Jump to content
alfie77

Legal jargon

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 4801 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi everbody

 

I have joined this action group because I could do with some help and advice regarding claiming bank charges.

I went through the motions of writing to the bank using templates published in the press (very useful). Having not received any reply after 3 letters from mid Feb to end April I proceeded to claim via the on-line court service.

The bank has employed solicitors who have sent me a copy of their defence. Now I'm stuck as the legal jargon is completely beyond me.

Does anyone know where I can get a translation, without going to a solicitor myself as this would likely cost more than my claim?

Any suggestions or

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Knowing Cobbetts (Nat Wests solicitors) this will be a fairly standard defence, but if you have any worries about it then post it up here and we'll be able to pick through it for you. There is no need to use a solicitor yourself.


If my advice has helped please click my scales

 

Should you require any further help feel free to pm me.

Nat West 2nd Acc

Prelim letter sent 8th Feb '07

:) Full Settlement Offer 24th Feb '07:)

:pMONEY BACK IN ACC ON MARCH THE FIRST '07:p

 

 

Nat West 1st Acc

Filed at court 2nd of Feb '07

Acknowledged on 15th of Feb '07

:rolleyes: Defence submitted 1st March 2007 :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your encourangement. I will try and paste the original document on Monday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi I'm

DEFENCE

1 This Defence is filed and served without prejudice to the Defendant’s case that the Particulars of Claim do not disclose reasonable grounds for bringing a claim against the Defendant to recover the bank charges (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 for 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 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 Claimant’s bank account.

4 In relation to the allegation that the bank charges amount to an unenforceable penalty the Defendant pleads as follows:

4.1 In order for the Claimant to sustain a claim that the charges debited by the Defendant are in the nature of a penalty the Claimant will need to plead and prove (a) the clause(s) pursuant to which the charges were applied; (b) that the charges were applied due to a breach of contract by the Claimant; and © identifying in each case the particular breach of contract (by reference to appropriate term(s) of the contract) that the charge related to. As presently pleaded the claim does not plead these matters and therefore does not disclose reasonable grounds for bringing a claim that all or any of the charges referred to in the Particulars of Claim have been applied pursuant to an unenforceable penalty clause.

4.2 Until such time as the Claimant pleads the matters referred to in paragraph 4.1 above the Defendant is unable to plead to the claim brought against it and therefore (pending the provision of full and proper particulars of the claim) at this stage denies that any charges have been applied to the Claimant’s bank account pursuant to unenforceable penalty clauses.

5 In relation to the allegation that the contractual provisions pursuant to which the charges have been applied are invalid pursuant to the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (“the Regulations”).

5.1 The Claimant is required to identify the contractual provision(s) that the Claimant alleges are invalid by reference to the Regulations. Until such time as these provisions are identified the Defendant cannot (save as appears below) plead to the allegation referred to in paragraph 5 above. The Defendant therefore reserves its right to plead further to the allegation once (and if) the Claimant identifies the relevant contractual provisions.

5.2 In relation to the case of the Claimant that the contractual provisions are invalid pursuant to the Regulations the Defendant pleads as follows:

5.2.1 Schedule 2 to the Regulations is an Indicative and non- exhaustive list of terms which gy be regarded as unfair (emphasis supplied).

5.2.2 If the Claimant is to rely upon paragraph 1(e) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations then the Claimant is required to plead and prove in relation to each bank charge that is sought the mailers referred to in paragraph 5.1 above and all facts and mailers relied upon in alleging that the sums paid are disproportionately high.

5.2.3 In the circumstances no grounds are disclosed for a claim that the contractual provisions (whatever they are alleged to be see paragraph 5.1 above) falls foul of the Regulations and in particular paragraph 1(e) of Schedule 2.

5.2.4 The Defendant is therefore unable (save as appears below) to plead to this allegation beyond denying that any bank charges have been applied pursuant to terms which contravene the Regulations. The Defendant reserves its right to plead further to this allegation once (and if) the particulars referred to in paragraph 5.2.2 above are provided.

5.2.5 Without prejudice to paragraph 5.2.4 it is the case of the Defendant that the Regulations have no application because the charges amount to payment for services provided by the Defendant and the adequacy (or otherwise) of consideration paid under a contract for services is not an issue to be judged by reference to principles of fairness under the Regulations.

 

6 Save as hereinbefore appears the Defendant joins issue with the Claimant on the claim(s) and denies that it is liable to the Claimant as alleged or at all.

Statement of Truth

The Defendant believes that the facts stated in this Defence are true. I am duly

authorised by the Defendant to sign this statement.

Full name: Lynsey Clare Burgoyne

Name of Defendants solicitor’s firm: Cobbetts LLP, 58 Mosley Street,

Manchester, M2 3HZ (Ref: LCB/RR01362.5053)

Signed

Defendant’s Solicitor

DATED this 01 day of June 2007

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi I'm back again, sorry for the delay but I needed to bring the papers to work.

I'm

DEFENCE

1 This Defence is filed and served without prejudice to the Defendant’s case that the Particulars of Claim do not disclose reasonable grounds for bringing a claim against the Defendant to recover the bank charges (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 for 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 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 Claimant’s bank account.

4 In relation to the allegation that the bank charges amount to an unenforceable penalty the Defendant pleads as follows:

4.1 In order for the Claimant to sustain a claim that the charges debited by the Defendant are in the nature of a penalty the Claimant will need to plead and prove (a) the clause(s) pursuant to which the charges were applied; (b) that the charges were applied due to a breach of contract by the Claimant; and © identifying in each case the particular breach of contract (by reference to appropriate term(s) of the contract) that the charge related to. As presently pleaded the claim does not plead these matters and therefore does not disclose reasonable grounds for bringing a claim that all or any of the charges referred to in the Particulars of Claim have been applied pursuant to an unenforceable penalty clause.

4.2 Until such time as the Claimant pleads the matters referred to in paragraph 4.1 above the Defendant is unable to plead to the claim brought against it and therefore (pending the provision of full and proper particulars of the claim) at this stage denies that any charges have been applied to the Claimant’s bank account pursuant to unenforceable penalty clauses.

5 In relation to the allegation that the contractual provisions pursuant to which the charges have been applied are invalid pursuant to the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (“the Regulations”).

5.1 The Claimant is required to identify the contractual provision(s) that the Claimant alleges are invalid by reference to the Regulations. Until such time as these provisions are identified the Defendant cannot (save as appears below) plead to the allegation referred to in paragraph 5 above. The Defendant therefore reserves its right to plead further to the allegation once (and if) the Claimant identifies the relevant contractual provisions.

5.2 In relation to the case of the Claimant that the contractual provisions are invalid pursuant to the Regulations the Defendant pleads as follows:

5.2.1 Schedule 2 to the Regulations is an Indicative and non- exhaustive list of terms which gy be regarded as unfair (emphasis supplied).

5.2.2 If the Claimant is to rely upon paragraph 1(e) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations then the Claimant is required to plead and prove in relation to each bank charge that is sought the mailers referred to in paragraph 5.1 above and all facts and mailers relied upon in alleging that the sums paid are disproportionately high.

5.2.3 In the circumstances no grounds are disclosed for a claim that the contractual provisions (whatever they are alleged to be see paragraph 5.1 above) falls foul of the Regulations and in particular paragraph 1(e) of Schedule 2.

5.2.4 The Defendant is therefore unable (save as appears below) to plead to this allegation beyond denying that any bank charges have been applied pursuant to terms which contravene the Regulations. The Defendant reserves its right to plead further to this allegation once (and if) the particulars referred to in paragraph 5.2.2 above are provided.

5.2.5 Without prejudice to paragraph 5.2.4 it is the case of the Defendant that the Regulations have no application because the charges amount to payment for services provided by the Defendant and the adequacy (or otherwise) of consideration paid under a contract for services is not an issue to be judged by reference to principles of fairness under the Regulations.

 

6 Save as hereinbefore appears the Defendant joins issue with the Claimant on the claim(s) and denies that it is liable to the Claimant as alleged or at all.

Statement of Truth

The Defendant believes that the facts stated in this Defence are true. I am duly

authorised by the Defendant to sign this statement.

Full name: Lynsey Clare Burgoyne

Name of Defendants solicitor’s firm: Cobbetts LLP, 58 Mosley Street,

Manchester, M2 3HZ (Ref: LCB/RR01362.5053)

Signed

Defendant’s Solicitor

DATED this 01 day of June 2007

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi I'm back again, sorry for the delay but I needed to bring the papers to work.

I'm a bit calmer now and the panic is subsiding, so I have attached a copy of their letter. Now I need to know are the solicitors trying to imply they do not have enough detail even though I had listed the charges by type/date incurred/amount and interest calculated.

My next question is do I need to respond to them or sent the details to the court as my original claim was done on-line and they probably do not have the breakdown that was sent to Natwest.

I very much appreciate any help and advice you can give

DEFENCE

1 This Defence is filed and served without prejudice to the Defendant’s case that the Particulars of Claim do not disclose reasonable grounds for bringing a claim against the Defendant to recover the bank charges (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 for 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 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 Claimant’s bank account.

4 In relation to the allegation that the bank charges amount to an unenforceable penalty the Defendant pleads as follows:

4.1 In order for the Claimant to sustain a claim that the charges debited by the Defendant are in the nature of a penalty the Claimant will need to plead and prove (a) the clause(s) pursuant to which the charges were applied; (b) that the charges were applied due to a breach of contract by the Claimant; and © identifying in each case the particular breach of contract (by reference to appropriate term(s) of the contract) that the charge related to. As presently pleaded the claim does not plead these matters and therefore does not disclose reasonable grounds for bringing a claim that all or any of the charges referred to in the Particulars of Claim have been applied pursuant to an unenforceable penalty clause.

4.2 Until such time as the Claimant pleads the matters referred to in paragraph 4.1 above the Defendant is unable to plead to the claim brought against it and therefore (pending the provision of full and proper particulars of the claim) at this stage denies that any charges have been applied to the Claimant’s bank account pursuant to unenforceable penalty clauses.

5 In relation to the allegation that the contractual provisions pursuant to which the charges have been applied are invalid pursuant to the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (“the Regulations”).

5.1 The Claimant is required to identify the contractual provision(s) that the Claimant alleges are invalid by reference to the Regulations. Until such time as these provisions are identified the Defendant cannot (save as appears below) plead to the allegation referred to in paragraph 5 above. The Defendant therefore reserves its right to plead further to the allegation once (and if) the Claimant identifies the relevant contractual provisions.

5.2 In relation to the case of the Claimant that the contractual provisions are invalid pursuant to the Regulations the Defendant pleads as follows:

5.2.1 Schedule 2 to the Regulations is an Indicative and non- exhaustive list of terms which gy be regarded as unfair (emphasis supplied).

5.2.2 If the Claimant is to rely upon paragraph 1(e) of Schedule 2 to the Regulations then the Claimant is required to plead and prove in relation to each bank charge that is sought the mailers referred to in paragraph 5.1 above and all facts and mailers relied upon in alleging that the sums paid are disproportionately high.

5.2.3 In the circumstances no grounds are disclosed for a claim that the contractual provisions (whatever they are alleged to be see paragraph 5.1 above) falls foul of the Regulations and in particular paragraph 1(e) of Schedule 2.

5.2.4 The Defendant is therefore unable (save as appears below) to plead to this allegation beyond denying that any bank charges have been applied pursuant to terms which contravene the Regulations. The Defendant reserves its right to plead further to this allegation once (and if) the particulars referred to in paragraph 5.2.2 above are provided.

5.2.5 Without prejudice to paragraph 5.2.4 it is the case of the Defendant that the Regulations have no application because the charges amount to payment for services provided by the Defendant and the adequacy (or otherwise) of consideration paid under a contract for services is not an issue to be judged by reference to principles of fairness under the Regulations.

 

6 Save as hereinbefore appears the Defendant joins issue with the Claimant on the claim(s) and denies that it is liable to the Claimant as alleged or at all.

Statement of Truth

The Defendant believes that the facts stated in this Defence are true. I am duly

authorised by the Defendant to sign this statement.

Full name: Lynsey Clare Burgoyne

Name of Defendants solicitor’s firm: Cobbetts LLP, 58 Mosley Street,

Manchester, M2 3HZ (Ref: LCB/RR01362.5053)

Signed

Defendant’s Solicitor

DATED this 01 day of June 2007

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no idea why this has posted 3 times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And sorry, you could have saved yourself the bother because it's completely usual Cobbetts nonsense. Just send them a copy of your schedule of charges with a brief covering letter ("...for your information...) with you rclaim number. Otherwise wait until the court contacts you.

 

In the meantime read up onthe next bits http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/11644-allocation-questionnaires-guide-completion.html

 

Steven

 

If this post is helpful, please click the scales

Any opinions are without prejudice & without liability.

Almost everything I know concerning the law I learned from this site.


Steven

 

Using CAG Toolbar will generate much needed income - Download Here

 

Confused by Simple Interest? Confounded by Compound Interest? Read my Interest Tutorial

My Wins

 GE Money Won unconditionally May 2007

NatWest Won unconditionally August 2007

Brighthouse Won unconditionally August 2007

Goldfish Won unconditionally April 2008 (including CI on the basis of Sempra)

Clydesdale Financial Services (now BPF) Won unconditionally February 2008

 

Any opinions are without prejudice & without liability. Do not take any legal action on my advice alone. Almost everything I know concerning the law I learned from this site.

 

Please note, I will not give advice by PM. Please send a link to your thread and I will do my best to answer there.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you so much, I have just done exactly what you have said. does it mean that Natwest do not send their soclicitors the schedule of charges they received from me originally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
does it mean that NatWest do not send their soclicitors the schedule of charges they received from me originally.
Experience seems to indicate that they don't send them anything!

 

Steven

 

If this post is helpful, please click the scales

Any opinions are without prejudice & without liability.

Almost everything I know concerning the law I learned from this site

  • Haha 1

Steven

 

Using CAG Toolbar will generate much needed income - Download Here

 

Confused by Simple Interest? Confounded by Compound Interest? Read my Interest Tutorial

My Wins

 GE Money Won unconditionally May 2007

NatWest Won unconditionally August 2007

Brighthouse Won unconditionally August 2007

Goldfish Won unconditionally April 2008 (including CI on the basis of Sempra)

Clydesdale Financial Services (now BPF) Won unconditionally February 2008

 

Any opinions are without prejudice & without liability. Do not take any legal action on my advice alone. Almost everything I know concerning the law I learned from this site.

 

Please note, I will not give advice by PM. Please send a link to your thread and I will do my best to answer there.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...