£3,000k barclaycard!!!!!!!!!

[nathal]

Hey,

Recently went into talks with barclaycard about reduced settlement, full and final settlement. They offered me about 70% i accepted. They gave me three months to pay.

Anyway one thing led to another and i hadn't the money in time.

Did not send any money!

No contact until recently, i received a letter saying thank you for your payment which has been accepted as full and final settlement of the account.

 

A week later they send another letter saying they made a mistake!

 

The debt has now been sold to my friends cabot.

Does this letter give me any leverage?

Could i send a copy to cabot say?

[give_me_it_back]

Their mistake as far as I'm concerned! If you have a letter saying you paid in full - that's all you need! Of course... you never received the second letter, did you..?

 

I'd say nothing to Cabot. If they get in touch with you - tell them to prove it! YOU can 'prove' to the contrary.

 

My opinion anyway...

[hagenuk]

What sort of leverage are you looking for? They made a mistake and they rectified it, sadly for you they are allowed to do this.

 

How much of the £3k is charges? Whatever is comprised of charges, claim back. The rest is money you have spent, so pay it back.

[hagenuk]

Their mistake as far as I'm concerned! If you have a letter saying you paid in full - that's all you need! Of course... you never received the second letter, did you..?

 

I'd say nothing to Cabot. If they get in touch with you - tell them to prove it! YOU can 'prove' to the contrary.

 

My opinion anyway...

 

This is just dishonest. The whole point of this site is to help us with claiming unlawful charges, not wriggling out of financial responsibility or stooping to the level of the banks.

 

Anyone can make a mistake. There is no specific proof that the debt is paid because the second letter exists, regardless of whether nathal admits receiving it. The law cuts both ways and all Barclaycard have to do is produce a copy and it will be accepted in law that it was posted and received.

[give_me_it_back]

I don't know who Cabot are, but if they are a debt collection agency, they DO have to prove that they have the right to collect the money.

[hagenuk]

I don't know who Cabot are, but if they are a debt collection agency, they DO have to prove that they have the right to collect the money.

 

Cabot are a DCA and yes, they do have to prove that the money is owed, but don't you think that we have a moral obligation to be honest and upstanding when we conduct our financial affairs? Particularly as we are engaged in claiming charges that are unlawfully applied. We can hardly demand the return of unlawful charges whilst behaving unlawfully ourselves.

[give_me_it_back]

I think you misunderstand me. I am NOT suggesting nathal be dishonest, and I am also NOT suggesting he doesn't pay the money back.

 

However, the BANK have made a huge error by sending this first letter, and, whether you say that 'everyone makes mistakes', I'm afraid I do not apply the same leniency to large corporations such as banks as I do to private individuals. There have been many cases where banks have paid money in to wrong accounts and, as it was THEIR error, they have had to stand by it and lose that money -

 

THEY can afford it. Let's not start endowing the banks with personalities and feelings.

 

Banks should simply not make errors like this. They are supposed to PROTECT our money and our interests. Yet, constantly on this site they are making huge errors like this. They are sending confidential information to incorrect addresses, paying money in to wrong accounts, sending out the wrong information..... Imagine that the error was made in the bank's favour, and Nathal HAD made payment, and the bank said he hadn't? The bank would certainly be asking for proof, and they certainly wouldn't make suggest that 'it's ok, Nathal - everyone makes mistakes'.

 

I still say that Nathal wait for Cabot to get in touch, and ask them for proof. There is nothing dishonest about that. If Cabot are able to prove it, then obviously he should pay the money back (at a sum he can afford). However, if they cannot prove that they should collect the money, then Nathal does not owe Cabot a penny.

 

My comment about not receiving the 2nd letter was merely to make light of what is probably quite an upsetting and worrying situation for Nathal.

[hagenuk]

I understand your point of view perfectly. However, if a bank makes a mistake and choose to write off the amount then all well and good but one can hardly expect them to and in many cases they do not. Like it or not, they do make mistakes and they are entitled to rectify them, as they have in this case.

 

We are engaged in fighting the banks because they have been profiting from our mistakes. By this I mean that most of us do not deliberately go overdrawn or bounce cheques on purpose etc. We have exposed the banks and are fighting back yet you expect that the same standards do not apply to us. Why should we profit from mistakes if banks should not?

[give_me_it_back]

I'm not sure how you see that we would make a profit from the banks mistake..?

[hagenuk]

Anyway, getting back on topic.

 

The letter does not give you any leverage.

 

If you wanted to try to claim that the letter absolves you of any responsibility then you could, but not only is that dishonest it may also be fraudulent.

 

You could send a copy to Cabot but Barclaycard will simply inform Cabot that it was a mistake and Cabot will pursue you anyway.

 

How much of the £3k is charges?

[hagenuk]

I'm not sure how you see that we would make a profit from the banks mistake..?

 

"There have been many cases where banks have paid money in to wrong accounts and, as it was THEIR error, they have had to stand by it and lose that money -"

 

 

Is that not profit from a bank's mistake?

[give_me_it_back]

Profit? no. Mistake? Yes.

 

Nathal - I hope I have made my point, and quite clearly. hagenuk's point about how much of the 3k is charges is relevant. You will quite possibly be able to reduce the debt substantially.

[hagenuk]

Profit? no. Mistake? Yes.

 

.

 

Of course it's a profit. There are many definitions of the word "profit" but the one that fits here is:

A benefit, advantage or gain, particularly a pecuniary gain.

 

We talk of the banks profiting from the misfortune of customers through excessive and unlawful charges so would an amount paid into an account in error profit the recipient?

 

Regardless of whether it was a mistake or not, it is still a profit.

[nathal]

Didn't mean to raise such a heated debate..

[hagenuk]

Surely just a good natured discussion?

 

Nathal, do you know what proportion of the £3k is charges?

 

If so, are you quite happy with what you need to do in order to claim those back?

[nathal]

Yeah approx about £1300 + interest.

Keep you posted as i progress

[give_me_it_back]

Thanks Nathal. Do that.

 

It is also worth looking in to the Equitable Estoppel law. it is mentioned in the Joneshousehold case here: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/abbey-bank/1889-another-claim.html

 

Good luck!

[nathal]

Just realised cabot are dealing with my citi card account. So many dca's. Coming out of my ears...