Mr T Bandit

 

Account Number: xxxxxxxx

 

Sort Code: xx-xx-xx

 

Please also find enclosed a breakdown of all the charges I am claiming.

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

Mr Toilet Bandit

Enc.

[the_toilet_bandit]

and they wrote this back.....(spelling my name wrong in the process)

 

Dear Sir

 

Our client: National Westminster Bank plc

Claim No: 6WY00633

 

We refer to your letter dated 4 August 2006.

 

We note your comments on our request for Further Information. Please note that Part 27.2(1)(f) applies subject to paragraph 3 of Part 27.2, which states that the Court of its own initiative may order a party to provide further information if it considers it appropriate to do so.

 

It is our client's contention that your Particulars of Claim did not properly particularise your claim. For example, our client cannot properly defend a claim where you have not given your account details and the details of each charge you claim is disproportionate and unreasonable.

 

The Court is bound by an overriding objective to deal with cases justly and ensure that parties are on an equal footing. It was clearly the case that our client could not respond to your claim where you did not provide sufficient particulars. Our client therefore objects to your allegation that the Request is intimidating.

 

Yours faithfully

 

Cobbetts LLP

 

It is me or our they trying to buy time/scare me off as I did send cobbetts my account details and spreadsheet in the last letter I sent?

 

And just thinking on it, should I send the court everything that I send cobbetts? cuz i havent.

 

I feel a nasty letter coming along here what with this stoopid slow dialup I'm not in the best of moods now, post your ideas and I'll incorporate them

 

Bandit

[sbb1979]

That's another pre-written letter of theirs, I've seen someone else who received exactly the same one! Its so ridiculous of them to claim that they don't know which account it is because following the stages and sending the library letters will have told them the account number and the exact charges twice already!

 

I think that when mine gets to the Moneyclaim stage I'll send a letter to Cobbetts pre-empting this request and giving them the details beforehand so that they can't try this delaying rubbish!

[seanf]

Bandit

 

I'm keeping an eye on you, laffar and timinio and a few others as our claims are at a similar stage. Seems I should expect this letter in the next day or 2.

 

This MUST be a tactic to try to scare us or and/or buy time.

 

After all, how much simpler does it need to be told.

 

Personally I wouldnt bother responding and just wait for the courts direction. But let me know what you decide.

 

Good luck - we are nearly there

[the_toilet_bandit]

well, I'm debating over sending them this:

 

Dear Sir or Madam

 

Claim No: 6WY00633

 

I acknowledge and refer to your letter dated 9 August.

 

With all due respect to your client, in all correspondence I have had them with them I have given my account details and a schedule breaking down the charges I feel are disproportionate and unreasonable that I am claiming for. In my last correspondence to yourselves on 4 August, I also gave my account details and the schedule of charges.

 

It makes me wonder why your client cannot respond to my claim when they had received this information in all correspondence between them and myself leading up to the claim.

 

If the court does order me to provide further information than I will do so. However, for complete clarity, below are my account details:

 

Account Name: Mr T Bandit

 

Account Number: xxxxxxxx

 

Sort Code: xx-xx-xx

 

Please also find enclosed a breakdown of all the charges I am claiming.

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

Mr Toilet Bandit

 

Enc.

[the_toilet_bandit]

well I sent them that letter on the 11th, and have heard nothing from either Cobbett's or the Court...just wondering if that's normal?

 

Bandit

[MARTIN3030]

Is there such a thing as normal where Cobbetts are concerned ?

 

I see they are employing the same tac towards Rbs claimants........they must have their hands full !

 

[Herbal]

Sorry to jump in, but I have seen a lot of this in other threads.

Given that Cobbets will be charging for each letter sent, is it right to threaten them with contacting Natwest, as a gesture of goodwill, to inform them that their representatives are incurring unneccesary costs in requesting information already held by them?

 

Might put a stop to some of these delaying and intimidating letters.

 

Also I don't think that there is such a word as "intimidatory". Someone is either being intimidating or they aren't. (One for pedant's corner I think).

 

Gerbil

[MARTIN3030]

Gerbil here is your answer

 

 

Adjective: intimidatory in'timidu`toree [N. Amer], in`timu'deyturee [brit]

1. Tending or serving to intimidate

[Herbal]

I stand corrected! What about the other point?

[MARTIN3030]

This is a good idea.

Cobbetts have had no success at all here.

I suspect that they will be on a fixed price to defend claims,since there is a standard procedure.

 

Being mindful of how many other firms of solicitors would be queuing up for this work now I reckon they have to be pretty competitive.

 

You can bet your life that Cobbetts are Shareholders of Natwest too !!

[Guest NATTIE]

well if you are interested in cobbetts then www.cobbetts.co.uk

[Herbal]

How about complaining to the Law Society?

 

Gerbil

[sm03art]

After a successful first half of the year, the banking team at leading law firm Cobbetts has completed deals with an aggregate value in excess of £0.5bn.

found this on there site!!!

 

Cobbetts banks half a billion

[MARTIN3030]

Dont forget,Cobbetts claims that the bank have not had details of the account number etc are being taken by instruction.

Its the bank that are presumably at fault is it not ?