I need help understanding a letter sent by tlt acting on behalf of Lloyds bank. I originally asked them to refund bank charges given reasons. They refused and said they acted accordingly. I then decided to take them to court. First their solicitor asked for an extension, then sent me a letter labelled "defence" on it. Some parts I don't understand. Such as:
"The defendant will say the claim is statute barred." However, I still have a default on my credit report.
Also they claim I didn't give them an opportunity to respond to the complaint. I did!! Hence the court action.
Then they said I failed to prove I was in financial difficulty. I have evidence as bank statements and approached step change.
The last bit they said " I invite the court to strike out the claim under CPR 3.1 and 3.4. what does that even mean?
"The defendant will say the claim is statute barred." However, I still have a default on my credit report.
Also they claim I didn't give them an opportunity to respond to the complaint. I did!! Hence the court action.
Then they said I failed to prove I was in financial difficulty. I have evidence as bank statements and approached step change.
The last bit they said " I invite the court to strike out the claim under CPR 3.1 and 3.4. what does that even mean?
Comment