Please Advise Cobbetts defence (I've been blinded by science).

[red1]

Received today from Cobbets, could someone please advise.

 

DEFENCE

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

 

2. On allocation the Defendant invites the court to direct that there be a case management conference in order for the Court to consider the making of of appropriate orders to give the claimant the opportunity to properly particularise the claim.

 

3. No admissions are made as to what charges have been debited to the Claimants bank account.

 

4. In relation to the allegation that the contractual provisions pursuant to which the charges have been applied are unenforceable by virtue of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 (UCTA 1977) and/or the Unfair Contract Terms in ConsumerRegulations 1999 (the Regulations) and/or the common law, the Claimant is required to identify:

 

4.1 (a) the section(s) of the Unfair Contract 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) referred to are unenforceable; and

 

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

 

Until such time as these sections/regulation?provisions are identified the Defendant cannot (save as appears below) plead to the allegation referred to in pragraph 4 above. The Defendant therefore reserves its right to plead further to the allegation once (and if) the Claimant identifies the relevant contractual information.

 

5 In relation to the case of the Claimant that the charges are unreasonable within the meaning of section 15 of the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 (SGSA0 the defendant pleads as follows:

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

5.4 In the circumstances (save as appears below) the Defendant is unable to plead to this allegation beyond denying that it has acted in breach of SGSA section 15 as alleged or at all. The Defendant reserves its right to plead further to this allegation once (and if) the defects in the pleaded case referred to in paragraphs 5.1-5.3 above are addressed.

 

5.5 It is the case of the Defendant that the contract between the claimant and 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.

 

^. If, which is denied, the Claimant is entitled to the return of the amounts debited in respect of charges, the Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to claim interest at a rate of 29.80 %.

 

This letter frightens the life out of me. What should I do now???

Thanks inadvance.

[gemspan]

Hi there

 

I am sure somebody with more information will be along soon but my understanding of this is that they want you to identify why you believe the charges are unreasonable and state why you are charging them compound interest.

 

Somebody wll be able to advise you better but it might be worthwhile if you post a copy of your actual claim text.

 

Kind regards

Gemspan

[HydraUK]

Hi, Red.

 

DON'T PANIC

 

Read this thread http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/royal-bank-scotland-bank/10582-mcuth-rbos.html because it has all the elements you need to respond to that defence, which seems to be fairly normal.

 

Have a look at the defence I received also http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/royal-bank-scotland-bank/28596-hydra-rbs.html. I haven't responded yet but will be using some of MCuth's work (after he grants his permission, naturally) to add to excellent work done by GlennUK and some of my own....