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

Edinburghlass_2

I'll just pop this into the thread discussing such a letter, as cneolj says send them what they want!

dori2o

Thats what I was thinking.

doog_2

Can any one help me with some of the points that my bank are requesting from me. I understand some of the things they are asking for, but they say i have to respond to all their requests in accordance with CPR Part 18 by May 2007. Do i have to do this? If i do the points i dont understand are as follows.
1. In relation to each charge, please clarify the following:[a] is it the case of the claiment the same should not have been charged ? If yes please explain why the claiment contends that the same should not have been charged ? [c] If no;is it the case of the claiment that the same should not have been charged in this amount. [d] If yes; please explain why the claiment contends that the same should not have been charged in this amount and identify the sum the claiment contends should have been charged. [e] If no; please state the claiments case.

I do believe that i have answered the above questions in my initial letters to the bank stateing that i do not believe the charges reflect the true cost to RBS to return a direct debit. Which all my charges are.

They continue:
2. In your claim you refer to the charges as penalties. Please provide the following particulars in support of your claim: Please specify the clause pursuant to which the charges were applied: Please specify whether the charges applied were due to a breach of contract by the claiment;
Please identify in each case the particular breach of contract [by reference to appropriate terms of the contract] that the charge related to.

3.In your claim you state that the charges are: an unfair penalty under the unfair terms in consumer contracts regulations 1999. Please specify all the facts relied on by the claiment in support of the contentions in previous section 3 above, and in particular please identify the contractual provisions that the claiment alleges are invalid by reference to the regulations.

If any one can help me understand what the bank is trying to say i would be very grateful. And also do i have to respond as they are saying.

Kurt_Hamster

CPR 18 doesn't apply if your claim is on the small claims track.

CPR 18 is just about the rules regarding open disclosure.

What they are after is for you to come around to their assertion that they aren't charges, they are fees for a service.

Sections 1 and 2 above are interogative rather than actually asking for disclosure and therefore don't come under the umbrella of CPR18 as they well know. You aren't obliged to spell out everything for them, that's what the hearing is for. What they want is for you to put your foot in it and make an admission that perhaps they can use in court.

AlexisV

No, I don't think you can, because that is only a small part of the defence. There are other points as the T&Cs.

If you end up in front of a judge, you just need to say it's a sloppy template and point 2 is incorrect.

Further, the charges are not default charges and, accordingly, cannot amount to a penalty.

That's interesting - if they're not penalty fees, then they are service charges. They need to reveal how much the true cost is to them for these fees, which of course they won't do.

The way they've set it out is helpful, because it is easier to dispute each and every one of those points.

crystalflower

]Please can anyone help me.

After putting in my claim to the small claims court, I have received a replay by Natwest requesting verious details.

I'm really having alot of trouble in deciphering what they want me to find out, and feel that this is just another way of delaying me. I'm no solicitor and feel totally confused by some of their requests - see below:

1. "In realtion to each charge, 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?
c)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.

2. I refered to the charges as being penalties.

a) Provide the following:
Specify the clause(s) pursuant to which the charges were applied.

b) Specify whether the charges applied were due to a breach of contract by the Claimant.

c) Identify in each case the particular breach of contract (by reference to appropriate term(s) of the contract) that the charge relate to.

3. Specify all the facts relied on by the Claimant in support of "unfair penalty under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999", and identify the contractual provisions that the Claimant alleges are invalid by reference to the Regulations.

So there you have it. I'm really confused by all this legal jargon, and was hoping someone, somewhere had received a letter like this and to tell me what they did about it? Please help.

Thanks
C

dori2o

Ok,

If I wanted to respond to the defence who do I respond to, the court, or the bank, or both?

Do I have to do it before I put in the AQ?

Any help appreciated.

dori2o

Bump******

Kurt_Hamster

Basically they are trying to draw you into making admissions they can use against you should it go to court.

Firstly, if you are on the small claims track then they have no right of disclosure. As it happens what they are asking for isn't disclosure of evidence, they are asking for statements, i.e. answers to questions. You aren't obligated to answer them. This is what the court hearing is for and for the judge to ask, not for the defence to ask you outside the courtroom.

Basically you don't need to answer their letter. All those questions should have appeared in their statement of defence.

dori2o

Please help

Many Thanks