Plutos vs. Natwest **WON**

[Plutos]

Also, can I add extra charges in to the Court allocation questionnaire?

 

Cheers!

 

PL

[Isobel Daly]

Hi Plutos

 

I received the standard defence pack from Cobbetts on Saturday with a request for CPR part 18. You'll laugh at this................. every part of the 7 point defence matters is the same - different wording but they say they have not had details of particulars (list of charges). Also got an AQ from the court. The easy one - N149. Both sets of letters came standard post. Good luck!!

[Plutos]

Hi Plutos

 

I received the standard defence pack from Cobbetts on Saturday with a request for CPR part 18. You'll laugh at this................. every part of the 7 point defence matters is the same - different wording but they say they have not had details of particulars (list of charges). Also got an AQ from the court. The easy one - N149. Both sets of letters came standard post. Good luck!!

 

Thanks for that, good to know. It seems to me that this site picked up momentum in the june/july period so they are now snowed under with people getting to this 'critical stage'. Vital we stay together and beat em'!

 

I'll let you know what I get tonight. Can I ask how much your claim was for (I assume they go easier when the amount is less):

[Plutos]

OK I got the legendary pack yesterday evening.

 

First page: we enclose by way of service

 

1) Defence

 

2) Request for further information

 

please acknowledge receipt

 

---------

Their defence basically says they are unable to plead because they need more information about the claim. I understand this is standard practice when the case has been logged using moneyclaim.

--------

The next section is the request for further information and clarification.

 

1) "this request is seved pursuant to CPR part 18

2) "The reasons why this request has been served are set out in the defence which has been served by the defendant"

3) "you are asked to provide a response to this request in accordance wioth CPR part 18 by 19 September"

4) "If not..." bla bla bla

 

The Request:

 

1) In your claim you state "claimant is claiming the return of £957.00 taken by defendant in charges over 4 years"

2) Please provide the following in particulars in support for your claim:

2.1: - date of charge

- Amount

- Reasons given

2.2: In relation to each charge, please clarify the following

- is it the case of the claimant the same should not have been charged

- If no, please explain why the claimant contends that the same should not have been charged

- if yes; 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

- if no, please state the claimants case.

3) In your claim you state that "the bank's charges are a disproportionate penalty and therefore unenforceable as they are contrary to common law”

4) Please provide the following particulars in support of your claim:

- Please specify the clauses pursuant to which the charges were applied

- Please specify whether the charges applied were due to a breach of contract

- Please identify in each case the particular breach of contract (by reference to the appropriate terms of the contract) that the charge related to.

5) In your claim you state that the charges are “invalid under the Unfair (Contracts) Terms Act 19778 s.4 and Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulation 1999 and Sch 2 (1) (e)” and “unreasonable within the meaning of the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 s15”

6) Please specify all the facts relied on by the claimant in support of the contentions in paragraph 5 above, and ion particular please identify the contractual provisions that the claimant alleges are invalid by reference to the UCTA/the regulations.

 

 

I would really appreciate it if anyone can reassure me:

 

1) Is this completely standard - it looks like it is to me, with just the amounts and 2 quotes personalised to some extent.

2) What exactly should my next move be, and what do I have to send them? I thought the CPR18 would be a seperate form that they tried to trick us into, but it seems to be a piece of legislation they can request stuff under.

3) Should I send an acknowledgement right away?

4) What will their next moves be?

 

Cheers

 

Plutos

 

[Michael Browne]

Although technically the case has not yet been allocated to the small claims track, it almost certainly will be and CPR 18 requests do not apply to small claims. So you don't have to reply to any of their questions. Most people, as a courtesy, send the schedule of charges (inc 8% interest) with a/c no.

 

Be interested to know what they said re: 4. If not ...bla bla bla

[Plutos]

Sorry, they actually said:

4) If you are unable to provide a response by this date then you should immediatly contact the defendent's solicitors and tell them when you will be able to provide a response.

 

5) If you are unable to provide a response to this request by this date then the defendant can apply to the Court for an order requiring you to provide the information requested or (in view of the deficiencies in the way that the claim is pleaded) an order striking out the claim(s)

 

Thanks for the reply, much appreciated!

 

Plutos

[Kidson]

Hi Plutos,

 

I extrapolated the following from elsewhere on these forums:- please see if it is relevant to you ~ two alt replies:

 

----------------------------

 

1. This response is served pursuit to CPR 18

 

 

The Response

 

2. In response to Para 2.1 and 2.2 (a)(b)© of defendants request please find herewith (attached Schedule one) a break down of the charges applied to the claimants account this includes the claimants account number sort code and the dates of the charges were applied and the reason.

 

3. In response to Para 2.2 © of the defendants request, the claimant has already explained why the charges should not have been applied but for the avoidance of doubt the claimant alleges that the charges are Penalty charges are irrecoverable at common law. The precedent for this was Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v New Garage and Motor co Ltd [1915] AC 79.along with Murray v. Leisure play [2005] EWCA Civ 963 It was held that a contractual party can only recover damages for an actual loss or liquidated losses.

 

4. In response to Para 2.3(a) Yes, the claimant should not have been charged an amount above the true administrate cost incured by the respondents, (b) the claimant should not have been charges for reason out lined in Para 2. © the claimant should have been charged the true administrative cost,

 

5. In response to Para 2.3(d) The Respondents have asked what the claimant should have been charged, to answer this the claimant will need a break down of the administrative cost incured by the defendant in applying the said charges.

 

6. In response to the further question made by the defendant the claimant will not be able to responded to these until the claimant has disclosure and inspection of documents as the claimant will be requiring a copy of his contract with the respondents

 

7. If the defendant requires any further information, the claimant will be happy to provide this once the discloser of documents/information has been dealt with by the court.

 

---------------------

 

 

Dear Sir or Madam:

 

Claim No: xxxxxxxxxxxx

 

 

I acknowledge receipt of your defence & request for further information and clarification.

 

I anticipate that the claim would be allocated to the small claims track and would not then expect to have to deal with a Part 18 request since these are specifically excluded under Part 27 unless the court specifically orders me to do so of its own initiative

 

Furthermore I consider that the CPR part 18 request is intimidatory and I intend to bring the intimidation to the notice of the court. However, for clarity, I confirm the charges I am claiming were applied to the following account:

 

Account Name: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

Account numbers: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

Sort Code xx

 

Amountxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

 

Yours sincerely

[Isobel Daly]

Hi

 

Are you going to send the CPR request back or are you going to send reply as above? I am going to go to the court on Monday with revised charges and AQ form. I am looking at putting in the standard CPR request which is abit long-winded but looks legal and official. Your thought......

 

Isobel

[Plutos]

Brilliant reply Kidson, thanks very much. I understand that the first part is if i decide to reply to the CSR 18, the second is the one if you don't want to reply. I think at the moment I will use something along the lines of the second. I'm having a really good look round the forums again at the moment; I think I's starting to get on top of this now. If anyone has any further suggestions or advice, that'll be very welcome though!

 

Many thanks to all of you; a donation will arrive when the cheque clears.

 

Plutos

[Plutos]

Hi

 

Are you going to send the CPR request back or are you going to send reply as above? I am going to go to the court on Monday with revised charges and AQ form. I am looking at putting in the standard CPR request which is abit long-winded but looks legal and official. Your thought......

 

Isobel

 

I'm thinking that I'll do the standard reply for the moment. What are people's general thoughts about this. If you do the CPR, you might look a bit more willing to cooperate. On the other hand, it means you are bowing to Cobbet's unreasonable request, and could get picked up on any mistakes later.....

 

Thanks,

 

Plutos

[Michael Browne]

Whichever you do won't make any difference to the outcome. The whole point of their letter is to make you think they have a case and take whatever they offer.

 

I'd send the sod off letter, if only on the basis that you should never volunteer any information more than you have to.

[Kidson]

Plutos - herewith another letter extrapolated from these forums:-

 

-------------------------------

 

I Acknowledge the receipt of the defence posted on behalf of National Westminster Bank.

 

I am not prepared, at this stage, to answer the CPR Part 18 Request. I anticipate that the claim will be allocated to the small claims track and would not then expect to have to deal with a Part 18 request since these are specifically excluded under Part 27 unless the court specifically orders me to do so of its own initiative.

 

Furthermore I consider that the CPR part 18 request is intimidatory and I intend to bring the intimidation to the notice of the court. I obtained all of the information pursuant to this claim (vis the charges, account numbers etc) from your client, National Westminster Bank plc. I am therefore somewhat surprised that you have not been sent this information by them directly to enable you to defend this claim efficiently.

 

The fact your client has not provided you with account number, sort code etc. would suggest that your client does not wish you have these details, possibly for security reasons. Therefore for me to provide you with these details I will need written consent from your client to do so.[not necc]

 

With regard to Defence section 3. “No admissions are made as to what charges have been debited to the Claimant’s bank account.”

 

This is blatantly untrue I have provided your client with all details regarding charge dates, amounts and detail, which incidentally were initially provided to me by your client, this information was sent to: Stuart Higley National Westminster House 225 Shenley Road, Borehamwood, WD6 1TE; 30 June 2006, Special Delivery Ref: ZV 1805 4108 4GB; received 3 July 2006 7:20 AM signed for by P.Sherley.

 

However I will take this opportunity to provide you with an updated schedule of unlawful charges made by your client including 8% interest, please find enclosed the aforementioned schedule. As soon as I am in receipt of written consent form your client with regard to account numbers and sort code I will provide these details.

 

 

Do you think this may be a bit strong ?

[Isobel Daly]

Hi Plutos,

 

Worth a look at this:

 

Please find my request pursuant to CPR part 18 you are asked to respond by XX XXX 2006.

 

· In relation to each and every breach by the Claimant which resulted in a charge being levied as confirmed by the Defendant in its Defence please provide full details (with all relevant supporting documentation) of:

 

 

a) any letters, telephone calls, or incidents of manual intervention into the account in respect of each and every charge claimed by the Claimant in the Particulars of Claim;

 

b) how charges are applied to the account (whether automatically or by some other means) and when;

 

c) the Defendant’s assessment of the cost to it of sending any letter making any telephone call or otherwise administering the account, with details of how the cost to the Defendant is calculated and what items of expense are included, or such other costs as are foreseeable in the context of contractual damages and the remoteness thereof and which can be specifically identified and defined and which can be reasonably attributed to each and every breach on the part of the Claimant;

 

d) the justifiably objective principles upon which all such costs are calculated and result in the specific level of each charge levied by the bank in respect of each of the breaches which resulted in the charges now claimed by the Claimant.

 

 

2. Where the Defendant avers that the charges are applied in return for the provision of a banking service to the Claimant:

 

a) Please identify each and every such service referred to in the defendant’s terms and conditions and identify the charges, by reference to those terms and conditions, that the Claimant is required to pay for each service identified.

 

b) Please confirm what steps are taken by the defendant in providing the alleged services referred to in the defence. Please provide copies of all notes, memoranda, or other information retained by the defendant to demonstrate the provision of the alleged services to the Claimant.

 

c) Please confirm whether charges are applied automatically.

 

Please note however, I consider that upon allocation this case will be referred to the Small Claims Track, accordingly I consider your CPR Part 18 request to be intimidatory as Part 18 would not apply. Having been in touch with other Nat West claimants I am aware of your recently devised tactics and attempts to cause claimants in person to give up. I shall not be responding to your requests designed to intimidate. I shall of course respond to the order of the Court leaving the matters to be settled by the court.

 

Yours faithfully

[Plutos]

I get the impression that the last letter, whilst good, is effectivly asking for information under CPR paret 18, whilst saying you are not going to answer their cpr 18 request in the last para!

 

I'm thinking of sending the basic refusual at the moment and seeing the response.... going to leave it a hour or two whilst I keep reading the forums though!

 

Thanks!

 

Alec

[Plutos]

OK, here's the letter. Any comments please put em' quick as its about to get posted!...

 

Plutos

The Dog House

Woof Woof Road

Bonesville

DO66Y

 

 

Cobbetts LLP,

Ship Canal House

King Street,

Manchester,

M2 4WB

 

 

Dear Sir or Madam:

 

Claim No: 1111111

 

I Acknowledge the receipt of the defence posted on behalf of National Westminster Bank plc.

 

I am not prepared at this stage to answer the CPR Part 18 Request. I anticipate that the claim will be allocated to the small claims track and would not then expect to have to deal with a Part 18 request since these are specifically excluded under Part 27 unless the court specifically orders me to do so of its own initiative

 

Furthermore I consider that the CPR part 18 request is intimidatory and I intend to bring the intimidation to the notice of the court.

 

However, for clarity, I confirm the charges I am claiming were applied to the following accounts:

 

Account numbers: 1111111 and 1111111

 

Sort Code: 11-11-11

 

 

Please also find enclosed a breakdown of all charges I am claiming. This schedule of charges was provided to National Westminster Bank in earlier correspondence, and is based on the information acquired from the Bank’s own records.

 

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

 

Plutos

[Michael Browne]

Perfect.

[Lager_Lou]

Hi Plutos,

 

I've read loads of threads on this forum regarding these letters and think yours is great - covers the points perfectly without saying too much. Will be using it myself when the time comes.

 

Good luck! Lager Lou

[Plutos]

Thanks guys, i'll get this in the post thisafternoon. I'll send it special delivery to make sure it is there fast and Cobbets can't claim i didn't respond. It looks tough too.

 

Plutos

[Plutos]

Letter sent last Friday, looking forward to a response over the next couple of days. I expect this will be the "no, really, we still don't understand what you're going on about" one, but we'll see. You've got to play their little games, right?

 

Pl.

[Plutos]

Finally picked up the allocation questionnaire from my other address, going to post it off today. Amazing that the cover letter has claimant crossed out in biro and defendant put in where they made a mistake in one of the sentences! Its been moved to a court near me (hammersmith).

 

Going to answer in the following (stolen from Bandit, sorry!)

 

 

(A) Postpone claim? NO

(B) Transfer to another court? NO

© Small claims track ok? YES

(D) Witnesses? 0

(E) Experts? NO

(F) Dates not able to attend? NONE

(G) Further Information? NONE

(H) Fee? NO

[Michael Browne]

Full AQ guide here:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/11644-allocation-questionnaires-guide-completion.html

[Plutos]

Thanks for that. I filled it in as above, but included another schedule of charges and a copy of the letter sent to cobbetts. I hope this is okay!

[Plutos]

Got a letter from Cobbets today:

-------------------------------------

We refer to your letter dated 8th September.

 

We note your comments on our request for further information. It is our client's contention that your Particulars of Claim did not properly particularise your claim. For example, our client cannot properly defend a claim where you have not given the details of each charge you claim is disproportionate and unreasonable.

 

The court is bound with an overriding objective to deal with cases justly and ensure that parties are on an equal footing. It was clearly the case that our client could noy respond your claim where you did not provide sufficient particulars. Our client therefore objects to your allegation that the Request is intimidating.

 

Yours Faithfully,

 

Cobblers LLP

-----------------------------------------------

 

Anyone think there is any further action required here? Are they going to try a new tactic and let it run then claim "we don't know what you're talking about"?

 

I send them the schedule of charges with the reply to their CPR 18 request, and I send it to the court with the allocation questionaire. It seems a bit rich they are still claiming to be ignorant of the details of each charge, surely, especially when they hold the information themselves, and I've send it to them at every stage.

 

What do you think?

 

Anyone else got one of these? (I think I read a couple of posts but can't find them now!)

 

Thanks,

 

Pl.

[Michael Browne]

This is their standard response to a CPR 18 refusal.

 

Not worth replying to. Just sit tight, their offer will be along any day now.

[Plutos]

Thanks Michael, although I'm an "avid" reader of the forums, it's always great to get a response. When I went home last night I opened the Cobbet's letter with anticipation, secretly hoping for a cheque to fall out, but got this instead!

 

I see some people have made their own CPR18 requests (e.g. "can you detail the breakdown of charges" etc which looks fun, but I decided to keep it simple).

 

I'm now incredibly prepared to go to court if natwest wants to do it - I've still got a couple of weeks spare holiday if need be, so plenty of time for preparation! I think it would be great (in some ways) to be the one picked to defend the case - though I doubt Natwest would do so! They'll find themselves a nice little 'ole lady to scare instead!

 

pl

 

This is their standard response to a CPR 18 refusal.

 

Not worth replying to. Just sit tight, their offer will be along any day now.