Jump to content

Have You Been Here - Asking For Particulars


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5239 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


Start your own new thread

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



Recommended Posts

Law Jargon As A Delaying Tactic - Please Help.

]Please can anyone help me.


After putting in my claim to the small claims court, I have received a replay by NatWest requesting verious details.


I'm really having alot of trouble in deciphering what they want me to find out, and feel that this is just another way of delaying me. I'm no solicitor and feel totally confused by some of their requests - see below:


1. "In realtion to each charge, a) is it the case of the Claimant the same should not have been charged?

b) If yes; please explain why the Claimant contends that the same should not have been charged?

c)Please explain why the Claimant contends that the same should not have been charged in this amount and identify the sum the Claimant contends should have been charged.


2. I refered to the charges as being penalties.


a) Provide the following:

Specify the clause(s) pursuant to which the charges were applied.


b) Specify whether the charges applied were due to a breach of contract by the Claimant.


c) Identify in each case the particular breach of contract (by reference to appropriate term(s) of the contract) that the charge relate to.


3. Specify all the facts relied on by the Claimant in support of "unfair penalty under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999", and identify the contractual provisions that the Claimant alleges are invalid by reference to the Regulations.


So there you have it. I'm really confused by all this legal jargon, and was hoping someone, somewhere had received a letter like this and to tell me what they did about it? Please help.




Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi C


As you say this is jargon as a delaying tactic and is the usual cobbetts cobblers - we had exactly the same letter this week (see http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/natwest-bank/55856-son-steven4064-natwest.html) for our response. In fact you do not need to respond at all. You only need to send anything if the COURT asks you to.


What to do about it? File it but otherwise ignore it.




If this post is helpful, please click the scales



Using CAG Toolbar will generate much needed income - Download Here


Confused by Simple Interest? Confounded by Compound Interest? Read my Interest Tutorial

My Wins

 GE Money Won unconditionally May 2007

NatWest Won unconditionally August 2007

Brighthouse Won unconditionally August 2007

Goldfish Won unconditionally April 2008 (including CI on the basis of Sempra)

Clydesdale Financial Services (now BPF) Won unconditionally February 2008


Any opinions are without prejudice & without liability. Do not take any legal action on my advice alone. Almost everything I know concerning the law I learned from this site.


Please note, I will not give advice by PM. Please send a link to your thread and I will do my best to answer there.


Link to post
Share on other sites

bluegreen, Steven is perfectly right, but did this letter came from Cobbetts. Nat West's solicitors? Also what was the date on the letter? This looks like Cobblers trying to use the Lloyds judgement to scare peeps.

A person is only as big as the dream they dare to live.



Good things come to he who waits



Its your money taken unlawfully from your account and you have a legal right to claim it back.

Link to post
Share on other sites


  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...