There you go, & dont take it personal LOL http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/hsbc-bank/97447-court-bundles-dummies-2.html#post905735 Celicaman

Well done RW. enjoy your winnings Celicaman :grin:

Happy Birthday JW, lets hope your cheque is in with all your cards Celicaman

Hayes, in you offer letter it usually says in relation to claim from (date) to (Date) and as long as you sent the acceptance form this forum, there is no problem in putting a second claim in. Worth checking on your copy of offer letter & what you signed, if different, just as double check, but should not pose problem CM

Yes there are, but why go down that path, there is plenty of peeps on here to help you. You will pick it up, theres a bit to learn, just make sure you keep posting & asking questions, you will get there, we were all the same as you are in the beginning. Celicaman

Oh and no whoopsee lol, why should it be, let them know you know that it is claimable CM

Think general concensus of opinion is carry on with your pre 6 years claim, they will just have to up their ex gratia offer by £300, as long as its not for CI but charges over 6 years charges only. They will be hoping that you just give up as they tell you they dont pay up on old charges, I think you already sent a rejection letter, so you could always follow up with a second one stating that whilst you accept the figure of £**** as part payment, you are still going to court for the balance, you should probably quote some of the s32 limitations arguments, just to show you are serious and know your stuff They will cave in eventually if you do it right, Im sure PM can advise as he just won 12 years worth. CM

Well Done PM You deserve it, keep up the good work Celicaman

Sounds good to me, a lot of peeps are trying to claim pre 6 years, have a look on the 'claiming pre 6 years threads' so would benifit from knowing the full implication of that case. Cheers CM

KennyH, its your claim, if you feel you need to get the current claim underway, then thats your choice as the post 6yr claim would prob go through faster yes. Non of your claim would probably see an actual court anyway, its just arguing with the banlk as to its legality that could drag it out longer. Good luck CM

Quote:'This is the problem and its why none of us advocate claiming compound interest anymore. Its not about sticking in a template and hey presto you'll all be able to claim 'contractual' interest again. If you want to embark on complex and potentially risky legal arguments you must at least research and understand them yourself first - and be prepared that you may have to argue it in court.' Thank you GaryH for clearing this up, i knew it wasnt quite as simple as putting in a template and claiming it, but more of a basic template of how to claim on the grounds of account of profits. Suppose this closes the CI argument for now, tis a pity cos i had eventually got my head around the R & M argument Back to drawing board i suppose Thanks Gary CM

ok, my view, try to keep the claim in prospective, as a law student you are thinking perhaps rightly or wrongly about what would actually happen in a court of law.(i am a lay person and hope i never see the inside of a court room) Reality is that no claims have actually seen a court and as such we have to make the banks understand that if it got to court, we do actually have cases of law and evidence to back it up. The banks have so many claims to deal with, they either offer some or they dont, most of the time they dont even read your letter, they just standard reply with a percentage offer, and if some outside the 6 yrs, add in about we dont pay over 6 yrs, so then you file your claim. In POC you put all claim details (telling granny how suck eggs here LOL) its a game of chicken, we tell them we have a case, they dispute it, the more case we can prove the better their offer. CM

Hi,To be able to win any case for CI, you would need to be able to back your claim up with a case of law. Your POC claim for CI "on the basis of mutuality of contract AND unjust enrichment' as far as i know there is no 'case of law' that was set using that as a winning argument, the same as reciprocity & mutuality. IMHO You would have no chance of winning on that basis. The fact that the Bank have paid in full charges, interest & costs to within £1 (they would up the offer to finish if needed) frankly leaves you no argument for charges, and ultimatley for the CI part, as previous case tried same and lost. You need a new argument. Now the banks Know they would win on R & M, they will pay up with charges plus stat, knowing if you continue, you will lose any further claim for CI. If we can start to claim for account of profit, it is an argument the banks do not know they would win, so would pay out CI before they would set foot in a court to argue the point. This is a new argument to which i do not know how to argue it so dont ask me how to do it. Help MODS ? Basically at this point YOU HAVE WON, take the money WELL DONE Celicaman

Its not actually a problem at court IF it ever got there, as the court would only award what it sees fit and that at worst that is the 8%.stat The problem with the claim that was lost was he had been paid the charges & 8% in full & cont with his claim for the CI alone. the bank only had to argue against the award of CI as there were no charges to account for. Not Sure how to add it into claim at moment, i dont think its a problem at the moment but if it gets to court bundle you need a better argument than R & M. The bank may just wait till last minute & pay you the charges plus int plus costs and let you get on with it as they know you cant win CI claim alone. However if you can back CI up with another legal case IE account of profits, then you fight on that basis, and the bank DONT know if they could win that one, so will settle for paying you off with CI. Hope thats clear ( I think ) And no i dont understand the account of profits part yet either, Hopefully a MOD can confirm how to claim on that basis and give us a template. Anyway its off to MIL's now for a goood old fashioned sunday dinner CM

Hi, if you ask for the new charges back in a summary including all the old ones, they cannot just refund the new ones, as on a normal basis , they never say they are refunding your charges, but are making a one of ex gratia offer as they are mindfull of the costs of fighting their oh so lawfull charges in court etc. On that basis any offer is not against actual charges but ex gratia and could not be entered in court anyway as it is always without predjudice. The percentage of the offer would prob be 80% of the post 6 year claims, & as you can still reject it, it keeps it all together My advise is keep all claim together. CM

Hi Fox mulder Watching your thread with interest,(not compound LOL) and wonder what argument you are going to use with the CI as it seems that the R & M path seems to be closed and as yet nothing concrete has been posted, although i note that there seems to be something in the off about accountability of profits where if claimed at the rate of 29%, they are happier to get rid of you with the 18.3% LOL, i'll bet. Tanzarrelli mentioned it in the post 192 of this thread http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/halifax-bank-bank-scotland/97691-contractual-interest-precedent-lost-10.html It may help your claim, as im sure the bank will be wise to getting round R & M by now. Im still chomping at the bit, waiting to start about 6 various claims and had my head half around the R & M argument only for it to fail in recent court ruling, so now looking into the various new arguments before i proceed. Celicaman

Well done penguin, you done your mum proud Just as a little extra, i e mailed the sender of the offer letter, a copy of my acceptance letter(as per latties letter) and money was Paid into account same day,i then followed with hard signed copy. It could get it paid faster & then your Mum can just sign the hard copy when she gets back, Just make sure date printed is same as email acceptance and it is word for word including the name & address of DG. Celicaman

Hi SC Dont bother with estimated claims, only claim actual charges you can prove, so it looks like a trip into parents loft. The fact that you have pre 6 year and new 2007 charges to add together will negate any chance of the claim being thrown out of a court due to limitations act, so claim them all together. As advised by Zootscoot a). In so far as any charges relating to the period before xx/xx/xxxx, the Claimant wishes to invoke s.32 (1) (b) of the Limitation Act 1980 in that the Defendant deliberately concealed the true cost of administering the contractual breaches committed by the Claimant and thus essential facts relevant to the Claimant's right of action have been concealed and continue to be concealed by the Defendant. b). Alternatively, the Claimant seeks to rely upon s.32(1)© of the Limitation Act. The Claimant paid the charges in the belief that they reflected the true cost of administering the contractual breaches. The Claimant has now discovered, following revelations relating to a similar organisation, that the true costs are much lower and that the belief held by Claimant was in fact mistaken. It is thus submitted that in accordance with s.32(1)(b), s32(1)© and s.32(2) that the time period for the purposes of the Limitation Act does not begin to run until the Claimant’s reasonable discovery. This was the 21st March 2007 when the revelations were made public. Or here is another version from somewhere else 9. The claimant seeks permission to proceed with the claim under s.32 (1)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, on the grounds that the claimant would not reasonably have discovered the defendant’s deliberate concealment of the facts relevant to the claimant’s right of action before the report of the OFT was published on 05/04/2006. The facts relevant to the claimant’s right of action are that the defendant is unjustly enriched by exercising the contractual terms in respect of default charges with a view to profit. If the defendant has elected to present its charges as if they were a legitimate loss or cost, whilst it is in actual fact profiting in a material sense from the charges, the defendant can be seen to have been operating without accountability to its customers, and to have consciously concealed the facts. The defendant is clearly in a privileged position to have a direct means of withdrawing monies from the claimant’s bank account. The claimant is entitled to know whether the charges paid represent a justifiably incurred cost to the defendant’s business, or whether they are in fact a penalty, and to expect that the defendant will always conduct itself with integrity. 10. Alternatively, the claimant seeks permission to proceed with the claim under s.32 (1)© of the Limitation Act 1980 on the grounds that the payments were conceded on the mistaken presumption that the said charges and interest thereon, did not amount to penalties - Kleinwort Benson Ltd v Lincoln City Council - and that the claimant Would not reasonably have discovered the said mistakes before the report of the OFT was published on 05/04/2006. Both basically say the same, but second one uses 2006 OFT report instead of march 2007 which was prob the BBC whisleblower. I would hope you have your money back on first claim this week if you have sent your Court bundle. CI claims im still working on doing several with that, but as Pete said its non starter on the original R & M basis, but there are some who are looking into using the banks profit as a way of getting CI, but not up on it yet, look for Tanzarrelli posts, she knows about it, but we need a template and somebody to explain how LOL Good luck Celicaman

i didnt do nuffink, i got an aliby Must be something i said, anywhere else & they ask me to leave

thats bull freaky, you are as informative as me and i learned some ( not much mind ) of what what i say from you and lattie and all the others on here. Trust me on this , i can just waffle more CM

where the hell did that come from, gotta learn to shut up its contagious

Not a fantasy, a nightmare LOL

Hi Muggins how many of your charges are outside of the 6 yr period Depending on what stage you are at, you can still add parts of the S32 limitations act to nullify any defence the bank throw at you if they dispute charges outside CM

First charges claimed Jan/feb 2001 filed court march 2001 paid in full no quibble and also offer inc interest @8% up to date of offer, ok 2 claims in jan & feb only £55 but they paid it no argument about outside 6 years. Next claim back to 1990 on same account plus charges after last claim, this should be a laugh, i think they may squirm a little CM

Well your always more than welcome here, were all just so pleased that freaky hasnt put you off coming back, you must have a strong stomach LOL You obviousley havent seen the pictures with the wellies on, really not pretty CM