Bleackley Vs Abbey

[angeraboutabbey]

Abbey have now entered their defence - I have until 19th Match to file Allocation Questionnaire. Defence is quoted below - does it look like the usual format? Anything I should worry about?

 

 

1) Save as is specifically admitted in this defence, the defendant denies each and every allegation set out i the particulars of claim.

2) It is admitted that the claimant has a bank account with the defendant, account number to be particularised ("account")

3) At all times the Account has been subject to the applicable terms and conditions ("conditions"), which for part of the contract between the claimant and the defendant and to which the claimant agreed when he opened the account. The defendant will refer at trial to the full conditions, but for the purposes of this defence will refer to the following extracts:

1) You can apply for an overdraft on your account. If we give you an overdraft we will tell you your limit and the interest rate applicable.

2) An unauthorised overdraft occurs if without our agreement you overdraw your account or exceed the limit of an overdraft which we have agreed.

3) If you have an unauthorised overdraft, you will be charged fees as set out in our tariff of charges or specified to you and these may include fees for transactions we are unable to process due to lack of available funds in your account.

4) Throughout the period that he has had the account, the claimant recieved a number of copies of the conditions and of the said tariff of charges as they were ammended and updated (though there has been no material amendment to the conditions extracted in paragraphs 3(1), 3(2) and 3(3) above).

5) Any overdraft facility ob the account was (and is) subject to the conditions.

6) The claimant has overdrawn or exceeded authorised overdraft limits on the account on a number of separate occassions, full details of which will be provided on disclosure. Therefore by virtue of the conditions referred to in paragraph 3 above such overdrawing was unauthorised and in breach of contract and the claimant bacame liable to pay fees to the defendant in accordance with its tariff of charges applicable at the time of review. In accordance with the conditins, such fees were debited to the account.

7) In view of the facts and matters referred to in paragraphs 3,4 and 5 above, the defendant denies that the amount of £1938.50 or any other amount was unlawfully debited to the account and the claimants claim for the repayment of that amount is therefore denied.

8) The claimants contention that the said fees are unenforceable and/or are "penalty charges" is denied. The fees reflect and are proportionate to the defendants administration expenses incurred due to the claimant's breach of contract and are a genuine pre-estimate of the damage suffered by the defendant.

9) Further or in the alternative, even if said fees are not proportionate to the defendants administration expenses incurred (which is denied), the claimant remains liable to pay such fees as may be found to be proportionate and the claimaint is not entitled to claim the repayment of the full amount of each charge made to the account.

10) the defenant denies that the claimant is entitled to claim interest in the sum of £316.96, or any other amount.

11) No admissions are made as to the amounts claimed by the claimant and the claimant is put to strict proof of the same.

I think it all looks like standard stuff but am a little concerned about statements 8 and 9 as being ways to ensure that I either will have my claim thrown out or still have to make some payments...any thoughts?

 

 

Thanks

[121o121]

Heres the Defence I recieved last week.

 

1. Save as is specifically admitted in this Defence, the Defendant denies each and every allegation set out in the Particulars of Claim.

 

2. It is admitted that the Claimant has a current bank account with the Defendant, account number to be particularised (the "Account").

 

3. At all times the Account has been subject to the applicable terms and conditions ("Conditions"). which form part of the contract between the Claimant and the Defendant and to which the Claimant agreed when the Claimant opened the Account. The defendant will refer at trial to the full Conditions but for the purposes of this Defence will refer to the following extracts:

 

(1) "You can apply for an overdraft on your Account. If we give you an overdraft we will tell you your limit and the interest rate applicable."

 

(2) "An unauthorised overdraft occurs if without our agreement you overdraw your Account or exceed the limit of an overdraft which we have agreed."

 

(3) "If you have an unauthorised overdraft, you will be charged fees as set out in our Tariff of Charges or specified to you and these may include fees for transactions we are unable to process due to lack of available funds in your Account."

 

4. Throughout the period that he has had the Account, the Claimant received a number of copes of the Conditions and of the said Tariff of Charges as they were amended and updated (though there has been no material amendment to the Conditions extracted in paragraphs 3(1), (2) and (3) above).

 

5. Any overdraft facility on the Account was (and is) subject to the Conditions.

 

6. The claimant has overdrawn or exceeded authorised overdraft limits on the Account on a number of seperate occasions, full details of which will be provided on disclosure. Therefore by virtue of the Conditions referred to in paragraph 3 above such overdrawing was unauthorised and in breach of contract and the Claimant became liable to pay fees to the Defendant in accordance with its Tariff of Charges applicable at the relevant time. In accordnace with the Conditions, such fees were debited to the Account.

 

7. In view of the facts and matters referred to in paragraphs 3, 4, 5 and 6 above, the Defendant denies that the amount of £551.00 or any other amount was unlawfully debited to the Account and the Claimants claim for the repayment of that amount is therefore denied. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to claim interest in the amount claimed of £105.46 or at all.

 

8. The Claimants contention that the said fees are unenforceable and/or are "penalty charges" is denied. The fees reflect and are proportionate to the Defendant's administrative expenses incurred due to the Claimant's breach of contract and are a genuine pre-estimate of the damage suffered by the Defendant.

 

9. Further or in the alternative, even if the said fees are not proportionate to the Defendant's administrative expenses incurred (which is denied), the Claimant remains liable to pay such fees as may be found to be proportionate and the Claimant is not entitled to claim repayment of the full amount of each charge made to the account.

 

10. No admissions are made as to the amounts claimed by the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof of the same.

 

Exactly the same as mine (apart from a few personal details). Nothing to worry about.

 

Did you get an offer?

[angeraboutabbey]

Thanks 121, No offer as yet unfortunately - had thought of writing to the bank in light of recent publicity and offer the chance for them to settle one last time, including a bit more detail about the support I have researched for my case and a little extra work I have done on the schedule of charges showing account balance and actual transaction details against each charge; this in itself makes quite interesting reading.

[Mad Nick]

Ang(etc),

I think it all looks like standard stuff but am a little concerned about statements 8 and 9 as being ways to ensure that I either will have my claim thrown out or still have to make some payments...any thoughts?

8 is a little corker - let's see them prove that one ! 9 is hogwash - in contract law the Liquidated Damages (default charges in this case) are either enforceable or they're not. There's no retrospective in between figure - unless you agree to one (which I'm assuming you won't, LOL). And even if there was (which there isn't), they would still have to disclose their costs (which they won't). Regards, Mad Nick

[angeraboutabbey]

Is this the answer I am looking for?

 

Filled out AQ as requested and have waited with baited breath for the last few weeks for Abbeys response. Recieved Notice of Hearing yesterday.

 

District Judge Rutherford has considered the statements of the case and allocation questionnaires filled and allocated the claim to the small claims track.

The hearing will take place at 14:00 on 2nd May at Trowbridge County Court and should take no longer than 15 minutes.

[WOW! IS THIS GOOD OR BAD???]

 

Each party shall deliver to every other party and to the court office copies of all documents (including any experts' report) on which he intends to rely at the hearing no later than 14days before the hearing.

The original documents shall be brought to the hearing.

The defendant do by 4pm on 2nd April 2007 file and serve:

1. An itemised statement showing how each and every item charged is calcul\ated.

2. A copy of the contract of the customer.

3. Skeleton legal arguements if points of law are to be argued relating to punitive damages and/or unfair contract terms.

Dated: 23rd March 2007.

 

 

Does this ask Abbey to show how they calculate my charges? Is this the end of my wait and if so why have Abbey still not made contact with me?

[angeraboutabbey]

Further to previosu quote...used the template AQ with draft orders! Looks like it may have worked a treat...well thats the way I read it anyway.

 

Cheers

[angeraboutabbey]

Is this the answer I am looking for?

 

Filled out AQ as requested and have waited with baited breath for the last few weeks for Abbeys response. Recieved Notice of Hearing yesterday.

 

District Judge Rutherford has considered the statements of the case and allocation questionnaires filled and allocated the claim to the small claims track.

 

The hearing will take place at 14:00 on 2nd May at Trowbridge County Court and should take no longer than 15 minutes.

[WOW! IS THIS GOOD OR BAD???]

 

Each party shall deliver to every other party and to the court office copies of all documents (including any experts' report) on which he intends to rely at the hearing no later than 14days before the hearing.

 

The original documents shall be brought to the hearing.

 

The defendant do by 4pm on 2nd April 2007 file and serve:

 

1. An itemised statement showing how each and every item charged is calcul\ated.

 

2. A copy of the contract of the customer.

 

3. Skeleton legal arguements if points of law are to be argued relating to punitive damages and/or unfair contract terms.

 

Dated: 23rd March 2007.

 

 

Does this ask Abbey to show how they calculate my charges? Is this the end of my wait and if so why have Abbey still not made contact with me?

 

 

Bump Bump!!

[Mad Nick]

Hi, Does this ask Abbey to show how they calculate my charges? No - it tells them to. Way to go.

Is this the end of my wait and if so why have Abbey still not made contact with me? It's the beginning of the end of your wait. Just sit tight. Let them come to you. Have all you figures ready - up-to-date interest and bundle prep costs.

Nice one. Regards, Mad Nick

[angeraboutabbey]

Hi, Does this ask Abbey to show how they calculate my charges? No - it tells them to. Way to go.

Is this the end of my wait and if so why have Abbey still not made contact with me? It's the beginning of the end of your wait. Just sit tight. Let them come to you. Have all you figures ready - up-to-date interest and bundle prep costs.

Nice one. Regards, Mad Nick

 

 

Oh the wait seems endless...Abbey did not return the requested documents to the court on time - now there is a surprise !

 

Should I ring them before I start to finalise my court bundle...or wait??? They have made no contact with me at all. I am really nervous now, can they possibly have something over me after all this?

 

Suggestions very, very welcome

 

with regards as usual.

[kia]

id be interested to know myself as im slightly behind you so we wait with baited breathxxkia

[Mad Nick]

Hi,

Should I ring them before I start to finalise my court bundle...or wait???

I wouldn't. I've never seen Abbey settle before seeing a Court bundle*, and ringing before might come across to them as a sign of weakness. Regards, Mad Nick

* correction : unless the Judge orders a stay for the parties to negotiate a settlement.