Time I gave it a go *WON*

[Solowka]

well, i filed my papers on the 4th Aug, got a letter they were deemed srved on the 9th aug, the bank have intill 23rd to respond but as yet i have had no acknowledgement of claim and i`ve read quite a few posts of others getting theirs within a few days, me confused now lol

[MARTIN3030]

There is a timescale which they have to work to.

We dont know why acknowledgement with some is quicker than others,but you must remember these are legal issues so quite often their response times maybe

has explanations to do with their own strategies.

 

Your consolation is knowing their stalling tactics (as far as time is allowed ) at the court stages are extremely limited by what the court has laid down !!

[Solowka]

Just a wee update, today is the 28th day since date of service and the post has just been and nothing today, knowing my luck the courts would`ve recieved the defence today, so will see if i can apply judgement tomorrow hehe, or could i try today?

[Solowka]

Got the defence from Cobblers yesterday, it really does astound the tactics that they use after reading it, also got a CPR pt 18 request, sent the reply to them yesterday after ammending BigCols template (Many thanks btw) hope you dont mind?)) things should start to get interesting now, next step CAQ methinks hehe.

 

Heres the cpr pt 18 request questions:

 

The Request-

1. In your claim you request `the return of amounts in the sum of xxxxxxx debited by the defendant in terms of charges.`

2. Please provide the particulars in support of your claim:

2.1 T o what account(s) (giving details of the account name, number and sort code) were the charges applied

2.2 In relation to each charge please identify (a) the date when the charge was charged, (b) the amount of the same; and © the reason(s) given for the charging of the same.

2.3 In relation to each charge, please clarify the following (a) is it the case of the claimant the same should not have been charged? (b) if yes; please explain why the claimant contends that the same should not have been charged? © if no; is it the case of the claimant that the same should not have been charged in this amount? (d) If yes; please explain why the claimant contends that the same should in this amount and identify the sum the claimant contends should have been charged. (e) if no; please state the claimants case.

3. In your claim you state that the charges are : `unenforceable by virtue of the unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulation 1999, the unfair contract terms act 1877 and the common law`

4. Please specify all the facts relied on by the claimant in support of the contentions in paragraph 3 above, and in particular please identify (a) the section(s) of the unfair contracts act 1977 (“UCTA 1977”); (b) the regulations of the unfair contract terms in consumer regulations 1999 (“the regulations”); and © the principles of common law relied upon by the claimant in alleging that the contractual provision(s) referred to are unenforceable. Please also identify contractual provision(s) that the claimant alleges are unenforceable by reference to the UCTA/ the regulations.

[Solowka]

Hey up, just a wee update, it would appear the rbos have charged me £38 lol, will have to add this onto the charges i`m claiming, i dont understand how it came about, theres only one DD coming out and i always make sure theres money in the account, unless they`ve cancelled my £50 overdraft without telling me, but it is my understanding they cannot do this as the account is in dispute, hmmmmmm.

[Guest willowb]

Hmmmm indeed! RBS always play fair and by the rules...so what could have happened hey? lol

 

Wxx

It won't be long now before you start getting offers ;>)

[MARTIN3030]

Next step will prob be a court date.........They really do stretch it as they know they dont have to settle till the last minute.

Cobblers appear to have a massive task as they are handling the Nae West claims as well.

 

Did you get the papers asking for further info ?

like asking for account details etc ?

 

I think its likely that if there were gonna be offers it would have been earlier.

They know that people who take it this far and let them know they are going all the way that they not gonna settle for anything less than 100%

 

My understanding is that they have ppl reading this site so you have to be careful.......for example one claimant was going on holiday and mentioned this....next minute he got an offer.......they knew he/she wanted the cash for that.

Sensibly they declined.

So looks like they are manipulating situs where they can see they may win ppl over with their offers.

[Solowka]

Aye, I did get papers asking for account details and names, but its nothing i havent sent them 3 times already lol, the mind boggles.

 

Just got back from work and this was waiting for me hehe

 

Dear Sir

 

Our Client : National Westminster Bank plc

 

We refer yo your letter dated 7 September 2006

 

We note your comments on our Request for Further Information. It is our clients centention that your Particulars of claim did not properly particularise your claim. Foir example, our client cannot properly defend a claim where you have not given account details and the details of each charge (excuse me, yes i did) you claim is disproportionate and unreasonable.

 

The court is bound by 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 not respond to 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

[Solowka]

*UPDATE* came in the post today :

 

Dear Sir,

 

Our client : The Royal Bank of Scotland

Clain No : XXXXXXXX (just in case they`re reading lol)

 

We refer you to the above matter.

 

Our client considers thet your challenge to its charges would fail on court. Our client believes that its charges are fair, reasonable and transparent. It considers that the amount debited to your account have been applied strictly in accordance with your agreement with it and its published tariff, which it is satisfied complies with all applicable laws and regulations. Our client is also committed to ensuring the transparency of the information it gives its customers about the operation of its products. As such, our client does not believe that your claim has no prospect of succeeding.

 

However, as a gesture of goodwill and strictly on the basis that our client rejects any liability to you, it is willing to offer you a goodwill payment of £1,150.

 

Acceptance by you of this goodwill payment will be in full and final of your claim against our client and strictly on the basis that :-

 

1 You agree not to disclose to any third party the fact of, or any details relating to this payment.

 

2 You write to the court withdrawing your claim.

 

blah blah...deadline...blah blah, take this letter to the courts attention on the firm belief its a reasonable offer.

 

Yours faithfully

 

Cobblers LLP

 

 

 

Well, looks like im gonna print off my rejection of offer letter lol, took their sweet time in offering me a goodwill payment, but glad they did tho hehe.

[Solowka]

*Another update* This came in the post yesterday

 

 

`DISTRICT JUDGE ROGERS has considered the statements of case amd allocation questionaires filed, and allocated the claim to `the fast track`.

 

The defendant shall file and serve the specified information pursuant to Rule 18 Request dated 6th September 2006 by 4pm on the 1st november 2006.

 

There be standard disclosure of documents by list between the parties by serving copies together with a standard disclosure statement by 4pm on the 28th November 2006.

 

Each party shall serve on every other party the statements of all witnesses as to the fact upon which he intends to rely at trial. There shall be simultaneous exchange of such statements no later that 4pm on the 26th December 2006.

 

The witness statements shall stand as evidence in chief at trial.

 

Evidence will not be permitted at trial from any witness whose statement has not been disclosed in accordance with this order.

 

No expert evidence being neccessary, no party has permission to call or rely on expert evidence.

 

The matter be listed in a three week trial window commencing 6th march 2007, with a time estimate of 3 hours.

 

The pre trial check lists be files by 4pm on the 18th January 2007.

 

The claimant shall file with the court not less than 7 days before trial a bundle comprising of the following -

 

an agreed proposed trial timescale

 

the pleadings

 

the statements of the parties and witness to facts

 

the skeleton arguement and reports of any case reliance is placed.`

 

 

Call me thicker than an offspring between a village idiot and john prescott, but WTF!?

[smoorach]

c'mon sol you know the answer to the wtf bit hun. they are wriggling and squrming but it doesnt stop you being right does it? we are all behind you go get em tiger.

[zeus_the_god]

just wanting to watch how this plays out as im in a similar boat

[stacymason]

The words 'fast Track' should have Cobbetts settling very soon I would've thought Sol!!

 

Good luck hun xx

[Solowka]

cheers stacy, hope you`re right hehe, was a a bit confused as to why its gone to the fast track and not smail claims

[stacymason]

Probably to stop Cobbetts playing games Sol, did you put anything in your allocation questionaire?

[Solowka]

it was nothing out the ordinary, just a request for disclosure of costs is all. just putting together me court bundle now tho.

[Solowka]

Well, today was the final day for the bank to disclose costs, a nervy experience cos i missed the post as i was in a vodka induced coma and he came with a special delivery package, managed to track him down and he delivered it a few mins ago.....

 

 

I WON!!!!!

 

the letter included a nice cheque for 2.3k

[stacymason]

CONGRATULATIONS!!!!!!!

Bet you soon forgot the hangover!!!!

 

Well done hun xxxxxxx

[sandbag]

Hey Sol - congratulations - get the vodka out. Well done.

Regards Sandbag

[smoorach]

well done hun thats great news more vodka induced comas coming then

[lostinparadise]

Congratulations Sol.

Go buy another bottle of Vodka you deserve it.

LIP:grin:

[Tracey81]

I sent my LBA on the 4th Dec and i rec'd a letter from them yesterday saying thank you for your patience while we investigate this matter? Anyone else rec'd a letter like this from them ?