Hello there, I am hoping for a bit of advise if possible..

I started the wifes claim a couple of months ago, and have progressed to the MCO stage.

I have recently recieved a letter from the Infamous "Cobbetts"

This is what Cobbetts have said... (Sorry it's so long winded)

REQUEST FOR FURTHER INFORMATION AND CLARIFICATION

1 - This request is served pursuant to CPR Part 18 alternatively with regard to CPR Rule 27.2

2 - The reason(s) why this request has been served are set out in the defence which has been served by the defendant

3 - You are asked to provide a response to this request in accordance with CPR Part 18 by 7th August 2007

Etc etc

The Request

1 - In your claim you state: "the defendant debited charges and interest in respect of purported breaches of contract"

2 - Please provide the following particulars in support of your claim:

2.1- 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.

2.2- 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 not have been charged 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: "unenforcable under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999, the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and the common law" and "they must be reasonable under s15 of the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982".

4- Please specify all of 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 Contractual Terms 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) reffered to are unenforceable.

I have searched the "Cobbett" keyword, and have read on here that I shouldn't have to answer a CPR 18.

I just need to clarify that what they are asking me above is just to scare me, and basically what the best course of action is for me now? (Ie Answer it in some way, ignore it, or crumple under the weight of the arguments above )

Thanks

Ah sorry a bit more reading for you people in the know.

This is the Defence - (sorry even more longwinded)

1- This defence is filed and served without prejudice to the defendant's case that the Particulars of Claim do not disclose reasonable grounds for brining a claim against the Defendant to recover the bank charges (and interest thereon) reffered to in the Particulars of Claim or any other sum(s). In the event that the claim is not properly paticularised then the Defendant will apply to strike out the claim and/or for summary judgement in respect of the same.

2- Without prejudice to the foregoing paragraph, if and to the extent that the Claimant proves the allegation that the defendant debited charges to the claimants bank account, insofar as such charges were debited on a date or dates more than six years prior to the issues of this claim, any remedy in respect of the same. whether damages, restitution or otherwise, is barred by the operation of the Limitation Act 1980 and/or the doctrine of laches and the defendant will apply to strike out this aspect of the claim and/or for summary judgement.

3- No admissions are made as to what charges have been debited to the Claimant's bank account.

4- The Claimant refers under paragraph 3 of the Particulars of Claim to having provided the Defendant with a copy of the list of charges. The Defendant has not yet recieved a copy of this list. The Claimant is therefore put to strict proof of each and every charge the subject of the claim and must identify in respect of each charge (a) the date and same was debited, (b) the amount of the same and © the description applied to the charge.

5- In relation to the allegation that the contracual provisions pursuant to which the charges have been applied are unenforcable by virtue of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 ("UCTA 1977") and/or the common law, the claimant is required to identify:

5.1 (a) the section(s) of The Unfair Contract Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 ("the Regulations"); and © the principles of common law relied upon by the Claimant in alleging that the contractual provision(s) reffered to are unenforceable; and

5.2 the contractual provision(s) that the claimant allege are invalid by reference to UCTA 1977 and/or the Regulations.

Until such time as these sectiosn/regulations/provisions are identified the Defendant cannot (save as appears below) plead to the allegation reffered to in paragraph 5 above. The Defendant therefore reserves its right to plead further to the allegation once (and if) the Claimant identifies the relevant contractual information.

6- In relation to the case of the Claimant that the charges must be reasonable within the meaning of section 15 if the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 ("SGSA") the defendant pleads as follows:

6.1 The Claimant is required to plead and prove the necessary factors (referred to in section 15 SGSA) concerning the contract between the Claimanr and the Defendant which mean that pursuanrt to SGSA section 15 there is an implied term that the Claimant pay a reasonable charge for the service under the contract.

6.2 Further, the Claimant is required to pleade and prove (a) that the bank charges which have been debited are unreasonable; (b) all facts and matters relied upon by the Claimant in support of this case and © what charges would have been reasonable.

6.3 In the circumstances no grounds are disclosed for a claim that the Defendant has acted in breach of SGSA section 15

6.4 In the circumstances (save as appears below) the Defendant is unable to plead to this allegation beyond denying it has acted in breach of SGSA section 15 as alleged or at all. The defendant reserves it's right to plead further to this allegation once (and if) the defects in the pleaded case referred to in paragraphs 6.1-6.3 above are addressed

6.5 It is the case of the Defendant that the contract between the Claimant abd the Defendant does not fall within SGSA section 15 because (a) the consideration for the service would be determined by the contract between the Claimant and the Defendant and (b) was not left to be determined in a manner agreed by the contract or determined by the course of dealings between the Claimant and the Defendant.

7 The Claimants claim for costs not being sufficiently particularised, the Defendant is unable to plead reserves the right to plead upon further particulars.

8 To assist the Claimant with the proper particularisation of the claim(s), the defendant serves with this defence a request made pursuant to CPR Part 18. If the claimant fails to provide the particulars requested in the time stipulated and/or the defects with the claim(s) (referred to in paragraph 1 above) remain then the defendant will apply to the Court for (amongst other things) an order striking out the claim.

9 Pending the proper particularisation of the claim(s) the Defendant is unable to plead to the Claimant's claim(s) beyond at this stage denying that the Defendant is liable to the Claimant as alleged in the claim or at all. The Defendant reserves it's right to amend this Defence to plead further to the Claimant's claim(s) once or if the claimant properly particularises the same.

10 Save as hereinbefore appears the Defendant joins issue with the Claimant on the Claim(s) and denies that it is liable to the Claimant as alleged or at all.

Basically I take it this is roughly a standard defense from Cobbetts, or is there anything I should be wary of?

The defencr you've received is one of cobbetts' standard 'template' defences. Also, their CPR Part 18 request is also a standard intimidatory tactic that they tend to use with claimants who've filed via MCOL (basically as there isn't enough space to adequately particularise the claim).

You only respond in full to the CPR 18 if the court orders you to do so. For the moment, send them the letter that's linked to my signature and attach a copy of your schedule of charges (copy to your local court for information with your claim number once your claim is transferred to them).

Best of luck