Hi mollycat03 Click on 'Site Map' at the top of the page. Under the section 'Bank Action Group', locate the 4th subheading 'Online Interest Calculator'. Good luck! PeterG

I had a go at HSBC Credit Card section yesterday for the sheer devilment of it really. Although we already hold a joint Visa card, they were trying to persuade my wife to take out another card - not for the first time - and I couldn't help but point out to the chap I spoke to that in their 'Key Information', their Default charges should include wording to the effect that one could be charged up to a maximum of £12 and this figure itself was not a norm. I said I would expect a separate invoice detailing the extra work that the Bank had been obliged to do, specifically related to the default charge in question, so incurring the Bank in costs over and above the norm that they were now seeking to recover. 'Oh no' he said, 'There is a straightforward charge of £12 - there's no invoice or anything like that'!!! I then acquainted him with what the OFT had actually said. He seemed quite perplexed, said he had made notes on what I had said and would pass it on for consideration by the 'relevant department' so that HSBC could offer an even better service. Meanwhile, he suggested that I go into my local branch and discuss my concerns with them - and he was serious! PeterG

Dave I have found the OFT website Who to contact in the OFT very informative as to what the OFT can and cannot do. The linked Consumer Direct advice service is also a useful ally. One significant point they stressed to me last week was that I (and anyone else fo that matter), am quite within my rights to ask for a detailed breakdown of how a default charge has been calculated (in the same way you would receive an invoice) and that it is the Financial Ombudsman Service that is then empowered to take this further, not the OFT. What was fully not ascertained was what action one could actually take if the Bank did not comply with the request but I presume the answer would be as above, to complain to the FOS - which is what I've just told the Halifax. I suppose the other tedious option would be to take Court Action again. PeterG

Hello again Folks, especially jonni2bad and Michael B, and indeed all of you who have given help and advice in our pursuit of justice. Well, first the good news….Eventually….. ***HALIFAX SETTLED IN FULL*** BUTit was not straightforward and I can now prove that the Halifax really do persist in unlawful charges …and are looking for that little bit ‘Xtra’! In short, battle has re-commenced as today’s letter sent to their Customer Relations Manager, below explains: ‘You will, I trust, have been in receipt of my previous letter, dated 29th August, which was sent in reply to your letter dated 23rd August. However, I find I must now write you again regarding further ‘Overlimit’ and ‘Late Payment’ default charges that have been applied to my latest September statement. Although I have noted from your letter of the 23rd August, your reiteration that future valid charges would stand, I would respectfully question the ‘validity’ of these latest charges which I consider are unwarranted penalties, having been triggered automatically, as a matter of course, with little or no regard given to the ongoing litigation process which I instigated through Stockport County Court on 9th August. In your letter, you made me an offer of £500, which I said I was prepared to accept but only in partial settlement of the £1160 I was claiming through litigation. If I had accepted that offer outright, I would have been under my credit limit. As it was, Ms Rachel Hinchcliffe, Litigation Solicitor, Legal Services-Retail Division HBOS plc wrote to me on 2nd September saying that the Halifax were prepared to reimburse £1109 in respect of bank charges incurred plus interest and would also reimburse my Court fee. I telephoned Ms Hinchcliffe to query the actual figures quoted in the text of her letter. It transpired that there was not only a minor clerical error in her figures but more importantly and more significantly, my claim had not taken account of a £25 refund which had been recorded on my February 2005 statement. When I checked as to why I had overlooked this, the reason was straightforward in that the February statement in question was one of two that had not been sent by the Halifax, in response to my initial request for copies of my last six years statements. We resolved this issue and I verbally accepted Ms Hinchcliffe’s amended offer, made without admission of liability. Regarding the £12 Late Payment fee so applied, you will see from your records that I made a payment of £50.00 received by you on 18th August. I understand this charge was applied nevertheless because what I had paid fell short of the full minimum payment of £74.15 required on my August statement. I have been in contact with the Consumer Direct advice service who reiterated that the figure of £12 is not a norm but a maximum amount Banks are allowed to charge for the sole purpose of recovering any extra costs incurred directly as a result of being overlimit or making a late payment. I was further informed that I am quite entitled to request an itemised breakdown of how you have incurred those extra costs. Therefore, I would be grateful if you would either provide me with such a breakdown or alternatively, simply rescind the charges forthwith. If however, you insist that these charges should stand and do so without explanation, then, as a matter of principle, I will feel obliged firstly to inform the Office of Fair Trading and secondly to then refer this issue to the Financial Ombudsman Service’ So, we await their response! I would also like to pass on a tip: If you phone up, it is just as important, if not more so, not just to get the name of the person you are talking to but also the location - Leeds, Edinburgh, Dunfermline, Halifax, Timbucktoo, Outer Mongolia, Outer Space, It seems they all have the same phone number and nobody knows who anyone else is. We spent 40 minutes on the phone and were transferred to five different call centres. Eventually, one gentleman said he would phone us back. He never did. Watch this space for that little bit ‘Xtra’ PeterG

CONGRATULATIONS - EXCELLENT SUPERB RESULT The wording of your offer letter was virtually identical to mine so it must be a stereotyped letter!. The only difference was the amounts involved. They knocked £51 off my claim so I phoned up their solicitor who I have to say was helpful, co-operative and realistic. I got the £51 reinstated but they've now applied £12 overlimit fee because the refund wasn't credited to the account by the statement date and they've also applied a £12 Late payment fee because the £50 paid on the 18th August fell short of the £74 minimum payment on the August statement. So having checked with the OFT Consumer Direct advice service, battle has recommenced today. I've demanded either a fully itemised breakdown of how they've arrived at these charges or that they rescind them forthwith. Failure to do so will result in me informing the OFT and referral to the Financial Ombudsman Service. I'll post my letter on my 'Halifax persist with unlawful charges' thread (because they really do!!!!) if you want to follow the action. I'm now taking on Barclays - who did you say you'd changed to? but I'm really pleased for you !!!!!!! PeterG

Thanks jonni2bad! Will follow that up so all parties receive the appropriate letters hopefully by Tuesday. Will keep you posted Thanks again PeterG

Are we actually going to Court? Is History in the making? Claim update: Halifax deliberately have probably not surprisingly set out to complicate the issue - and I would value opinions on the best course of action, especially as the Halifax Solicitors have on 22nd August, filed an Acknowledgement of Service indicating an intention to defend all of the claim. Following the Notice of Issue, the Halifax had until today (the 25/08) to respond which they have done not without a fight it would seem. They appear to have launched a three-pronged attack - First, a letter from Retail Bank Collections, Halifax, headed ‘Urgent Notice’ and dated 19th August - a Saturday! arrived on Wednesday 23rd. stating that the account was seriously overlimit (£306.66 over a £1100 Credit Limit) and to avoid this account being referred to a recovery agent, FULL payment must be made immediately. Credit facilities had been withdrawn and no attempt should be made to use the card. Second, a letter was received today, 25th, from the County Court notifying us that an Acknowledgement of Service had been received and the defendant now had until 8th September to file a defence. Third, also in today’s post was a more conciliatory letter dated 23rd August, from Customer Relations Manager in Leeds. Referring to our ‘’ongoing complaint regarding charges’, she offered her ‘sincere apologies for the inconvenience this issue had caused’ us. She was ‘sorry’ that we were ‘unhappy’ to refund £250. and re-emphasised that they were to recover costs so she could not agree to refund them all -(i.e. £1160 - no mention anywhere in the letter of the Small Claims Court Notice of Issue, the Court fee or Interest being claimed !!!) However, ‘in an attempt to reach an amicable solution’, she was prepared to increase the offer to £500 ‘in full and final settlement’. ‘Future valid charges will stand’ and they reserved the right to close the account if it was not managed correctly. An acceptance form and pre-paid envelope were enclosed. She was ‘keen to resolve’ our concerns and if we were unable to do so, she would provide details of how we could contact the Financial Ombudsman Service. If no reply was forthcoming from us in the next eight weeks, she would assume that our concerns were resolved. So does the Left Hand know what the Right Hand is doing? Do the fingers on one hand know what they are doing? Having spoken to the Court administrative staff today, they require copies of all the above correspondence and our reply! PeterG

Hi Damian Have been out all day so just catching up! Michael makes a very astute and when you think about it obvious point. They would have to go to Court to challenge / dispute your claim and unless they have a sudden change of policy, they won't do that. I'm no legal expert but I would think that under the terms of Data Protection, if push came to shove, you could insist on full clarification of the charges applied. If the scenario was such that it did go to court, then you can bet your bottom dollar or your last £ sterling that they would know exactly what the charges were for and say so. However, follow Michael's advice and submit your claim. Don't worry about your claim being later than what you stated. I gave them July 24thJuly, then 31st and eventually filed on Aug 9th! Like I said, getting it right is the key, time is not of the essence! Best of luck PeterG

Damian RIght. first of all, the OFT ruling applies specifically to unfair Credit card charges although I think? that they've now been asked to officially investigate Bank Current account charges. Nevertheless, that doesn't help you at the moment. Therefore can I suggest 2 possible ways to follow now. 1 Check up again on similar threads in the Halifax Forum but in particular, access the posts of Dave (Administrator), jonni2bad and Michael Browne to name but three who have given much pertinent helpful and very specific advice throughout all forums. 2 Read the articles by Neil Faulkner on the Motley Fool (UK) website. Don't get me wrong, Neil is a strong advocate of CAG but if you go to The Ultimate Guide To Reclaiming Bank And Card Charges - 30/06/2006 - The Motley Fool UK, you will find his several articles which I think you will find helpful and informative - and give you another 'informed' perspective. I have had personal contact with Neil and he is very approachable, inundated with requests for help but still comes up smiling! You may need to retrace your steps in requesting details of the charges. Under the Data Protection Act, you are entitled to request not only the dates when charges were applied and the amounts involved, but you also want to know precisely what the charges were for? It is insufficient and a cop-out for the Bank to say 'as previously notified'. So if you've paid your £10 and they cannot produce the info you have requested, which they of course must admit in writing, then this will by default, I think, strengthen your case. Remember, the one with the best paperwork wins! So you might need to write again to 'seek further clarification'. Anyway. take your time. Get it right and don't leave the Bank any room for excuse. PeterG

Damian I didn’t use the Moneyclaim online form and although I appreciate that many people have used this facility most successfully, to me, it seemed at an overall glance to be quite involved and meant to cover a multitude of scenarios. By contrast, Form N1 in my opinion is far more straightforward. Having said that, may I make some observations and suggestions that you might consider to be helpful before submitting your claim. 1 Be concise and precise. 2 You have quoted various Regulations in support of your claim but omit to mention the most important one of all, the April 5th OFT ruling which has precipitated all this action by hundreds of people. 3.Penalty charges have been deemed to be irrecoverable at law - full stop. Only a judge can and will decide if charges applied to your account are unfair. 4 You should itemise each charge giving the date, the amount and what it was for - eg:- overlimit; late payment; returned payment fee. 5 Standard ‘Interest’ applied to your account is not reclaimable. Are you sure that Halifax has levied interest specifically on your charges? 6 I’m not clear how you’ve calculated the interest in arriving at £566.65. You can claim 8% interest on each charge from the day it was applied to the present. Use the CAG ready calculator to tabulate this if you have not already done so. 7 It is a good idea to show that you have tried to resolve this ‘dispute’ with the Halifax but having failed to do so, are therefore compelled to resort to the Courts to press your case. It is not so much a matter of the Halifax failing to justify their charges to you, it is more a matter that you consider these particular charges unfair and unlawful and are now seeking to reclaim them in full. 8 In general, you can only claim for the last six years so to my mind, when you opened your account is of no relevance. So - Keep it simple; State the total amount you are reclaiming in penalty charges over the last six years. State the total amount you are reclaiming at 8% interest Supply itemised lists of the above. Remember to add in your Court fee As has been already said by others in CAG, you are taking on a big organisation who are extremely reluctant to accept the OFT ruling but even more reluctant to go to Court. It is not a race, there is no time-limit. As in all legal matters, the one with the best paperwork wins. Make sure your claim is clear, easily understood and watertight. Once the dye is cast, it’s not good to be troubled with afterthought! PeterG PS In reply to your last post, if you are reclaiming Credit Card charges, I used the Dunfermline address. Otherwise use the Leeds one - NOT you local branch!

You go to your local County Court. You can post your form or take it in personally. Your fee depends on the amount you are claiming. Pay by cheque made out to 'HMCS'. Refer to the following website for more info: Making a Claim Look at Stage 3 - Small Claims Track PeterG

I was asked to supply three copies of the N1 form by HMCS - which could be photocopies; one to be sent to the defendant, one for HMCS USE and one to be returned to you bearing the Court's 'Seal'. Also send copies of all correspondence so that the Court can see what steps you have taken to try and resolve this prior to this legal stage. Best of luck PeterG

Hi Damian I didn't use that as I purchased the Lawpack kit on the left of your screen. Nowhere on FORM N1 was it suggested that I needed to enter when the account was opened. What is of relevance is that you are able to show the Court evidence of what penalty/unfair charges were levied on your account and when. PeterG

Hi Damian You can only reclaim unfair/unlawful charges over the last six years so I would think that when you opened your account is of no relevance? PeterG

Hello Mike As Michael says, it is up to you. However, you might find it of further interest to read through my thread ‘Halifax persist with unlawful charges’ where I was kindly given advice by both Michael and jonni2bad. You can read the letter I finally sent in the thread ‘DeviousDame Vs Halifax (Need Advice Please) #16 As I said in a previous reply, HMCS will give them 14 days to reply irrespective. PeterG

They are stalling! You've sent them an LBA. Stick to your guns and go ahead with Court Action. Forget the FSA. Your claim / complaint is not with them. The Bank is obliged to reply to HMCS within 14 days and if they want more time, they will probably have to explain why and answer their case in Court. Now that would be interesting! PeterG

Leave it empty! Employing a solicitor is expensive. The whole point of the Small Claims Court is to enable you to pursue your claim and keep the costs to a minimum. Add your Court fee (£120?) to your claim and if you win, then the defendant has to pay the overall sum you have claimed. If for some obscure reason you lost because the Bank were actually legally represented in Court by some fantastic lawyer costing them £150 - £200 whatever £ per hour, then they are still liable for their own costs and you forfeit your £120. Plug! Plug! Get the Small Claims Lawpack advertised on the Left Hand side of this page!!!!!!! Excellent value! Advice on what to put, Forms for every eventuality, Cd - plus lots more. The Court will probably require three copies of the N1 Claim form which you can print off from the Cd in the pack or you can photocopy. Enclose copies of all correspondence entered into so far. This shows the efforts you have made to resolve this before having to resort to HMCS. The Court will send one 'sealed' copy to the Bank's address you have given and will deem it have been served within two days. The court will stamp all supplementary material you have sent, copy it and return the originals to you along with a letter telling you the defendant's options and the date by which they must respond and the procedure if they don't etc.etc. Then you wait............ PeterG

Is the HQ of the ECI you are dealing with, based in Great Eastern Street, London? If so, look at their website Debt Collections, Credit Checking and Bailiff Services and read 'Know your rights'!!! PeterG

Hi The OFT!!! Google, Advanced Search, Exact phrase Enter. Look for: OFT press release: OFT warns debt collectors about unfair practices. www.oft.gov.uk/News/Press+releases/2002/PN+82-02+OFT+warns+debt+collectors+about+unfair+practices.htm - 21k - 14 Aug 2006 - Citizens Advice also have an article based on the OFT press release. Hope this helps Best of luck PeterG

Hi You could try contacting 'Citizens Advice'. What you really need is a solicitor or at least proper legal advice, but beware, you are dealing with an organisation that in my opinion is totally autocratic. A fly in a spider's web has more chance of escape than someone caught by the congestion charge. If you live outside London and are not familiar with the way the scheme operates, then avoid driving into the city. There are no toll booths, no clear warning signs, no information for innocent visiting strangers, just cameras. Not like speed cameras, painted yellow which are more often than not preceded by roadsigns with pictures of a camera or even large worded warning signs. We talk about unfair bank charges. The way Congestion charging operates is to my mind, nothing short of legalised extortion - unfair, unscrupulous and loathesome. You are given six different grounds for appeal. No other 'excuse' is accepted. Retrospective payment is not accepted but the longer it is before you ultimately pay, due to appeals etc, the more you are likely to have to pay. The hub-centre is based I think, in Coventry. Phoning them up, they don't want to know! It's up to you to know about the scheme and pay up before you use it. I already feel sorry for those people going to the Olympic Games who will get stung. Bet Seb Ccoe didn't include that in the promotion blurb and boy oh boy, will that add to the congestion. I bet they can't wait! My daughter's group had done a gig in Islington, the last but one of 25 over 30 nights supporting The Fall on their British Tour. They were shattered and rather than drive back to Manchester through the night, they booked into a hotel in King's Cross. Leaving at 7-30am next morning, they were caught on camera leaving!!!! London at 7-55am. They never saw the camera or anything else warning them. First they knew was 3 weeks later. Be careful that you are not throwing good money after bad. I really sympathise with what you have gone through but whilst I appreciate the problem of traffic congestion, in my opinion, their present charge scheme is unfair, makes a mockery of traditional British justice and should be scrapped. PeterG

Thanks for the comments Welly. However, for those who might wish to look at other options by which they might improve their financial standing simply by being aware of what they might be able to legally claim, simply input 'Bank charges' into Google Advanced Search, Exact phrase, press Enter and peruse the results! In particular, I recommend a look at Martin Lewis' brilliant website, 'www.moneysavingexpert.com' whereby you'll find not only a significant and superb article on the recovery of Bank charges courtesy of CAG!!!, but also a host of other ways by which you may well discover other benefits to which you are fully entitled but which you never knew existed. PeterG

Hi For those who ‘have believed but not actually seen’, I thought it might be of interest to CAG members to see extracts of exactly what the OFT said in their Press release 05/04/06. In particular, we should take note of the fact that although the threshold has been reduced to £12, it doesn’t mean that the Banks can automatically charge a flat fee of £12 (which is what they think they can - and are doing) So if you are apprehensive of taking the banks on, get some reassurance from what the OFT said, and if you are still not sure, then get a cuppa, put your feet up and read the House of Commons Select Committee on Treasury Second Report House of Commons - Treasury - Second Report > Paragraphs 48 - 51. and / or The complete OFT report ‘Calculating fair default charges in credit card contracts’ can be found on their website: [/size] [/color][/font] Current credit card default charges unfair OFT sets threshold for intervention 68/06 5 April 2006 These (penalty charges) are charges in standard credit card contracts for a failure to pay a minimum payment on the due date, exceeding a credit limit or a failure to honour a payment made. Where credit card default charges are set at more than £12, the OFT will presume that they are unfair, and is likely to challenge the charge unless there are limited, exceptional business factors in play. A default charge is not fair simply because it is below £12. A default charge should only be used to recover certain limited administrative costs. These may include postage and stationery costs and staff costs and also a proportionate share of the costs of maintaining premises and IT systems necessary to deal with defaults. A fair default charge should not exceed a reasonable estimate of certain limited administrative costs which the credit card issuer reasonably expects to incur as a result of default. Only a court can finally decide whether a charge is unfair or not. The OFT has today set out a statement of its view of the law. This has not generally been accepted by most of the eight credit card issuers. The OFT is not proposing that default fees should be equivalent to the threshold, and a court will certainly not consider that a default fee is fair just because it is below the threshold. Where there are exceptional business factors, so that the presumption that a default charge over £12 is unfair is not applicable, this does not necessarily mean that the current level of the default charge is consistent with the OFT's interpretation of the requirements of unfair contract terms legislation. But for example, where a card issuer has a policy of requiring customers to pay minimum monthly repayments by direct debits, such as that operated by Egg, and offers credit cards only to customers that satisfy a relatively high scoring requirement it may be able to set a fair default fee at a level above the threshold. So- Go for it. The Law is on your side! PeterG

Hi For what it's worth, this is the letter I sent, to which I have not received a reply. They've now received another letter, this time from HMCS!! Penalty and unfair charges - Request for refund Thank you for your letter dated 17 July 2006. I note your comments with regard to costs incurred but whilst accepting that you pass costs on only to affected accounts, I am still of the opinion that overall, your default charges are per se exorbitantly excessive and a means of also securing further profit over and above your actual net costs. They are therefore according to the OFT deemed to be unfair unlawful penalties. As I stated in my previous letter, the OFT further stress that any default charges should be based solely on those expenses actually incurred over and above your normal day-to-day running costs. I appreciate that some extra costs may indeed be incurred for administering my account for late/unpaid payments or overlimit situations but I am disappointed that you have not provided a more specific detailed explanation of a breakdown of those costs to substantiate and justify exactly how these ‘extra’ expenses, totalling £25 in respect of each and every default charge levied on my account, have been actually incurred. Consequently, although I welcome your offer to refund charges to the value of £250, (which as you state, represents half the amount applied to my account in the last 12 months), I would respectfully point out that the OFT ruling is retrospective, not just for one year but over the last six years. Therefore I am only prepared to accept this sum in partial settlement of £1150, which to date is the current gross total sum of all unfair charges levied on my account by the Halifax over the last six years, and which I believe from my interpretation of the recent OFT publication, I am lawfully now entitled to reclaim. I will hope to receive a positive response from you by Monday 31 July 2006. Otherwise, I will proceed forthwith and without further notice, to seek a fair and just settlement through the auspices of the Small Claims Court. Yours sincerely PeterG

In response to Kevin the broke from another thread. Four weeks ago, I had an e-mail from HBoS to say that my overdraft facility was insufficient to meet a substantial cheque which I had written for work done at my house and that I would incur a charge of £39.00 to a maximum of three times if the cheque was represented and there were still insufficient funds in the account. I had already spoken to the bank earlier that day to transfer money from a separate Halifax account into my BoS current account. I was told at that point that the cheque had not been received to date. The e-mail that afternoon came as a nasty surprise so I phoned up to be told that the cheque had hit my account at midnight and they had only just realised. In effect, it had bounced and although there were now sufficient funds available, I would still incur a charge of £39.00! I immediately said that if they proceeded with that, then I considered it was grossly unfair and unlawful. I considered it a penalty charge and as such, I would immediately bring it to the attention of the Office of Fair Trading and publicise this incident on the Consumer Action Group website! The response was immediate. ‘Well, I’ll reverse the charge so will that be alright then? I politely thanked him and rang off! As simple as that! PeterG

Kevin See my new thread - 'How I overcame the HBoS £39 Charge' PeterG