Is their defence valid?

Sykskar

Heya,

I've followed all the steps and I've been given a copy of their defence which reads...

"The claimants account is governed by the defendants personald and/or business banking terms and conditions.

Pursuant to the defendants terms and conditions the defendant is entitled to make a charge for its services as set out in the defendants price list, including an overdraft review fee for considering whether to provide and providing and overdraft.

The defendant denies that the charges applied to theclaimants account amount to penalties at common law and/or unfair contract terms for the purposes of the unfair terms in consumer contracts regulations 1999 (UTCCRs)

The charges applied to the claimants account are reasonable and are properly and fully disclosed in the defendants terms and conditions and published price list.
The charges represent the contractually agreed price for the services provided and the UTCCRs are not applicable to them; alternatively, they are not unfair contrary to the UTCCRs. Further, the charges are not default charges and accordingly cannot amount to a penalty.

Save as set out above, each and every allegation made by the claimant is denied. For the reasons set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief."

So.. will this stand up in court? can I still claim that the charges made against my account (total charges) are injust?.
Will the judge laugh at their defence or will he/she laugh at me? .

Also I'm not sure if I'm actually supposed to publish particulars of their defence, but I could use some advice about how to proceed.

Twinkly

Sykskar wrote: »

Heya,

I've followed all the steps and I've been given a copy of their defence which reads...

"The claimants account is governed by the defendants personald and/or business banking terms and conditions.

Pursuant to the defendants terms and conditions the defendant is entitled to make a charge for its services as set out in the defendants price list, including an overdraft review fee for considering whether to provide and providing and overdraft.

The defendant denies that the charges applied to theclaimants account amount to penalties at common law and/or unfair contract terms for the purposes of the unfair terms in consumer contracts regulations 1999 (UTCCRs)

The charges applied to the claimants account are reasonable and are properly and fully disclosed in the defendants terms and conditions and published price list.
The charges represent the contractually agreed price for the services provided and the UTCCRs are not applicable to them; alternatively, they are not unfair contrary to the UTCCRs. Further, the charges are not default charges and accordingly cannot amount to a penalty.

Save as set out above, each and every allegation made by the claimant is denied. For the reasons set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief."

So.. will this stand up in court? can I still claim that the charges made against my account (total charges) are injust?.
Will the judge laugh at their defence or will he/she laugh at me? .

Also I'm not sure if I'm actually supposed to publish particulars of their defence, but I could use some advice about how to proceed.

They basically deny the charges are unfair under consumer law, they just use a lot of words to say so. They are unfair under consumer law, there is no doubt about that and thousands of claims have been settled before the banks will appear in court. Dont worry your claim is valid and no, the judge wont laugh at you