kingmadras -vs- Nat West

[kingmadras]

Hi all,

 

Got my statements back from Nat West and I'm in the process of doing my Prelim Letter. A couple of questions:

 

1. Do I address my PL to my local branch or the same address as the people who sent me my copy statements?

 

2. On my statements (going back to 2001) there are some charges to my account that give no reason for the charge. Would I be correct to assume I can claim for these?

 

Thanks in advance!

[Andy449]

Hi Kingmadras,

 

I sent my prelim letter to the manager of my branch and this worked fine for me. I would recommend that you either do the same or send it to Natwest customer services.

 

I had similar unspecified charges on my statements (totalling about £200). I added them to my claim and Natwest still paid in full this weekend so you should be okay

 

Regards

Andy

[kingmadras]

Cheers Andy, letter in post today.

[Guest NATTIE]

King Madras, i am still going to dissent on this, any letter re prelim or Letter Before Action goes to Customer Relations Unit Borehamwood, the branch may simply forward it on. The branch no longer get involved in this process anymore which was different when andy started his claim.

If you have unspecified charges if you post them on here i can tell you what they are 100%.

[kingmadras]

King Madras, i am still going to dissent on this, any letter re prelim or Letter Before Action goes to Customer Relations Unit Borehamwood, the branch may simply forward it on. The branch no longer get involved in this process anymore which was different when andy started his claim.

If you have unspecified charges if you post them on here i can tell you what they are 100%.

 

Hi Nattie, the unspecified charges (normally £29.00) were put onto my account at the end of each month but without any details. It would just say 'CHARGES - DATE - A/C NO. - £29.00' .This happened for about a 2 year period.

 

Prior to these unspecified charges, Nat West were charging £9.00 a month service fee and a £20.00 unarranged borrowing fee. Would I be right to assume that these two charges combined would make up this unspecified £29.00 charge? And if so, can I claim the full £29.00 back or just the £20.00?

 

Thanks in advance.

[Andy449]

Personally, I chose to include the full £29 for 2 reasons:

 

1. They chose not to specify what the charge relates to on your statement so how are you to know whether it is claimable or not?

 

2. If the bank aren't happy with these then they are free to explain their reasoning when they defend in court (as if) and you can then drop these from the claim total.

 

You should be fine doing this as long as you can't reasonably ascertain what the charges relate to - try phoning your branch and ask them to explain. If they can't help then go ahead and add them to your claim

 

Andy

[Guest NATTIE]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/natwest-bank/27521-advantage-gold-unarranged-borrowing.html

this explains it definitively. It is £20 unarranged borrowing + £9 Advantage Gold fee

[kingmadras]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/natwest-bank/27521-advantage-gold-unarranged-borrowing.html

this explains it definitively. It is £20 unarranged borrowing + £9 Advantage Gold fee

 

Thanks Nattie; on that basis would it be wise to claim the £29.00 as it wasn't made clear on the statement or just the £20.00?

[Guest NATTIE]

the thread is clear, so re read post 7

[kingmadras]

the thread is clear, so re read post 7

 

Thanks Nattie, my apologies for not reading your link properly.

[Guest NATTIE]

King madras, apologies to you but Knowledge is Power, other sites may suggest claim everything because they lack the knowledge to know what the charge is, the CAG is not one of them becuase I have given YOU the power to both get the charge details and as a result help others when they are on the threads. Many learn and are empowered. Looking forward to an update from you.

[kingmadras]

Well, they've had my LBA for 14 days now.

 

I've had absolutely no correspondence from them whatsoever, including the Prelim Letter, which is a bit disconcerting. Is this rare, or is it just another tactic to dissuade you from continuing your action?

 

Anyway, will start court proceedings tomorrow and see if I get a reply then.

 

Cheers!

[fendyweather]

Its normal at the moment not to receive diddly from them, based on the fact that the claims thing has gone through the roof. I think theyre simply inundated. But carry on. Youve done your bit and followed steps correctly, so start your claim tomorrow as you said you will. You will get your money, its just a case of when and how long it goes on. But by starting the court claim you are dictating the timetable as to when you get your money back. All the best......... Fendy xxx

[kingmadras]

Well they have until 2nd of May to respond. A few questions:

 

Do they have to respond to me, the court or both?

If it is the court and they do respond, will it show up on the Moneyclaim site?

If they don't respond, do you apply for judgement on the 2nd or 3rd?

 

Thanks in advance.

[scott150663]

Well they have until 2nd of May to respond. A few questions:

 

Do they have to respond to me, the court or both? the court

If it is the court and they do respond, will it show up on the Moneyclaim site? YES

If they don't respond, do you apply for judgement on the 2nd or 3rd? Hold on for a few days after the 2ND may as they may defend late and the court will give them afew days grace, normally they fax the court on the final day and the court posts the defence to u a few days later

 

Thanks in advance.

 

hope this helps

 

Just be patient

 

Scott

[kingmadras]

Nat West have sent their acknowledgement through on 1st May.

 

Do they have 28 days from 1st May or 28 days from my inital claim (18th April)?

 

Nowt straight forward is there?

 

Cheers.

[zootscoot]

28 days from the date of deemed served.

[kingmadras]

Cobbetts have served their defence and also put in a request for more information - evn though Nat West have had most of the information requested already.

 

One question has me stumped:

 

3. "In your claim you state that the charges are: "unenforceable under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999, the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and at common law" and "they must be reasonable under s15 of the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982."

 

4. Please specify all of the facts relied on by the claimant in support of the contentions in paragraph 3 above, and in particular please identify (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. Please also identify the contractual provision(s) that the claimant alleges re unenforceable by reference to UCTA/the Regulations.

 

Help!

 

Also when replying to Cobbetts, do I copy the court in my response?

 

Cheers.

[kingmadras]

Shameless bump.

[kingmadras]

Ignore my last couple of posts, I now realise it was the CPR 18 bit and it's covered in other areas on the site!

 

 

One other point - my case has been transferred to a court closer to home but on the notes from Northampton it says:

 

"It is ordered that the filing of an allocation questionnaire be dispensed with in this case unless the District Judge at the court of transfer orders otherwise"

 

Yet on the notes from my local court it says that the AQ should be returned to them. As there is no AQ attached am I to assume that I should do nothing unless ordered otherwise?

 

Thanks in advance.

[hedgey06]

Phone the court ............... just to be on the safe side!!! xx

[kingmadras]

Phoned my local court (Durham) and they have said that bank charges claims are no longer required to fill out an AQ.

 

Don't know if this is unique to Durham or a nationwide policy but thats what they've told me.

[steven4064]

Don't know if this is unique to Durham or a nationwide policy but thats what they've told me.

 

It's not a policy but an increasing number of courts are doing it. Mine's not!

 

Steven

 

If this post is helpful, please click the scales

[kingmadras]

It's not a policy but an increasing number of courts are doing it. Mine's not!

 

Steven

 

If this post is helpful, please click the scales

 

Is this a good thing or a bad thing from my point of view?

[steven4064]

Is this a good thing or a bad thing from my point of view?

 

I don't think it makes much difference to you - I think it is more for the court's benefit. Either way, make sure you send the 'new' draft order for directions

 

Steven

 

If this post is helpful, please click the scales