Cheddar V Natwest **WON**

[stanton]

I would call the court where you filed and ask them to find out where your claim is - you shoud definately have had it by now.

[cheddar]

Thank you again Stanton i will ring them in the morning.

[cheddar]

Righty-ho i rang the bank about an hour ago and they said they have sent something out but it mustn't have got to me so they're sending it out again. She said it is deemed as served on the 15/09/06 this is the date is was served on Natwest then? That NatWest have 14 days from then? Me confused! lol! she did say that the info would give me the dates and wotnot but i'm impatient! I think i am right in what i am saying though, my getting giddy before thought it was 14 days from when i took it in Never mind!

[cheddar]

Well it came today so it says Issued on 13/09/06 deemed as served 15/09/06 so NatWest have until 29/09/06 to send their defence (as I assume they will). YEY!

[stanton]

you got it right Cheddar- keep going !!

[Bookworm]

No, they have 14 days to acknowledge your claim, then they have another 28 days from the AoS to file a defence.

[cheddar]

Ah right thankies Bookworm!

[cheddar]

Well got my AoS today they Acknowledged it on 18/09/06 so 16/10/06 to Defend right?

[Bookworm]

Backtrack completely, you were right the 1st time round, and I f****d up!

 

It is 14 days to either acknowledge or lodge a defense, if they acknowledge, they get 28 days from date of issue.

 

Not only did I mislead you, I have now realised I messed up my Natwest claim all those months ago. I misunderstood what it said on my AoS them and have been mistaken and have misled people since.

 

Sorry, sorry, sorry.

[laffar]

Not to worry bookworm, it doesn't seem to have harmed anyones claim ... be calm!

[cheddar]

Backtrack completely, you were right the 1st time round, and I f****d up!

 

It is 14 days to either acknowledge or lodge a defense, if they acknowledge, they get 28 days from date of issue.

 

Not only did I mislead you, I have now realised I messed up my NatWest claim all those months ago. I misunderstood what it said on my AoS them and have been mistaken and have misled people since.

 

Sorry, sorry, sorry.

 

Aww don't worry, you can't be right 100% of the time Bookworm! We learn by our mistakes! Will keep everyone updated! So 16/10/06 to defend is correct then? lol!

[cheddar]

Okay so this plops thru my door this morning:

 

DEFENCE

 

1. This defence is filed and served without prejudice to the defendents case that the POC do not disclose reasonable grounds for bringing a claim against the claimant to recover the bank charges (and onterest thereon) referred to in the POC or any other sums. In the event that the claimant does not properly particularise their claim then the defendent will apply to strike out the claim and/or for summary judgement in respect of the same.

 

2. On allocation the defendent invites the court to direct that there be a case management conference in order for the court to consider the making of appropriate orders to give the claimant the opporutnity to properly particularise his claim.

 

3. No admissions are made as to what charges have been debited to the claimants bank account.

 

4. On relaiont to the allegation that the bank charges amount to an unenforceable penalty the defendent pleads as follows:

 

4.1. In order for the claimant to sustain a claim that the charges debited by the defendent are in nature of a penalty he will need to plead and prove a) the clauses pursuant to which the chagres were applied; b) that the charges were applied due to a breach of contract by the claimant; and c) indentifying in each case the particular breach of contract (by reference to appropriate terms of the contract) that the charge related to. As presently pleaded the claim does not plead these matters and therefore does not disclose reasonsable grounds for bringing a claim that all or any of the charges referred to in the POC have been applied pursuant to an unenforceable penalty cluase.

 

4.2 Until such time as the claimant pleads the matters referred to in paragraph 4.1 above the def is unable to plead to the claim brought against it and therfore (pending the provision of full and proper POC) at this stage denies that any charges have been applied to the claimants bank a/c pursuant to unenforceable penalty clauses.

 

5. In relation to the allegation that the contractual provisions pursuant to which the charges have been applied are invalid pursuant to the UCTA 1997 and/or the UCTCR 1999 and/or section 15 SGSA 1982.

 

This then goes on about the UCTA/UCTCR/SGSA and what parts it does apply to etc the same as everyone elses

 

6. The claimant is time barred from bringing a claim of unauthorised bank charges prior to 15 September 2000 by the provisions of Section 5 of the Limitation Act 1980.

 

7. Save as hereinbefore appears the defendamt joins issue with the claimant on their claim(s) and denies that it is liable to the claimant as alledged or at all.

 

STATEMENT OF TRUTH

 

Blah blah....

 

What worries me the most is paragraph 2. about wanting a management conference! and after that saying i haven't done a sufficient POC (i know they say that to everyone but still). Also para 6 bothered me greatly, why am i time barred? when i asked for my money back in april/may 2006???

[katesage]

DEFENCE

 

1. This defence is filed and served without prejudice to the defendents case that the POC do not disclose reasonable grounds for bringing a claim against the claimant to recover the bank charges (and onterest thereon) referred to in the POC or any other sums. In the event that the claimant does not properly particularise their claim then the defendent will apply to strike out the claim and/or for summary judgement in respect of the same.

 

Claimant??!! don't they mean defendant??!

 

useless beggars, theyve been xeroxing the same old set of defence papers for months!

 

dont worry cheddar, this is a carbon copy of what i got 3+ weeks ago.

they offered me over half my claim last week.

ignore it and wait for your allocation questionnaire if you havnt received it already. you can write acknowledging receipt of defence. did you get CPR18 questions?

 

its all totally standard and your case will hopefully (!) follow the exact same pattern as all the others.

 

good luck hun:)

[cheddar]

You know i wondered that in para 1. they should mean defendant shouldn't they? Fools! lol!

 

I will acknowledge receipt out of courtesy so should I say that I feel i have answered all those questions and that if the court want more info it is up to them to ask for it, is there a template on here anywhere? Or shall i use the one in Michaels sticky thread?

 

No mention of cpr18....

 

Also did yours say that you were time barred? I haven't seen this anywhere else???

[katesage]

No, no mention of time barring but then again mine did have a CPR18 request attached.

 

Anybody else??

 

Isnt it a reference to the 6yr disclosure rule?

[cheddar]

Yes it is as they mention the Limitation Act but I sent my 1st request for payment in April 2006 and my charges only go back to July 2000, so why are they saying 15th Sept 2000 that is 6 years before i filed the claim!!!

[Michael Browne]

Also did yours say that you were time barred? I haven't seen this anywhere else???

 

Yes and they're talking rubbish. The 6 years date back from when you first became aware of the unlawful charges and contacted the bank about it, ie dpa if you sent one, otherwise your prelim letter.

[cheddar]

I thought as much thank you, so i just write a letter back then acknowledging the defence and saying that i have covered everything they are asking for? Do i sent this to the court and copy to cobetts or....?

[katesage]

pretty much thats all you need to do, perhaps include reference to the fact that you have supplied their client with a schedule of charges twice and that should more than suffice.

they keep saying that we have not properly particularised our claims.

its just smoke and mirrors!:grin:

 

ps, just cobbetts at this stage. all correspondence will be seen at court stage if you had to produce a bundle. somehow i doubt it!

[cheddar]

Nice one will come up with something later, the fact that my printer went bang the other day doesn't help much tho! Grrrr will have to go to the library i think.

 

Do i send it to court and cc to cobbets anyone? Do i have to send court a copy??

[katesage]

cobbetts only at this stage:grin:

[cheddar]

nice one cheers hunni! xxx

[Michael Browne]

Bankfodder's advice to a similar question:

 

However I am quite sure that even if you take extreme care you will still get these letters from Cobbett's and other solicitors.

 

Make no mistake that the banks are conducting sham litigation. If they were claimants they would be judged to be vexatious. Cobbett's strategy is impoverished and is designed to weed out the feint of heart and those who are not properly prepared.

 

I am quite sure that they are achieving quite a good rate of claims being abandoned people accepting reduced settlements.

 

If you received a letter from Cobbett's or other solicitor then my suggestion is that you should write your reply to the court and copy it out to Cobbett's. Do this particularly if you have already supplied the schedule of charges. You should make it very clear to the court that the bank has had full details of the claim on at least two previous occasions and that you are now supplying them with a further one.

 

Make it clear to the court that Cobbett's request is a standard letter which is being distributed to all claimants regardless of the way that their claim is constructed and that it is designed only to frustrate and to intimidate.

 

Copy the letter out to Cobbett's. Do not dignify them with a direct reply.

 

Don't worry too much -- you can be sure that by now the courts throughout the United Kingdom are well aware of what is going on and are deeply suspicious of the banks and their so-called legal representatives.

[cheddar]

You know that was in the back of my moind and thats why i asked i couldn't find that again! lol! i have bookmarked it now! Cheers!

[katesage]

I sent my acknowledgement of receipt of defence and CPR18 to Cobbetts, but after reading BFs point, I wish I hadnt bothered!

 

Although I did state that I found their CPR18 request intimidatory and that i would draw it to attention of the judge etc.

 

Actually this is a really good point by BF. There is a sticky about cases being transferred to the Mercantile courts to try and force a case (or several) properly, because the courts are tiring of this influx of court time -wasting. (All judges pet hate!)

If we send all responses to the court instead of dignifying Cobbetts with responses to their intimidatory letters, and just copy these letters to Cobbetts, hopefully Cobbetts and all the other law firms representing the banks, will realise that these tactics will count against them in the end.

 

Please OFT.... do something!