Hi Plutos, We're at about the same stage and the 'first offer' letter has landed. Has yours arrived yet?

Cobbetts are getting buried under claims, that's what it is. I'll bet their mail comes in an artic now.

Well, the standard here's an offer of about 60% of your claim letter arrived from Cobbetts. It's worded exactly the same as other claimants on this site have been getting, you know, the one that starts "Our client considers your challenge to its charges would fail in Court" etc etc etc. It goes on to offer a "goodwill" payment. I've come to the conclusion that goodwill isn't in NatWests vocabulary. I will be replying in the same vein as many others on here and saying thanks for the offer of part payment but the action continues for the rest. It's really reassuring to see others who have been through this stage and then gone onto recover THEIR money. When the other half rang to say Cobbetts had written she was shocked to find I knew what they had written even before she opened the envelope. Must be nearing the end now. Just waiting for a hearing date. RR

Cobbetts allocation questionnaire arrived today. They more or less agree with what we put on ours. They are asking for a case management conference to direct that we amend the particulars of claim. The wording being to the effect that there isn't a valid claim against their clients. Fine, I can go to court for a conference and the worst that can happen is I have to amend the particulars of claim though having used a template from this site I am confident it's a good claim and they are probably trying it on. Is it a stalling tactic? - very likely. I think it more likely the judge will issue a direction to us to clarify the claim if he thinks it needs it though I used the template on this site which spells out very nicely why we think their charges are unlawful. I'm glad I bought a copy of the small claims guide, it really is worth it's weight in gold. If you haven't got a copy yet, BUY ONE FROM THIS SITE, you'll be glad you did.

Well surprise surprise. That one looks identical to the defence Mrs Roadrally received from Cobbetts aside from the interest paragraph. Don't Panic, the worst you might have to do is amend your claim, Read the FAQ's and go buy a copy of the small claims guide book (Buy it from this site - the profits help to fund the hosting costs) believe me it's worth every penny.

Don't know for sure. We used an N1 and it was served in a few days - certainly no more than a week. I think a lot depends on how busy your local court are and I guess they are all hotting up looking at this site

As I understand it and IANAL (I Am Not A Lawyer) the downside is you can get whacked for costs if you lose but the upside is that Standard Disclosure is usually ordered which means the banks would have to fess up all the gory details about relevant matters such as the true cost of administering their moneymaking charges regime, and we all know just how keen they are on that!

Quick update to the story so far.... Replied to Cobbetts defence and letter but kept it to acknowledgement of receipt of defence, here's another copy of the spreadsheet and a copy of the allocation questionnaire. From what others are saying about Cobbetts being overloaded I doubt they will do any more than file it away. Busy reading the Small Claims Procedure - A Practical Guide (Bought from this site of Course!) Makes interesting reading and does a lot to inspire confidence in taking this case forward. If you can afford a copy it's worth every penny.

Tillers, 1. Don't Panic! (Wasn't that on the cover of a very famous book?) 2. Lots of us have received long defences from Cobbetts and they all seem to be templated with just a few tweeks here and there. Can you post the defence here for the more knowledgeable to comment upon? Finally, why will it potentially be struck out on the 22nd September? Cheers, RR

Take a look at this one. It seems Manchesters PCN's are still rubbish. Parking ticket - line advice - FightBack Forums

Hi Plutos, Let me know if yours and ours are the same! I would not be surprised if they are using a standard template and filling in the blanks. Have they made the same mistake in para one on yours? "do not disclose reasonable grounds for bringing a claim against the claimant to recover the bank charges" I assume they mean defendant? Cheers, RR

Hi Kidson and thanks for the response. The covering letter letter says we enclose our client's defence by way of service please acknowledge receipt. I assume they will have lodged the same with the court. Here's their defence. IN THE XYZ COUNTY COURT CASE No XXXXXXX BETWEEN MRS ROADRALLY AND NATIONAL WESTMINSTER BANK PLC DEFENCE 1. This defence is filed and served without prejudice to the defendants case that the particulars of claim do not disclose reasonable grounds for bringing a claim against the claimant to recover the bank charges (and interest thereon) referred to in the particulars of claim or any other sum(s). In the event that the Claimant does not properly particularise her claim then the ddefendant will apply to strike out the claim and/or for summary judgement in respect of same. 2. On allocation the Defendant 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 opportunity to properly particularise her claim. 3. No admissions are made as to what charges have been debited to the Claimants bank account. 4. In relation to the allegation that the bank charges amount to an unenforceable penalty the defendant pleads as follows: 4.1 In order for the claimant to sustain a claim that the charges debited by the defendant are in the nature of a penalty she will need to plead and prove (a) the clause(s) pursuant to which the charges were applied; (b) that the charges were applied due to a breach of contract by the claimant; and © identifying in each case the particular breach of contract (by reference to appropriate term(s) of the contract(s) that the charge related to. As presently pleaded the claim does not plead these matters and therefore does not disclose reasonable grounds for bringing a claim that all or any of the charges referred to in the particulars of claim have been applied pursuant to an unenforceable penalty clause. 4.2 Until such time as the claimant pleads the matter referred to in paragraph 4.1 above the Defendant is unable to plead to the claim brought against it and therefore (pending the provision of full and proper particulars of claim ) at this stage denies that any charges have been applied to the claimants bank account pursuant to 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 Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 ("UCTA 1977") and/or section 15 Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 ("SGSA"). 5.1 The Claimant is required to identify the contractual provisions(s) that she alleges are invalid by reference to UCTA 1977 and/or the regulations. Until such time as these provisions are identified the Defendant cannot (Save as appears below) plead to the allegation referred to in paragraph 5 above. The defendant therefore reserves its right to plead further to the allegation once (and if) the Claimant identifies the relevant contractual provisions. 5.2 In relation to the case of the Claimant that the contractual provisions are invalid pursuant to the regulations the defendant pleads as follows; 5.3.1 Schedule 2 to the regulations is an indicative and non-exhaustive list of terms which may be regarded as unfair (emphasis supplied) 5.3.2 If the Claimant is to rely upon paragraph 1(e) of Schedule 2 to the regulations then she is required to plead and prove in relation to each bank charge that she seeks to recover the matters referred to in paragraph 5.1 above and all facts and matters relied upon in alleging that the sums paid are disproportionately high. 5.3.3 In the circumstances no grounds are disclosed for a claim that the contractual provisions (whatever they are alleged to be - see paragraph 5.1 above) falls foul of the regulations and in particular paragraph 1(e) of Schedule 2. 5.3.4 The defendant is therefore unable (save as appears below) to plead to this allegation beyond denying that any bank charges have been applied pursuant to terms which contravene the regulations. The Defendant reserves its right to plead further to this allegation once (and if) the particulars referred to in paragraph 5.3.2 are provided. 5.3.5 Without prejudice to paragraph 5.3.4 it is the case of the Defendant that the regulations have no application because the charges amount to payment for services provided by the Defendant and the adequacy (or otherwise) of consideration paid under a contract for services is not an issue to be judged by principles of fairness under the regulations. 5.4 In relation to the case of the Claimant that the charges are unreasonable within the meanin of SGSA section 15 the Defendant pleads as follows: 5.4.1 The Claimant is required to plead and prove the necessary factors (referred to in section 15 SGSA) concerning the contract between the claimant and the defendant which mean the that pursuant to SGSA section 15 there is an implied term that the Claimant pay a reasonable charge for service under the contract. 5.4.2 Further, the Claimant is required to plead and prove (a) that the bank charges which have been debited are unreasonable; (b) all facts and matters relied upon by the claimant in support of this case and © what charges would have been reasonable. 5.4.3 In the circumstances no grounds are disclosed for a claim that the Defendant has acted in breach of SGSA section 15. 5.4.4 In the circumstances (save as appears below) the Defendant is unable to plead to this allegation beyond denying that it has acted in breach of SGSA section 15 as alleged or at all. The defendant reserves its right to this allegation once (and if ) the defects in the pleaded case referred to in paragraphs 5.4.1 - 5.4.3 above are addressed. 5.4.5 It is the case that the Defendant that the contract between the claimant and the Defendant does not fall within SGSA section 15 because (a) the consideration for the service would be determined by the contract between the Claimant and the Defendant and (b) was not left to be determined in a manner agreed by the contract or determined by the course of dealings between the Claimant and the Defendant. 6. Save as hereinbefore appears the Defendant joins issue with the Claimant on her claim(s) and denies that it is liable to the Claimant as alleged or at all. STATEMENT OF TRUTH ETC ETC So that's their defence as exactly as it is stated. I noticed another thread where a case management conference has been called. Maybe they are pushing people right down to the wire hoping they'll bottle out. My initial thoughts with this is that I may need to amend the particulars of claim to include all their terms and conditions and send another spreadsheet and corresponding statements cross referenced to the spreadsheet. What do the leagle Eagles on here think? RR

Does the ticket have a date of issue and a date of contravention on it? Last I heard, Manchester tickets didn't comply with the 1991 act. If the PCN doesn't have the two dates on it the ticket is worthless If it does, both dates must be on the ticket and not one on the ticket and one on any tear off payment slip. Take a good look at the signing. The ABD have an excellent guide on ABD and expert advice can be got on http:\\forums.pepipoo.com where there is a fantastic section on parking tickets. Best of luck fighting the parking parasites! RR

Cobbetts defence has arrived and having had a good look around the forum it appears to be a variation on defences other people have had. Nothing major, just small changes in wording. Given all the stuff other people have had about CPR from Cobbetts I expected to find reference to CPR part 18 in there but funnily enough it doesn't. Why the change of tactic I wonder? Anyone care to comment? They claim the particulars of claim do not disclose reasonable grounds for bringing a claim etc. Given we used the template for the N1 from the templates section (changed to suit) and sent the full spreadsheet listing dates amounts and the transactions the charges relate to I am at a loss as to how they can claim it isn't detailed enough. I wonder is this just bluff and bluster? They ask for confirmation of receipt so I will copy the Court in on it. I'll sleep on the draft reply and then post here for comment before I send it. Any comments or help will be gratefully received. Thanks, Roadrally.

Blacksheep, can you enlighten me a little more on that then? Does anybody have any idea if 3 will recover from them if I migrate my tariff down to something a bit more suitable. I am using Skype more than the phone and am loath to let them get away with this.