New strategy v Abbey - CPR Part 18 Requests

[FoxyFiona]

Excellent!! Very, VERY good news! Well done.

 

Abbey are in a vulnerable position now IMO. They have also just lost a claim in Birmingham a week or so ago. I think we can now start really attacking them. Part 18's are one option, I've got a couple of other idea's as well which I'll put up in the next week or so.

 

 

Ah thanks Gary, I really couldnt have done it without you. You are like a CAG superhero!

 

I think the way forward is to keep changing tactics as they always find a way round each one eventually, they are as slippery as eels......

[srfrench]

Great thread.

 

Quick bump on the wherewithall and viability of sending a CPR PArt 18 request to Abbey.

 

My case (for £7200) has been sent to the Mercantile Court in Leeds and listed for a Case Management Hearing on the 29th August 2007.

 

Do I send Abbey the doc on Thread 1, wait say 14 days then approach the Court to make it an Order? Slightly confused about the process and apologies :?

 

Many thanks

[srfrench]

Ignore my last post, worked it out.... ..... and will be posting to shAbbey 1st class special del tomorrow morning to Inga at her new address!

 

Many thanks. Superb thread!

[roverman]

I requested Abbey to answer the above questions under part 18 and today they have replied with:

We note that by reason of the quantum of you claim, you are not entitled as a matter of right to the information sought.

 

We refer you to the Civil Procedure Rules in this regard.

 

I'm not sure what "quantum of your claim" means and are they right or just fobbing me off?

[GaryH]

Ignore my last post, worked it out.... ..... and will be posting to shAbbey 1st class special del tomorrow morning to Inga at her new address!

 

Many thanks. Superb thread!

Sorry, I've been offline most of the day. Sorted now though, yes?

I requested Abbey to answer the above questions under part 18 and today they have replied with:

We note that by reason of the quantum of you claim, you are not entitled as a matter of right to the information sought.

 

We refer you to the Civil Procedure Rules in this regard.

 

I'm not sure what "quantum of your claim" means and are they right or just fobbing me off?

How presumptuous and arrogant. Schoolyard bully tactics again. The "quantum":rolleyes: of your claim is not important. Its true that part 18 does not usually apply to small claims, but even if your claim was £500 who the hell is she to second-guess the court on allocation? I've seen £400 claims allocated to the fast track before. If its pre-allocation your request is valid.

 

What stage of the process are you at, and how much is your claim?

[GaryH]

I requested Abbey to answer the above questions under part 18 and today they have replied with:

We note that by reason of the quantum of you claim, you are not entitled as a matter of right to the information sought.

 

We refer you to the Civil Procedure Rules in this regard.

 

I'm not sure what "quantum of your claim" means and are they right or just fobbing me off?

Response...

 

Dear Ms *******

 

Thank you for your e-mail.

 

I do not accept your reason for not responding to my part 18 request.

 

To state that I am not entitled to the information as "a matter of right" due to the "quantum" of my claim is arrogant and disingenuous nonsense.

 

You do not specify which particular Civil Procedure Rule or practice directive you wish to refer me to in order to substantiate your assertion. However, I will assume you are referring to rule 27.2, which provides that the part 18 provisions do not apply in claims which are allocated to the small claims track.

 

May I draw your attention to the fact that this claim is not yet allocated to the small claims track, or indeed any track. Claim value is only one factor taken into consideration when allocating to track and to attempt to second-guess the courts decision on allocation is presumptuous in the extreme.

 

Furthermore, track allocation notwithstanding, the court may order a party to provide further information under part 18 if it is considered "appropriate". I believe it is entirely reasonable and appropriate to request clarification in respect of the "administrative expenses" referred to in your defence, and how such expense is incurred.

 

I will allow you a further 7 days to respond to my request. If you do not do so, I reserve the right to seek an order from the court obliging your compliance, and/or, your refusal to respond and continued furtiveness regarding the "administrative expenses" which you steadfastly aver to be representative of your extortionate £35 per item charges, will be documented and included in my submissions to the court at the appropriate time.

 

Please note that your response must be verified by a statement of truth.

 

Yours Sincerely,

[Destinyofsouls]

Hi,

Just stumbled accress this thread.I have to say Gary, you are a bl**dy superstar when it comes to this bank charges lark. Where do you get all this knowledge from?

This request for further information- why is it only directed at Abbey? I thought that as they claim it is a 'breach of contract' in their defence, that stitches it up, as then it is a penalty. Is that right?

So, could this be used for all banks defences?

[roverman]

Brilliant Gary. I will send a reply poste haste. Thanks.

[Guest amethystdragon]

Right - I need to get back on top of this all - I had to submit my AQ's yesterday - Which I did using the "Abuse" version but I never got a reply to my CPR 18 request to Abbey - What should I do now? Its well over the 14 days I gave them but I haven't reminded them about it - So I think I've 2 options

 

1) Write to them giving them another week to produce the goods - then submit an order request to the court

2) Submit an order request to the court straight away

 

Is that the only options I reasonably have or is there something else I should be doing ? Should I contact Inga or someone else ?

[GaryH]

Whats the value of your claim?

[Guest amethystdragon]

My claim is £6k+ and rising daily with contractual interest - I've looked back through the thread and wondered if something along these lines might be worth sending to Inga via email

 

Please be aware that I issued you with a CPR Part 18 request on the 12th June and despite a request that a response was forthcoming within 2 weeks, to date no documentation has been received with regard to this matter.

 

I would be grateful if you could inform me whether you intend to comply with this request. As you have had more than ample time to respond to my request, should I not hear from you by the 20th July 2007 I will seek a court order under p18

[Guest amethystdragon]

Oh and on the AQ for this claim I suggested that it be allocated to fast track

[GaryH]

So, could this be used for all banks defences?

Yes, as long as its a request which is relevant within the provisions of part 18. I.e it must be to clarify something referred to in the defence or be proportionate and reasonably necessary to prepare your case or understand the case you have to meet.

 

Abbey are wide open to this sort of attack becouse of their defence. Other banks maybe less so, although I'm sure there are aspects of all of them which could be picked at.

[GaryH]

My claim is £6k+ and rising daily with contractual interest - I've looked back through the thread and wondered if something along these lines might be worth sending to Inga via email

 

Oh and on the AQ for this claim I suggested that it be allocated to fast track

In that case then give her another 2 days then slap an application in on Friday. Its more than 14 days and they haven't responded so you can request that the application is dealt with without a hearing. See the application on page 2 (I think) of this thread.

[Guest amethystdragon]

Great thanks Gary - Email about to go off in a sec

[Guest amethystdragon]

Already had a reply (of sorts) - It appears that Inga is on holiday so all requests should be forwarded on as per her out of office reply:

 

I will be on leave from 13 July 2007 to 23 July 2007 inclusive. In my absence, if your email relates to Abbey National Plc, please direct your email to [email protected] or [email protected].

[Guest amethystdragon]

I've had a proper response from Clare Fletcher who appears to be unable to read people's surnames!!!!

 

Thank you for your email. From looking at your file it seems likely

that your claim will be allocated to the small claims track . In these

circumstances we do not feel that CPR Part 18 is an appropriate device

and do not intend to respond to your request in the absence of a court

order requiring us to do so.

 

Kind regards

 

Clare Fletcher

[Guest amethystdragon]

I just love how they seem to think they hold all the cards!! - Using Gary's previous response to the email roverman got sent as a basis - I've just sent her this back:

 

Dear Ms Fletcher,

 

Thank you for your e-mail.

 

I do not accept your reason for not responding to my part 18 request.

 

May I draw your attention to the fact that this claim is not yet allocated to the small claims track, or indeed any track. I assume that you are relying on rule 27.2, which provides that the part 18 provisions do not apply in claims which are allocated to the small claims track. Claim value is only one factor taken into consideration when allocating to track and to attempt to second-guess the courts decision on allocation is presumptuous in the extreme.

 

Furthermore, track allocation notwithstanding, the court may order a party to provide further information under part 18 if it is considered "appropriate". I believe it is entirely reasonable and appropriate to request clarification in respect of the "administrative expenses" referred to in your defence, and how such expense is incurred.

 

As you have been previously informed I will allow you until 20th July 2007 to respond to my request. If you do not do so, I reserve the right to seek an order from the court obliging your compliance, and/or, your refusal to respond and continued furtiveness regarding the "administrative expenses" which you steadfastly aver to be representative of your extortionate £35 per item charges, will be documented and included in my submissions to the court at the appropriate time.

 

Please note that your response must be verified by a statement of truth.

 

Yours Sincerely,

 

[FoxyFiona]

Already had a reply (of sorts) - It appears that Inga is on holiday so all requests should be forwarded on as per her out of office reply:

 

 

lol. She will have had a couple of days to deal with my order for CPR pt 18 before she went on her hols, or she will miss the 4pm dead line on the 23rd.....shame.

[Deb76]

Hi

 

I am claiming £11,638 and have a pre trail hearing on 9th August, I have not had to fill in an allocation questionnaire. Do you think it is worth me sending a Part 18, as I was in negotiations with Clare until I called her bluff, now she has stopped responding to me. Does it prompt them to start negotiations?

 

Thank you

[GaryH]

Yes - send a part 18 straight away, ASAP. If they don't respond, file an application on the 14th day.

[srfrench]

How do we file an application?

[GaryH]

See post #36.

[srfrench]

PMSL... yup got that GaryH, but do I make the application by just sending the form N244 with a copy of the CPR18 request to be made an order without a hearing plus the £35/£65 fee to the Judge? Or would I have to go into the Merc Court in person to get it actioned?

[GaryH]

Ah, sorry - yeah just posting it will be fine. Make sure you include the completed N244, with the request attached along with any chase up letters, plus a cheque for the £35 fee.