tobciocc vs slc (the defence)

[tobciocc]

Well I put my claim in about 3 weeks ago, notified that SLC where putting in a defence. Recieved the defence today and basicaly it suggests that the charges on my loan (and interest) are in line with the terms of my loans. Also that they are not disproportionate. should I do anything? the case is been refered to a district judge, is that normal.

 

Any advice or reassurance is most welcome.

[hedgey06]

Hi tobciocc,

 

In order for others to advise further, can you post up some further details please? E.g., if you could scan in your PoC/the defence somebody should be able to comment on them and advise you whether everything is fine or if you need to make any amendments.

[noomill060]

I got the same load of twaddle.

 

Dont worry, it will never get in front of a judge.

 

They will soon contact you offering you all the money you claim (without admission of liability of course!)

[noomill060]

"the charges on my loan (and interest) are in line with the terms of my loans"

 

Doesnt make them lawful, though does it?

 

" Also that they are not disproportionate."

 

In their opinion only. Who cares what they think- we know better, dont we?

[tobciocc]

Yes thats the sum of it, they say the charges are fair and etc etc. Also says see attached sheet and there isn't one. Basically they don't highlight anything in the agreement I signed that proves what they say.

 

I guess they hope the claimant will get cold feet and stop the claim, not me.

 

BTW thanks for the responses.

[noomill060]

The case has been refered for full trial before the District Judge as they dispute your claim, this is quite normal.

 

has a date for trial been set yet?

 

As you see from my SLC **won** thread, they will leave it until closer to the hearing date before waving the white flag.

[noomill060]

If you could scan the defence and post it up we could help better, just in case, eh?

 

Remove your own details first, of course.

[tobciocc]

HI again ... sorry for the delay, this is the defence.

 

1. It is admitted that the Claimant has an outstanding loan ££P$$$$$$$

 

2.Interest and charges have been applied, it is denied that these have been applied other than in accordance with the terms of the loan.

 

3. No admissions are made as to the allegations of how the claimant came to make the allegations now made in the particulars of claim.

 

4.The Particulars of Claim do not particularise the grounds on which, and the extent to which, the charges applied are alleged to be disproportionate or unjustifiable. Each allegation to that or similar effect is denied. The Defendant reserves the right to respond further to the particulars of Claim when they have been further particularised.

 

6. (?) Without prejudice to the above, and, for the avoidance of doubt, and so far as it is neccessary to allege this, the charges satisfy any requirements of reasonableness where (which is not admitted) such a requirement applies by reason of the regulations referred to in the particulars of Claim.

 

7. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the remedies claimed or

any remedy.

 

Thats the defence, sorry its long winded but thats the SLC for you. Is this the normal defence strategy?

[noomill060]

Did you use the CAG bank charges Particulars of Claim?

[tobciocc]

No not as such, I outlined what I was claiming and why. I also attached a list of all the charges added to my loan, when they were added and the total. Also the same sort of list for monies I have already paid to SLC.

[tobciocc]

I remember now, I got it from the moneysavingexpert website.

[noomill060]

Could you put it up here?

[tobciocc]

Do you mean the template I used?

[noomill060]

What ever it was that you used as particulars of claim.

[tobciocc]

Sorry still trying to find the original template, its similar to other I've checked.

 

However today I received a letter from Capquest demanding the disputed charges from me within 7 days. Surely this is really dodgy as its gone to court, is there anybody I need to tell about this.

 

I also received a letter from the court giving me a date of 27th March for a preliminary hearing.

[noomill060]

Ignore the Capquest letter. The amount is legally in dispute, they cant touch you. Tell them to f*** off.

 

Make a photocopy of it and send it to the court, asking them to add it to your file and ensure that it is brought to the attention of the judge.

[noomill060]

Contact the court and tell them that you wish to modify your particulars.

 

There will be a fee for this.

 

You are welcome to use my PoC and refer to my legal action against SLC.

 

Im going to give one of the moderators a shout as to how you can do this.

 

Dont worry.

[pt2537]

Hi there,

 

you would need to file an amended particulars of claim using a N244 from memory. there is a fee which i believe is in the region of £40 i will have to check to make sure

 

if Noomill has a set of particulars of claim that they would be happy for you to use then all you need is a N244 which is fairly easy to fill in, it wouldnt need a hearing to do either and i do believe in the bank templates section it sets out how to fill in the N244 etc

 

i hope this helps

 

regards

 

paul

[pt2537]

http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/courtfinder/forms/n244_0400.pdf

 

theres a link to the N244

[noomill060]

My PoCs are pretty much thsame as tob's. Looks like SLC have grown themselves a set of (tiny) b@lls if they want to mix it with us

 

PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

 

 

1. The Applicant has an account xxxxxxx ("the Account") with the Respondent which was opened on or around January 1995

 

2. During the period in which the Account has been operating, the Respondent debited numerous charges to the Account in respect of purported breaches of contract on the part of the Applicant and also charged interest on the charges once applied. The Applicant understands that the Respondent contends that the charges were debited in accordance with the terms of the contract between itself and the Applicant.

 

3. A list of the charges applied is attached to these particulars of claim.

 

4. The Applicant contends that:

 

a) The charges debited to the Account are punitive in nature and are intended to hold the Applicant in terroreum; are not a genuine pre-estimate of cost incurred by the Respondent ; exceed any alleged actual loss to the Respondent in respect of any breaches of contract on the part of the Applicant; and are not intended to represent or be related to any alleged actual loss, but instead unduly enrich the Respondent which exercises the contractual term in respect of such charges with a view to profit.

 

b) The contractual provision that permits the Respondent to levy such charges is unenforceable by virtue of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations (1999), the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and the Common Law.

5) Accordingly the Applicant claims:

 

a) the removal of the amounts debited to the Account in respect of unlawful charges in the sum of £xxx.

 

 

b) Court costs;

 

c) Interest pursuant to section 69 County Courts Act 1984 as set out on the attached list of charges, or at such rate and for such periods as the court deems just.

6). The Applicant asks the Court to order that the Chief Executive Officer of the Respondent, Student Loans Company Limited, do write to the Applicant within 14 days, concurring that in levying these disproportionate charges, the Student Loans Company Limited erred in law and confirm that future arrears letters to all customers of the Student Loans Company Limited will be charged at no more than the actual cost to the Student Loans Company Limited, as required by Statute, Case law and consumer directives. (continued)

 

 

 

7). Alternatively, if the charges are a fee for a service, then they must be reasonable under S.15 of the Supply of Goods and Services Act (1982).

 

I believe that the contents of these particulars of claim are true

 

 

Signed:

 

 

Date:

[tobciocc]

So i guess I should just go with it as it is and see what happens, what do you think?

[noomill060]

I think thats your best bet. Their defence seems to be twaddle.

 

If it ever comes before a judge, I'll give you the details of my case which SLC just paid up on.

[tobciocc]

Yes I fail to see how they will be able to justify those charges, I've even been charged 2 lots of £20.00 on the same date.

 

I'll keep you posted

[tobciocc]

Well I recieved a letter today from Harper Macleod offering to settle, however not in full. Basically I paid them about £100 of payments over the course of 18 months, this was (in their words) to 'keep them off my back'. Obviously I claimed this back, Harper Macleod claim I can't as it wasn't clear what this payment was for (???). They also say I can't claim interest as the SLC hasn't added any. So, do I settle for removal of just the charges or do I stick with the full claim. The difference between settling and not is about £200.

 

I'm inclined to hold out for the full payment, what do you think.

[noomill060]

SLC charges interest on the entire debt at a % rate derived from the rate of inflation, so of course they have charged interest! they know this you know this, they are just trying to muddy the waters with BS.

 

Anyway, I presume that your claim is for the following:

 

1) Total amount of £20 penalties unlawfully added to your debt

 

2) Court costs

 

3) County Court interest @ 8% per annum on each charge from the date each charge was added.

 

Is this correct? If not, how did you calculate the interest?

 

They have made you an offer hoping you will take it and go away quietly.

 

You should email the solicitor at Harper Macleod accepting their offer as PART PAYMENT only, telling them you intend to continue to pursue SLC for the balance of the amount claimed.