giles v natwest defense sublitted

[jbenmore]

Hi ,

 

just got home from work to find cobbetts defence in the post.

 

not sure where to go next..7 points to it, so input would be of great help!!

 

1)asking me to particularise my claim

 

2)on allocation th e defendant invites court to direct there be a management conference in order for the court to consider the making of appropraite orders to give claimant opportunity to properly particularise claim ( sounds patronising!)

 

3)no admissions made as to what charges have been debited

 

4)claimant required to identify;

 

4.1) sections of UCTA 1977 and regulations UCTR 1999 and principles of common law relied upon and

 

4.2)the contractual provisions that the claimant allege are invalid by ref to UCTA1977

 

5) ref. section 15 of supply of goods and services act 1982 SGSA that the charges are unreasonable the def pleads as follows:

 

5.1)claimant req to plead and prove the necessary factors (in sec 15) concerning contract between claimant and defendant which mean that purauant to SGSA section 15 there si an implied term that the claimant pay a reasonable charge for the service under the contract.

 

5.2) Further, claimant req to plead a nd prove a) the bank charges are unreasonable b) all facts and matters relied on by claimant and c) whgat charges would jhave been reasonable.

 

5.3)in the circumstances no grounds are disclosed for a claim that the defendant has acted in breach of SGSA 15

 

5.4)defendant is unable to plead to this allegation beyond denying it. defendant reserves the right to plead further to this. once claimnant has responded to above points.

 

5.5)its the case of the defendant that the contract beteween claimant and defendant does not fall within SGSA section 15 because a) the consideration for the service would be determined by the contract and b) was not left to be deteremined in a amanner agreed by the contract or dtermined by the course of dealings between claimant and defendant.

 

( i did not mention anything to do with SGSA in any correspondence by the way)

 

6. the claimant's claim for costs not being sufficiently particularised , the defendant is unable to plead and reserves the rifght to plead upon further particulars

 

7)save as hereinbefore apperas the defendant joins etc.

 

 

Please can someone advise as cobbetts want an acknowledgement and I feel a little bit worried , this looks different to other natwest defenses.

 

thanks all!

 

james

[muggins73]

Hi jbenmore,

 

Might be worth having a gander at my thread, as strike me down, the defence you've received is almost exactly the same (and that of nearly 500 others on this forum!!)

 

Don't worry, its their way of trying to scare you into submission.

 

Simply send Cobblers a brief letter acknowledging receipt of their client (Natwests') defence and nothing more. After all, it's only polite:D

 

Have you received notification from the court that Natwest has filed a defence? If not, it should be along soon enough. When you receive it, fill it in, forward the necessary payment and AQ to the court, keep one for yourself and send a copy to Cobblers along with a brief covering letter stating that you enclose a copy of the AQ and that you can confirm that you have filed a copy of the same with the court, and ask them to acknowledge!!!

I also added the following just to show them that their scare tactics hadn't rubbed off...'Kindly note that I am looking into your clients' Defence more thouroughly. If deemed necessary, I will contact you in due course with regards to its requests'.

 

Gain comfort at the thought that you are one step closer to getting your monies back.

 

Good luck.

[jbenmore]

thanks muggins!!

 

i will probably receive AQ etc very soon. so will get that done asap.

 

good luck with yours, I 'm not far behind!!

 

james