Thread: RBS Defence Recieved

part 18 does not apply to the small claims track. Therefore there is no need to respond to any inquiries made under part 18

I see no point in responding to a part 18 inquiry other than to point out that you consider that the inquiry is intimidatory as part 18 is excluded and that you intend to bring the intimidation to the notice of the court.

Hopefully this would deliver a little shock to the solicitors

I am responding with the following letter. Is it ok?

Dear Sir or Madam

I am writing regarding correspondence received from you today consisting of your defence and request for further information in accordance with CPR part 18.

As you are probably aware CPR part 18 is not applicable to claims under the small claims track, and only the court can request this information. I find your reference to this and your deadline of 5th July a deliberate attempt to intimidate and mislead me as you are aware I am self representing.

I am enclosing information from the DCA website in relation to the Civil Procedure Rules and Small Claims Track for your information.

However, as a matter of good faith, I have attached a breakdown of the charges that I am reclaiming. To avoid any further confusion on your part I have included the account name, number and sort code. However, I would have thought that, as your client is the provider of this account, that they would have access to this information.

The particulars of claim on my claim form clearly lists the relevant laws and regulations, But I am also enclosing these again for your further reference

I am more than willing to provide further information if the court deems it necessary.

also enclosing the following after reading another thread by pac1208. Hopefully it will quicken up the process!!!

The claimant holds bank account number####### with the defendant that is conductedon their standard terms and conditions. Theclaimant is seeking the return of money taken by the defendant during the past 6 years in
relation to Unauthorised overdraft,Referral,Chq/DD/SO Unpaid and Default Notice Charges. These charges are a disproportionate penaltyand therefore unenforceable as they arecontrary to common law. Further, as a
disproportionate penalty they are invalidunder the Unfair (Contracts) Terms Act 1977 s.4 and under the Unfair Terms in Consumer
Contracts Regulations 1999. Para.8 and sch.2(1)(e). In the event that the charges are not a penalty then they are unreasonable within the meaning of the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 s.15. The claimant has
repeatedly asked the defendant to return the money but they have not done so or attempted to justify their charges.

Sounds good, I'd like to think that the intimidation bit really annoys them!

Good luck.

maybe give cobbetts a ring verity? they settled with me the day after I gou court date for November.

Keep us informed hunxx

maybe give Cobbetts a ring Verity, I received full payment the day after getting my court date, or if you don't want to ring perhaps an email.

Keep us informed hun xx