I'm getting pretty confused now. I've got 72 tabs open! The steps I have gone through so far are: 1. Sent a letter generally stating that I did not agree with getting charged fees, telling them we were in dispute and asking them to hang on till I made some calculations (they were going through the Debt Collection Agent threat routine). 2. No answer. 3. Found this site, read some of it, sent a letter saying we are in dispute about X amount of charges which had attracted Y amount of interest, attached a schedule of charges which worked out how much interest I had actually paid in the past (i.e. achieved a zero balance) and sent it off. (the Y amount of interest part was wrong for a variety of reasons but the X amount of charges was right). 4. Got a letter back saying thank you but no thank you but as a gesture of goodwill here's Z amount of fees off your balance, now pay up the remainder. 5. Sent a Letter Before Action saying thanks but no with the same flawed Schedule of Charges still with the correct X amount of charges less the "goodwill" 6. Received a letter but here's another goodwill gesture of Q amount which we're calling a return of some of your interest. Bye bye now, don't forget to pay the rest. 7. For a variety of reasons I have not got back to them yet. I've been reading much of this site and have decided to go for Restitutional Interest and scrap my original Y amount interest calculations. 8. I've prepped a letter which I am/aren't calling a Letter Before Action and a compound spreadsheet which charges compound interest (CISheet v101.xls) on each charge from the day it was applied at 29.9APR. The X amount of charges is the same. 9. Andy's answer has thrown me. I thought I was supposed to tell them up front if I was asking for Restitutional Compound Interest not Statutory. I want to get it off but don't know if I should start at point three again or if I should be asking for Restitutional upfront or what??? Thought I fully understood this 5 mins ago! Any takers with a bulleted step by step, the Wiki (can't post a link) does not seem to lay this out clearly? Best Regards DatumX

Thanks for that. I'm going to go for restitution at 29.9% and am more than happy to go to court. However, since I sent my original letters I have changed the total amount I am claiming due to the fact that I am calculating the interest as restitutional rather than the hotchpotch I was previously. The principal sum of charges has not changed but the interest has, considerably. Do you think I need to go back and send another Preliminary Letter then a Letter before Action or do you think I should just go with a Letter Before Action as the principle amount has not changed? Best Regards DatumX

Hi Martin2006, Thanks for the quick response. I understand the principle already but I don't understand 24.9%. For example this link states: "...when claiming interest as damages the claimant must plead and prove his actual interest losses as a separate item of loss. That loss may, for example, be the cost of borrowing money, or the loss of an opportunity to invest the promised money." It can also come under "Unjust Enrichment" to Barclays i.e. taking back profits they may have made with my money while they had it. But in either case I don't know how I prove it. Essentially, what is the evidence (be it a Statute, a precedent case or a published interest rate leaflet) I could tangibly produce in court to substantiate 24.9% or 29.9% or any other compound figure? Best Regards DatumX

Hi, Thanks for the above information. I have been getting myself familiar with the restitution principles etc. however I am wanting to fully understand why 29.9% or 24.9% are suggested? I've been looking at Barclaycard 2015 results, historic rates of interest they have charged me etc. but I can't quantify why I should use one figure rather than another. I don't want to just use one because it usually works, I want to know why I am using it. Sempra Metals V Commissioner of Inland Revenue calculation factors don't really apply exactly because the UK government was not a business. Does anyone have a potted explanation as to where the figures were originally pulled from and how I could therefore defend them if needed? Best Regards DatumX

Some way down the road with this already having sent letters and schedule of charges etc. Got some money knocked off twice. Sent a Letter Before Action but have not been on top of things and not followed up at 14 days. Weeks have passed. Am now going to file for court in earnest after sending a revised Letter Before Action. I'm not really happy with the way I am calculating interest in my prior documents and want to get it right and proceed with vigour. THE PROBLEM: Historic charges were applied on particular dates and did or didn't attract interest for varying amounts of time depending on how Barclaycard decided to play it i.e. A charge goes on, there is say 28 days when it does not have interest charged on it then it falls into the main balance and then charging of interest commences as if it were a purchase. When payments are made it is the first, second etc amount to be paid off and then it ceases to attract interest even if you still have a balance which was formed by purchases. THE QUESTION: Do I need to give a monkeys about the nuances of the above dates, payment thresholds etc? Is it OK to just say it attracted X numbers of months of interest which corresponded to the next time I cleared the balance? The money that paid it off would have paid off an equal amount of the "real" purchase balance if the charge had not been applied in the first place wouldn't it? ALSO: I am finding a lot of what would appear to be dead links to spreadsheets, letters etc. The ones I do find seem to be out of date for one reason or another and the forum/wiki seems to be very hard to navigate in terms of finding appropriate documents/attachments. Is there a page which has all the most up to date forms on that I am missing. I'm particularly needing a restitutional interest spreadsheet and good/recent Particulars of Claim texts. Hope someone can help. Best Regards DatumX