NCF355 v CitiCards

[ncf355]

Hi all,

 

 

some advice would be appreciated on this one:

 

Having had the defence and AQ through I have read through the defence and there are several points I want to me to the court, can I just send the following letter to them, or would this not be acceptable?

 

 

 

Thankyou for your recent communication enclosing the defence from Citi Financial regarding my claim 6 QZ 54763.

In section 5.2 the defendant states ‘and puts the claimant to proof that the clauses complained of are a disproportionate penalty clauses and/or unreasonable’ – as I have detailed in previous letters to Citi Financial (copies enclosed for the benefit of the court) I am happy to pay their incurred costs but they have consistently failed to provide a true breakdown of costs involved so I feel the burden of proof is on them to give a full breakdown of costs enabling me to pay the actual costs incurred.

In section 6 of the defendants defence statement, the defendant states ‘The particulars of claim do not particularise either the amount of the claim or the dates upon which the amounts claimed arose..’

I wish the court to be made aware that Citi Financial have been sent a breakdown of these charges (including amounts and dates) on 2 separate occasions via 1st class recorded post on the dates 23rd and 30th July, for both the defendants and courts benefit I have included another copy of the same.

In addition, the defendant states in section 9 ‘The defendant has agreed to abide by the OFT report and adopt a lower level of default fees which it has set at the new industry standard of £12’ – this statement misquotes the OFT who actually stated £12 was the level at which they would intervene, not that they considered £12 a fair amount.

In section 9 the defendant states they have made an ex gratia payment of £52 to cover the difference between £12 and the charges of £25 – I wish the court to recognise that whilst I am grateful for the partial refund I still wish to proceed with the action to recover all remaining amounts (namely the remaining charge amounts, interest charged on these and the costs of brining this action.

It should also be noted that Citi’s position prior to the issue of my claim was that no payment would be made (I enclose a copy for the courts perusal), leaving me with no choice but to proceed to small claims.

I shall forward my Allocation Questionnaire within the next week.

Yours faithfully

:?

[gizmo111]

Hi all,

 

 

some advice would be appreciated on this one:

 

Having had the defence and AQ through I have read through the defence and there are several points I want to me to the court, can I just send the following letter to them, or would this not be acceptable?

 

I'm not sure to be honest - I thought pulling the defence apart would only happen if it actually gets to court, Hopefully someone with more knowledge will reply - I would love to reply to the points these idiots made in their defence.

 

 

Thankyou for your recent communication enclosing the defence from Citi Financial regarding my claim 6 QZ 54763.

 

In section 5.2 the defendant states ‘and puts the claimant to proof that the clauses complained of are a disproportionate penalty clauses and/or unreasonable’ – as I have detailed in previous letters to Citi Financial (copies enclosed for the benefit of the court) I am happy to pay their incurred costs but they have consistently failed to provide a true breakdown of costs involved so I feel the burden of proof is on them to give a full breakdown of costs enabling me to pay the actual costs incurred.

 

In section 6 of the defendants defence statement, the defendant states ‘The particulars of claim do not particularise either the amount of the claim or the dates upon which the amounts claimed arose..’

 

I wish the court to be made aware that Citi Financial have been sent a breakdown of these charges (including amounts and dates) on 2 separate occasions via 1st class recorded post on the dates 23rd and 30th July, for both the defendants and courts benefit I have included another copy of the same.

 

 

In addition, the defendant states in section 9 ‘The defendant has agreed to abide by the OFT report and adopt a lower level of default fees which it has set at the new industry standard of £12’ – this statement misquotes the OFT who actually stated £12 was the level at which they would intervene, not that they considered £12 a fair amount.

 

In section 9 the defendant states they have made an ex gratia payment of £52 to cover the difference between £12 and the charges of £25 – I wish the court to recognise that whilst I am grateful for the partial refund I still wish to proceed with the action to recover all remaining amounts (namely the remaining charge amounts, interest charged on these and the costs of brining this action.

 

It should also be noted that Citi’s position prior to the issue of my claim was that no payment would be made (I enclose a copy for the courts perusal), leaving me with no choice but to proceed to small claims.

 

I shall forward my Allocation Questionnaire within the next week.

 

Yours faithfully

 

 

:?

 

I am not sure to be honest - I thought we only got ot pull the defence apart if we actually got to court. I would love to reply to the defence these idiots sent.