rbrears v Natwest ::: SETTLED IN FULL

[rbrears]

Ok today is the last day for NW to file a defence having acknowledged my claim for approaching 5k

 

Since the MCOL appears to refuse to let us enter judgment online for days after the time limit has expired I'm sending the request for judgment to them by post today so it is in their mail bag tomorrow morning and will hopefully be actioned as soon as it is possible to do so.

 

Maybe the court will also have the defence in its mailbag today or tomorow - We'll see Who knows what I might find in my post at home when I get in from work !!

[rbrears]

Checked online - they got their defence in today - can't wait to see it. Just in by the skin of their teeth the buggers

[mountainofdebt]

a) it comes from solicitors (Corbetts?) based in Mancester

 

b) that they ask you for further information specifically:

 

1.The details of the account

 

2. A list of the charges and when they were incurred

 

3.What you exactly mean by the relevant acts quoted in your court action (if you quoted any that is!)

[rbrears]

Snap!

 

Exactly. They are running the service defence. Thats great because I'm ready for that one and it means that the bank are not pleading and therefore not going to be able to lead any evidence of their costs so if the judge does find that their so called service charges are in fact penalties they wont be prepared to deal with that and give any evidence of what the true cost is.

 

Its a stock defence and part 18 request being knocked out by a solicitor who, looking at the law society website, has only been qualilfied for 5 minutes

 

Anyway I'm off to prepare my reply to the Part 18 request and my own request to the bank asking for full detasils of each and every service referred to or specified in the banks T&Cs (there are none) and details of each and every service provided in respect of each and every charge applied. I find it hilarious that they ask for details of the accounts (already set out in full in the letter before action which they have) and details of each and every charge (already set out clearly on the statements - copies of which they also have). If this is the best they can do then I'm going to enjoy this.

[thecornflake]

If this is in small claims you don't have to reply to the CPR 18 request. However I suspect you already know this but are replying in order to put forward your own request.

 

Also i think you replied to my post on the other CPR rule abotu notices to admit facts - It would be interesting if you were prepared to try using that as well.

 

It sounds like you have prepared well against the service charges argument - can you let us know what you main points are (if you're happy to risk posting it here!)?

 

Oh, and good luck of course;-)

[dinghy]

How is this progressing ?

[rbrears]

They offered me about 50% - you know what the answer was

 

Allocation questionnaires submitted by both parties end of last week.

[rbrears]

Phone call from Cobbetts 10 minutes ago - SETTLED £4.5 k

 

Man am I going to get ****ed this weekend :) :)

 

Can a MOD change the title of this thread to show full settlement please?

 

Survey done - another donation on its way

[dinghy]

 

 

 

[clynes]

CONGRATULATIONS

[thecornflake]

Nice one. Tremendous to have a victory against Natwest. I'm very surprised they didn't go to court though, considering they have done and won in both cases.

 

What did you do differently from the templates if anything? Possibly the wording on the allocation questionnaire did it?

[barracad]

Congratulations!! (Thread title changed as requested)

 

 

I'm very surprised they didn't go to court though, considering they have done and won in both cases.

 

If you're referring to Whizzkid & NeilP - these were set-aside hearings not actual claim hearings. Apart from that there has been one case, but that was a long time ago before we had all the support and info we have available now.

[topcatbones]

Superb news.

 

Gives hope to the rest of us.

 

Tony

[Spiceskull]

Dhum dhum dhum, another one bites the dust. Great result - well done!

[Bookworm]

Nice one. Tremendous to have a victory against Natwest. I'm very surprised they didn't go to court though, considering they have done and won in both cases

 

Sorry for hijack, I need to clarify this.

 

They have?

To the best of my knowledge, Natwest have defended only once and won (Henry v Natwest) and haven't dared try it since. Can you advise what other one was and your source?

 

Barracad: If you're referring to Whizzkid & NeilP - these were set-aside hearings not actual claim hearings.

That was Abbey, and it was not a win for the bank, that's for sure!!!

 

 

 

Now back to the regular programme:

 

CONGRATULATIONS!!!

 

 

 

.

[Janet-M]

congratulations

[whizzkid001]

Congrats from a fellow 'settled'!!! Guess the drinks will def be flowing this w/end!

[thecornflake]

They have?

To the best of my knowledge, Natwest have defended only once and won (Henry v Natwest) and haven't dared try it since. Can you advise what other one was and your source

 

The second was a much earlier one often quoted here but I'm not sure if the original claimant posted details themselves.

 

TBH I'm not sure why they didn't go to court again after Henry vs Natwest but there you go. i was getting worried after that one but rbrears success has now destroyed my doubts.

 

My reason for being mildly cynical is that if I claimed the full amount from my NW account it would add up to around £12,000.

 

At the very least I shall be claiming the small claims limit of £5,000 and I really can't afford to lose the moneyclaim costs so I have been watching any Natwest cases with great interest. Hence wanting to know if rbrears letters differed from the templates at all.

 

If I start feeling confident enough I may just risk it all and go for the full amount plus associated losses and damages.

[rbrears]

Think it was my amended particulars of claim and part 18 request that probably swung it - apart from the banks not having a leg to stand on that is. When I get the cheque I will post the text for use by other NatWesters or give it to BF to do with as he wishes since I suspect it will apply to similar T&Cs from other banks

 

Many thanks for the congratulations. It feels good to have that cash back.

[thecornflake]

i presume the CPR18 request was asking for the basis of their charges. I also presume they didn't reply to it.

 

They should know that doesn't count in small claims though. I would be surprised if that rattled any half-decent solicitor.

[mountainofdebt]

Big congratulaions winging their way from across the water..........have news of my own (have posted on my thread for continuity - but not as good as yours unfortunatly!!!)

[Chrissielr]

Think it was my amended particulars of claim and part 18 request that probably swung it - apart from the banks not having a leg to stand on that is. When I get the cheque I will post the text for use by other NatWesters or give it to BF to do with as he wishes since I suspect it will apply to similar T&Cs from other banks

 

Belated congratulations!

 

Did you get around to posting the text as above - I've searched high and low but can't seem to find anything?

[rbrears]

Now posted in General Forum under title "Reply to stock defence and Part 18 issues" - hope it helps

[Chrissielr]

Thanks

[smel24]

Bookworm,you mention Natwest has won one case:

 

NatWest have defended only once and won (Henry v Natwest) and haven't dared try it since.

 

Was this becasue of a particular reason as I am going for a £3.5K claim and they seem to be playing tough on the larger claims?!