Letter from bank/solicitor during Moneyclaim online process...

Catster2007

EasyEddie,
Think I have had exactly the same letter as you in response to my claim to natwest. i have until 18 April to respond.
Is your letter from a Manchester based group of Solicitors?
Let me know how you get on?
Thanks

chuckles1066

Easy_Eddie wrote: »

I am in the final part of reclaiming bank charges from Natwest. I have felt that they've delayed as much as possible. I put in my court claim and they have lodged a defence. I have recieved a "Request for Further Information and Clarification" from their solicitors "served pursuant to CPR Part 18"

Part 18 Requests are an excellent means of extracting information that the other party refuse to supply. I speak from personal experience.

District Judges in the Small Claims Track of the County Court are reluctant to issue them because, unless there is a compelling reason to do so, they are seen as overkill.

If you've received a Part 18 Request from the Court, you would do well to comply with it.

MOGUL50

Hi

I issued a claim against Natwest for £4768.60 through the Small Claims Court. I have today received a letter from their solicitors saying that they will be defending the case.

I claimed that the charges exceeded the defendants losses & The Term permitting the Defendent to levy such charges is unenforceable under
The Unfair Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 and Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and at Common Law.

They are asking me to identify what sections of these Acts I base my allegations.

CAN ANYBODY PLEASE HELP ME ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS AS I DO NOT HAVE A COPY OF THESE ACTS

hula-hoops

Found this while Googling:

Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 No 2083 states:

Schedule 2 Indicative and Non-Exhaustive List of Terms which may be Regarded as Unfair

(e) requiring any consumer who fails to fulfil his obligation to pay a dis-proportionately high sum in compensation

Tozer

nickmack wrote: »

As I said, you don't need to respond directly to the questions. The defence is standard and designed to intimidate you. Fill out the AQ promptly when it arrives.

Have you already sent a list of charges?

Actually you do. Under the "overriding objective" of the Civil Procedure Rules, you are REQUIRED to co-operate with the other side in a litigation. Ignoring them is not an option for either party.

If a party submits a request for further particulars (which it is entirely at liberty to do) and the other side ignores it, then the party submitting the request is entitled to apply for a striking out or a stay until the reply is provided. When I was a trainee solicitor, we were always applying for striking out orders and generally get an "unless" order which is a "reply within 14/21/28 days or be struck out" court order.

Tozer

MOGUL50 wrote: »

Hi

I issued a claim against Natwest for £4768.60 through the Small Claims Court. I have today received a letter from their solicitors saying that they will be defending the case.

I claimed that the charges exceeded the defendants losses & The Term permitting the Defendent to levy such charges is unenforceable under
The Unfair Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 and Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and at Common Law.

They are asking me to identify what sections of these Acts I base my allegations.

CAN ANYBODY PLEASE HELP ME ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS AS I DO NOT HAVE A COPY OF THESE ACTS

OK, being legalistic now but I have always thought the UCCR argument to be a bit of a red herring and unnecessary. I would push forward the argument that the charges are not a "genuine pre-estimate of the loss likely to be suffered in the event of a breach of contract" and therefore do not constitute liquidated and ascertained damages. Basically, under English civil law going back hundreds of years, penalties are not enforceable. Liquidated damages are. The argument is that the loss suffered by banks for which they impose hefty charges is minimal and that the charge is not a "pre-estimate of the loss".

Certainly, as a lawyer, that is the argument we always run when litigating. Regulations are open to much interpretation from both sides (look at the ridiculous legislation called the Human Rights Act!). Judges like to interpret common law (i.e. non statute) as it is the law which judges have made over the centuries.

Tozer

Ok having been involved in hundreds of cases, the CPR (whilst nice and ultimately sensible) is not followed to the letter. In particular, small claims cases are treated with pretty low levels of attention by district judges. General rules: Yes, you should treat the court's directions ULTIMATELY seriously. And yes, you should respond to all sensible requests from the other side.

jayneg_2

I am hoping to try and spend some time in front of my computer tomorrow so could anyone shed any light on where to get help regarding filling out the forms as Nat West have defended my claim. I have received a huge amount of paper work from their solicitors Cobbetts in Manchester. There is a defence and a Request for Further information which goes on about responding to their request "in accordance with CPR Part 18" etc etc. I have to reply by 18 April. Any tips for filling this in and does this mean they will defend this in court? Any help really appreciated. JG

Leebcoward

If you have sent the spreadsheet of the charges then this should be all they need. Send it a again with copies of letters...sounds like they are trying to intimidate you. Be strong.

jayneg_2

Sorry to be really thick here but I have been reading up all morning on the different threads about the Defence and Request for further information. Am I right................do I just reply to the Cobbetts, Natwest solicitors, enclosing all the information previously sent to Nat West or do I have to answer every single question on their defence individually. If I do Im really not sure of the correct answers to the CPR Part 18 request - HELP!