This topic was closed on 11 March 2019. If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there. If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened. - Consumer Action Group

This topic was closed on 09 March 2019. If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there. If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened. - Consumer Action Group

This topic was closed on 09 March 2019. If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there. If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened. - Consumer Action Group

Thanks Glenn. No mention of specific cases at all unfortunately.

We are awaiting a court date for our claim against Barclaycard and have received a 'General Form of Judgement or Order' from our County Court. It says: "Before District Judge xxx sitting at xxx County Court. Upon reading the court file it is ordered that 1. The Claimant must by 4pm xxx October 2006 identify the dates and amounts of its charges challeged. 2. The parties are to consider whether this claim should be stayed pending a decision and decisions in other similar cases". With regards to the 1st request, we have already supplied both Barclaycard and the County Court (with the Allocation Questionnaire) with details of the charges claimed but will send it again! However, the 2nd request confuses me. I know a lot of the judges have been ordering that cases be stayed, but our judge says "consider whether this claim shoud be stayed". Excuse me being thick but does that mean he has left it up to us, and we could write back saying we have considered staying the claim but dont wish to, give us a court date please?? A word of advice from a moderator would be gratefully received - don't want to stuff it up when we are so near! Thanks, Lolly

We did our Natwest Credit Card and Bank account claims separately after advice from this forum. They are separate contracts with different terms and conditions. Lolly

Well, we gave NatWest 7 days to pay up after they did not file a defence to our claim for charges to Credit Cards. The 7 days has more than passed with no word so tomorrow we will be asking for the judgment to be enforced. Exciting stuff On another note, we have a separate claim for our bank account and today we received a copy of their allocation questionnaire from Cobbetts. No offers made whatsover, which is slightly worrying because a lot of people get offered half at this stage. Fingers crossed it wont be long now! Either that or we will see them in court. Lolly

Hello all Natwest failed to respond to our credit card claim within 28 days and today we received a notice of judgment from Northampton County Court. What is the next step in order to enforce the judgment? I have looked in the FAQ's but cant find an answer to this one. Do the courts inform Natwest that they have lost and need to pay? Or do we do that and then send in baliffs ourselves if they dont pay? Comments gratefully received! Lolly

Hi Sm03art. A defence just means that the bank has confirmed that they are going to defend the claim in court and gives the reasons why they are defending it. In nearly every case the banks have paid up before the court date is reached, but putting in a defence gives them more time and draws things out even more, probably also scaring off a lot of people from taking it any further. CPR 18 is a request for information, but if a case goes down the small claims court route they are not actually allowed to ask for a CPR 18 from you and it can be ignored - it is just another scare tactic. The CPR 18 request I received is long and complicated with loads of legal jargon, and I can imagine a lot of people get put off when it arrives. It doesnt mean they have won whatsoever. Hope that helps

Hi, We recieved a defence from Cobbetts today as well, also expecting a response by 9th August. Ours also received on last possible day. Ours is for a very similar amount too - be interesting to compare the progress of each. I will keep an eye on your thread! Going to supply them with a list of the charges, which wev'e given NatWest already (these people obviously can't read). Decided to politely refuse the CPR18 request as they cant ask us to do that when its going to the small claims court. However, if youre brave you could send a CPR 18 request of your own and really annoy them, you can find one here: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/15172-reply-stock-defence-18-a.html Theres no mention of CPR 16 on ours though. I would think its just another stalling tactic, after all they cant argue the usual - "you havent supplied us with the charges" line because you did that in the particulars of claim. Clutching at straws me thinks! Best of luck Lolly

Look at this link and you will find a few threads about it: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-charges-print/ Nothing to be too concerned about from what I can see

Thats great, Ill remember it for next time The rest of what youve said sounds like a plausible reason. Used to being shat on, I would call it!

NZ Ill wait for the sheep jokes.... At least Im not an Aussie

That book sounds really interesting, I will keep an eye out for it. Im not English, and I reckon its do with the "musnt grumble" thing, people here generally seem very placid and happy to settle for things rather than get on their soapbox or risk causing stress.... (well, my English husband does that anyway!) Am being very generalising here, my apologies if it offends anyone. Obviously most people on this forum arent like that or they wouldnt be here! I am the other end of the spectrum which isnt always a great way to be either Cheers Lolly

Yeah youre probably right about it being a damage limitation tactic. And about people thinking that the offer is a good one, from a few posts Ive seen on here theres a chunk of people who have misunderstood the OFT thing and think charging £12 is ok because the OFT says so ..... It does seem to be that a lot of people are just pleased to get any sort of refund or are put off at the court stage, despite the fantastic results seen in your survey. Funny how as consumers we think, "ooh we should be grateful for what we can get", where does that mentality stem from? Maybe its because we are all so used to being walked on (rip off Britain!). To have the roles reversed for once is such a unfamiliar, unexpected situation that we dont know quite how to deal with it?