Not at all, it just says that for the avoidance of doubt so you know that the figure stated really is everything and there are no extra sums to pay. If anything its a helpful provision.

I would suggest you read Parts 6 and 13 of the CPR.

You would have a very good chance if you issue a claim based on the bounced cheque. For commercial reasons a cheque is treated by the law as the equivalent of cash sonly if there has been a fraud or a 'total failure of consideration' i.e. No contract, can the person paying by cheque usually defend a claim based on a bounced cheque. Check out the case of Lamont v Hylands which deals with this issue.

Gezwee, will you please calm down? I am getting rather tired of going from thread to thread having to react to your nonsense. How on Earth have I 'withdrawn' from the thread? I posted yesterday evening! I do however have a life which involves more than this forum so, occasionally, one or two posts might be made before I have the time to respond. Now then, the OP said this "Could i defend purely on the basis of the numerous £12 late and overlimit fees been unfair." To which I replied: "You wouldn't be able to defend the whole claim on [that] basis, just the amount which is comprised of charges." Are you suggesting that the OP *could* defend the entire claim on that basis? If so you should be ashamed of your lack of understanding coupled with your obvious desire to take control of every thread and drag the OP along. If however you accept that what I said was correct then why are you attacking me for saying it? By the way, it made me laugh that you said this: "Have you sighted the agreement, the terms, the statements of account, the default notice, the termination, the assignment/s, the value of PPI [if any]" And then attacked me by saying this: "if you want to speculate on unknowns why bother posting?" Physician, heal thyself!

But none of those points are relevant to a change of name. If the OP is trying to just buy time though then I suppose kicking up a fuss is the best way to do it!

You wouldn't be able to defend the whole claim on the basis, just the amount which is comprised of charges. If it's about £600 as you say then you can file a part admission and defend the remainder. Defending on the basis of £12 charges being unfair is not the strongest basis though.

But what difference does it make to the debtor if it's simply a case of correcting the name? He can either erroneously pay RBS or correctly pay Natwest. As Ganymede says, what is the prejudice?

Sorry, you did indeed say 'forwarded'.

But what would be His address for service?

No, that's why it says 'Claimant'! I would suggest you seriously consider agreeing to mediation as it can actually work and, in any case, shows you are being reasonable.

What were the other reasons? The fact a CCJ will interfere with your employment prospects is not a reason for it to be set aside.

Legal costs and interest possibly?

Absolutely, there's no harm in doing more than required.

Unless the order says otherwise there's no need for a skeleton, there's no general rule to that effect. You do indeed need to file and serve your response not less than 7 days before the hearing, a witness statement is the usual format.

I wouldn't like to give advice on the merits of a claim without seeing evidence but on the assumption that everything you've said is correct and can be proved then you have at least the basis of a claim for negligence/breach of contract.

I'll suggest again that you have a look at Parts 6 and 13 of the CPR.

I'm not sure how much clearer that could have been really.

Just to clarify the above, if the court was to find that the pleadings weren't served then you would be entitled to have the judgment set aside on that basis alone; you wouldn't also need to show any prospect of successfully defending the claim.

You may well be expected to justify *why* the charges are unfair and should be refunded. You should also provide a breakdown of the charges to show how your claim is quantified.

If you do say so yourself

There's no harm in being lengthy if needed and without seeing the content of that letter I don't know if it's suitable but, in general terms, that seems like a long Particulars of Claim. What is the claim actualy for?

You will ultimately have to prove your case that the Defendant is responsible but you only have to prove it on the balance of probabilities. Therefore the court will ask itself whether it is more likely than not that the builder is responsible and this will depend on the evidence you both present. If, for example, the builder claimed that aliens were responsible for the damage you would not have to directly disprove that but simply convince a judge that is a less likely explanation than what you are saying happened. In short, the builder will have a tactical rather than legal burden to prove his case and if you have lots of evidence compared to none from him then it's more likely the judge will agree with your version of events.

Yep, you'll need to show why they are penalty charges as opposed to just charges for administration on the account. As Galactica says the PofC would greatly assist.

I see, thanks for the clarification. It is still a contract though even if not a deed. It is therefore enforceable.

I would suggest you read Part 6 of the CPR which deals with service and then read Part 13 which deals with setting aside a default judgment. Don't ignore this and hope it will go away because it won't.