Many thanks for the quick reply. We also paid £140 for credit checks. The £200 was a security deposit to take the house off the market. Thanks Sean

Hi, we moved into this house just over a year ago. The landlord has a management company who "looks after?" the property. Anyway they failed to protect the deposit until we threatened County Court action. However when protecting the deposit they never included the security/holding deposit of £200 that we initially paid. We have a receipt to show that we paid admin fees and a security deposit. Now though, the management company are saying the £200 was also admin fees and the admin fee was for references, which it was for anyway. Can we make a claim for that part of our deposit not being protected? If so do the same rules apply? Many thanks Sean

I did that a couple of years ago when Newmans did the same to me. TS did rock all as far as I can tell however a letter to Credit Services Association, of which 1st Credit also belong, did yield results and their whole attitude changed.

I had exactly the same thing with Abbey and Wescot. Don't usually phone these people but did just for a giggle. I'm a bit of a wind-up merchant, lol. The bloke I spoke to at Wescot got extremely angry, especially when I laughed at his threats and asked, almost begged, him to take it to court. Anyway one quick letter explaining that the account was in dispute and they quickly replied saying they would investigate. I've heard nothing since, which is a couple of months.

I agree with baconbuttyman. I know Martin Lewis is doing the right thing but on the telly the other night he made it sound like you write a couple of letters to your bank and they pay up which is not generally true. People at least need to serve court papers and most banks will take it to the wire before paying up. All they'll offer before this is some derisory "good will" payment.

Had some dramas with that so am hoping it is right. At the end of the day is it not up to Close Brothers to prove it wrong in court? As long as mine is a good estimate. Anyway if you're happy with that I will go with it. Just waiting for the letter from the court detailing all the new directions from the judge. What was said in court was file & serve new defence within 14 days (23rd July). Close brothers would then be given another 14 days to reply to any claim, then we would be back in court first available slot 14 days after that. I will keep posting to let you know how it goes. I can type up their statement that they were going to use before the adjournment if anyone would like to see it. Steven thanks so much for your help and advice it really has helped and is much appreciated.

Whilst fighting through all the paperwork so I could try and work out the interest and get the relevant interest rates at the various times the charges were made I found a charge that had been missed from the original schedule so this has now been added. The reason for putting date as 19th July is we are still awaiting the new directions from the judge after last weeks adjournment so I do not see this being submitted before then.

OK here is the wording of her counterclaim 1. The Claimant had an account **************** ("the Account") with the Defendant which was opened on or around 14th March 2000 and closed on or around 16th December 2006 2. During the period in which the Account was operating the Defendant debited numerous charges to the Account in respect of purported breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant and also charged interest on the charges once applied. The Claimant understands that the Defendant contends that the charges were debited in accordance with the terms of the contract between itself and the Claimant. 3. A list of the charges applied is attached to these particulars of claim. 4. The Claimant contends that: a) The charges debited to the Account are punitive in nature; are not a genuine pre-estimate of cost incurred by the Defendant; exceed any alleged actual loss to the Defendant in respect of any breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant; and are not intended to represent or related to any alleged actual loss, but instead unduly enrich the Defendant which exercises the contractual term in respect of such charges with a view to profit. b) The contractual provision that permits the Defendant to levy such charges is unenforceable by virtue of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations (1999) and the common law. 5. Accordingly the Claimant claims: a) the return of the amounts debited in respect of charges in the sum of £983 and any interest charged thereon; b) Court costs; c) The claimant claims compound interest on the amounts claimed - using the rate and method specified in the said contract, and applied by the defendant to monies it is owed from 13th February 2004 to 13th December 2006 of £37.67. d) The claimant claims interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year, from 13th February 2004 to 19th July 2007 of £115.29 and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of £0.24 I believe that the contents of these particulars of claim are true

Yes, when they first brought the court case that was the first thing we asked for.

Good point. It was a suggested possible route that the judge mentioned to my wife and the claimants so we will go on as we are then. Thanks

Thanks. I've now worked it out that after all interst and charges are deducted she owes £3855 which is better. I'm going to sit down and work out the wording of her counterclaim this afternoon and will post it here for input from yourself and anyone else who can help. One question I do have is do we submit this Part 20 Claim with our defence or is it treated as a seperate claim? I'm assuming we go to the court with the Part 20 claim and its then added to the file of her case and is then sent to the card company. As we are now dealing solely with their solicitors I assume it needs to be sent by the court to the solicitors. I'm also assuming we don't need the courts permission to file a Part 20 as we can now submit a revised defence. Thanks for your help so far it really is appreciated.

Thanks for your help. I'll sit down and try and work it out tomorrow. At 8% it works out at just over £100. Anymore would be gratefully received as it would lessen the amount owed. Is this tactic likely to work, i.e. will the court go for the full APR instead of just 8%?

Thanks for the answer. Whenever she made a payment it reduced the balance. The charges were just added to the balance so I'm thinking like you that a defence is possibly a better option but also like you I am no expert. If I counterclaim then I could also claim back the interest at 8% and I believe this is what the judge was getting at when she told their rep in court that if they didn't just settle for the sum admitted now it could work out even more expensive for them.

My wife is being taken to court for a credit card debt. She admittied just over £4000 but disputes £968 which is the charges over a 6 year period. She went to court Monday and the Claimant asked for an adjournment as they were not ready. The judge was obviously not happy but eventually agreed awarding my wife £50 loss of earnings as she took a days annual leave. Anyway whilst in court the Judge urged the Claimant to just settle as all costs would be borne by them as they weren't ready but they refused. One of the things that was mentioned by the Judge was a Part 20 Claim and my wife was told it was something she should look at. She was also given 2 weeks to submit a revised defence which has to be in by the 23rd July. Now I believe after doing some digging is that a part 20 claim is a counterclaim. So I would like to know how she goes about putting in a Part 20 Claim as the card company have said they definitely will not relinquish the charges and will be in court in 6 weeks. If she can hit them for all charges plus interest plus anything else then it would be a bit of a bonus. The credit card is issued by a company called Close Brothers. Their solicitor at court said to us that she didn't think they were fully aware of what they were getting into and also that this could become quite high profile as they are willing to defend their charges in court.

Sorry