They are defending my claim

GarethR

tillycat wrote: »

I am helping my daughter, my daughter's boyfriend and my son's girlfriend to reclaim their bank charge. We have been through the preliminary stages and are now into court proceedings. We have just been informed by the banks solicitors that in the first of these cases the bank (Lloyds TSB) intends entering a defence as follows.
The bank will be defending these proceedings on the following grounds.
1.The fees that you seek are properly incorporated into your contract with the bank; and
2. By making payments (whether by cheque, debit card or any other means) from your account where you have insufficient funds to cover them, you are making a request to the bank for an increased overdraft which the bank may meet or decline. If it meets your request, you must pay the necessary charges. The issue of penalties only arises as a matter of law, where there has been a breach of contract, and there has been no breach of contract here.

Has anyone received a similar letter and have reached the 28 day deadline, if so what was the outcome?
In their letter the bank's solicitor also added the following.

Looking ahead,a situation which gives rise to a dispute is not one the bank wishes to continue. In view of this, you are requsted, please, to make contact within the next 14 days with your local Lloyds TSB Branch Manager, to review your account. A review may be useful to consider whether your current banking arrangements are the most appropriate for your needs.

What are the trying to say here? are they offering to negotiate or are they telling us to sod off and take our business elsewhere or is there something alltogether more sinister.

Thanks
Tillycat

Basically the first bit is stalling tactics wait & see what the courts say, no doubt you will get the standard letter from the banks solicitors requesting info to do with CPR18, I have a standard response to that based on what Martin & Co suggest so PM me for that when required. If they havent actually issued you or the courts with the defence then I wouldnt be too concerned at the minute.

The second bit if you ask me is a back handed dig at the persons finances, I wouldnt even entertain that bit & Im sure the judge wouldnt be impressed with that remark if seen the way I see it.

Take em to the cleaners, my money is on you winning

jvvital

My partner and I have submitted court proceedings for reclaiming our bank charges and have just received counter claims from the bank:

Defence:<O:p></O:p>
1. The Particulars of Claim do not provide details or particulars of the account in question and / or the precise charges alleged to have been unlawful, or the date there of. To the extent it is alleged that the Claimant incurred bank charges on the claimant's account for unauthorised borrowings (whether unpaid fees for retuned cheques, 'Paid Referral fees' or any other such fees), the Defendant puts the Claimant to strict proof of each charge and the date thereof.<O:p></O:p>
<O:p></O:p>
2. The Particulars of Claims are summary in nature. Accordingly, this defence is summery in nature and the Defendant reserves the right to amend this Statement of Case in due course.<O:p></O:p>
<O:p></O:p>
3. the Defendant is entitled to charge the Claimant for unauthorised borrowings by reason of its standard terms and conditions. The Claimant accepted the same when the account was opened, including (in particular but without limitation) the following terms and conditions (which are summarised): <O:p></O:p>
a) The Defendant's right to charge a 'Paid Referral Fee' where the Defendant pays an amount (either by compulsion or election) which causes the account to become overdrawn - £30 per item (previously £25)<O:p></O:p>
b) The Defendant's right to charge an administrative fee if any cheque, standing order or direct debit cannot be paid because of insufficient cleared funds in the account - £35 per item (previously £30).<O:p></O:p>
the Defendant's entitlement, if the Claimant becomes overdrawn without an overdraft limit, to charge interest at the unauthorised borrowing rate on the excess balance.<O:p></O:p>
4. The Defendant's standard terms and conditions give the Claimant a fair and transparent view of those terms and the charges applicable for unauthorised borrowings (including where the account is overdrawn without an overdraft limit or where the Claimant exceeds the authorised overdraft limit).<O:p></O:p>
5. If and to the extent it is the Claimant's case that the failure to make necessary payments and / or failure to remain within authorised overdraft limits and / or failure to arrange an authorised overdraft constituted a breach of the terms applying to the account and that the contractual entitlement to debit charges from the Claimant's account constitutes a liquidated damages clause, the same is denied. The charges constitute payments the Claimant agreed to make by reason of the terms and conditions of the account and were consideration for the Defendant advancing credit of the Claimant, which the Defendant was under no obligation to advance. The Defendant was entitled to impose such charges and interest when the Claimant incurred the overdraft.<O:p></O:p>
6. Accordingly, it is denied that the legal principles relating to liquidated damages clauses and penalty charges are relevant or applicable to the facts set out above. Further or alternatively it is denied that any such charges constitute unlawful penalty charges or are in breach of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999.<O:p></O:p>
7. Therefore, it is denied that the charges were unlawfully debited from the account.<O:p></O:p>
8. If and to the extent the Claimant incurred charges on the account, this was caused by the Claimant having gone into overdraft without having agreed with the Defendant an authorised overdraft facility or to increase the overdraft facility and / or the failure to make payments to bring the balance of the account back into credit.<O:p></O:p>
9. it is averred that the said charges and interest are and remain lawful and enforceable and that the Defendant was entitled to debit the same.<O:p></O:p>
10. The Defendant denies that it is liable to the Claimant for the sums claimed and interest as pleaded or at all.<O:p></O:p>
11. In the alternative, and without prejudice to matters stated above, if (which is denied) the said charges and interest or any part thereof are unlawful or unenforceable as alleged by the Claimant or at all, and the charges were a consequence of the breach of contract by the Claimant, the Defendant has nonetheless suffered loss and damage as a consequence of such breach of contract in allowing the account to go into unauthorised overdraft. Accordingly, in the event that the Defendant is unable to rely on its express entitlement to enforce the charges as set out above, it will seek to recover to the extent necessary such loss and damage as it actually suffered, which will not necessarily be limited to the value of the said charges and the Defendant seeks to set off such sums against any liability owed hereunder to the Claimant. <O:p></O:p>
Barclays Bank PLC.<O:p></O:p>
<O:p></O:p>
Sorry for the long-winded statements. This is Barclay's defence. I believe that we do not need to respond to this, but is this a customary defence? Should we be worried? Or is this just a smoke screen? Please advise us!!<O:p></O:p>
<O:p></O:p>
Thanks for your help.<O:p></O:p>

Edinburghlass_2

Standard defence!

Edinburghlass_2

beatthebank wrote: »

the reply was a copy of the banks defence from there solicitor,attactched to a transfer of preceedings.

You don't need to respond to the defence but if the court sends a letter you need to respond to that.

sunshine445

paul_d wrote: »

You should do. Its called 'particularising' your claim. Because you filed online there is limited space to itemise your claim, and as such the defendant can ask the judge to strike out the claim. Re-send your spreadsheet to bank/solicitor and Northampton.

Good luck. Us claiming against A&L are at court date time!!

Its kind of exciting!!

New to forum not sure if this is how I get help but just read your thread and hoping you can help. I just filed on online and never sent any further papers to Northampton is that why they have asked for further information request. what should I do now, please help!

Edinburghlass_2

Can you read this thread please as it saves me linking to threads again and the answers you need should be in this thread...

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=495213

sunshine445

Sorry link is not working unable to open

Just want to know request for further information is it just a case of sending them the schedule to Northampton and Cobbetts (natwest solicitors). Seems this is common problem needs to be made clear by MCOL site!

sunshine445

sorry link is not connecting.

when you receive request for further information (standard blurb) is it just a case of sending schedule to Court and solicitors. Do I need to do anything else? Thanks

beamo1

HI All

I have recieved the defence from HSBC today (nothing special just a bog standard defence).
I then spoke to the court and was informed that my case had gone in front of the judge to dispense of the A+Q form .
Good news in my eyes coz aint gotta fork out another £100 and should get a date sooner
good luck to everyone who is claiming
LETS NOT LET THE BANKS WIN
steve

archer5

Hi Everyone,

I've received from my local court a 'Notice that Acknowledgement of Service Has ben filed'. I s this the defence part where I wait 28 days and then continue to judgement?