The defence is not filed yet only received papers yesterday. The complaint was made 7 months ago and i have applied the right to withhold payment until my complaint has been addressed. So 7 months they claim I am in arrears.
Does your contract allow you to with hold payments at all please?
I don't know the bank are unwilling or unable to provide a signed copy of the agreement or any agreement or "terms and conditions" they keep referring to. However under their terms and conditions of their consumer credit licence if I make a complaint, they have 5 days to acknowledge the complaint, a further 8 weeks to resolve the complaint. If after 8 weeks they can't resolve the complaint they must refer me to the financial ombudsman service who then take control of the complaint. I have 6 months to contact them from the day they refer me. I think we are going off track here. What I am asking is basically I'm looking to have this thrown out on the basis that the bank are refusing to verify their claim before it even gets to court. The fact that it will be (the bank v me) in court and I refuse to deal with anyone but the claimant "the bank" and wish for them to swear under oath that what they claim is true. On the basis I send NOTICE to the court with my counterclaim in my defence in your opinion what is the likely outcome will it get thrown out or proceed with a hearing.
or more relevant would be if the bank was your client what would you advise them to do ? Continue to a hearing or ……………………………..
You can't get the claim thrown out straight away
You can file a defence to the claim
Then the bank would be at liberty to apply to the Court to strike out your defence on the basis it has no prospect of success
However you need to be very careful
It is not for the bank to refer to the FOS - you are wrong about that
After 8 weeks YOU may complain to the FOS
However you can't throw the case out before it starts.
Once a defence is file you or they can make an application to strike out
But that is only when the case has started
Does that clarify the position for you?
So am i correct in saying i can require the claimant to verify their claim viva voce and have it heard by a jury. Is it not true in the event of the need for an appellant review the appeal court will only review evidence give under oath or verified evidence.
Why would they apply to the court to have it struck out on the basis of it having no prospects of success ? After all I'm offering to settle any varied claim against me.