Hi Gizmo! Just wondering how you were getting on with A&L? When I claimed against them, I seem to remember them saying that their records only went back to 1995. Although I successfully claimed that far back, I wondered what response they'd given you. regards,

Hi again, Trusty! Had more time to think about your 'offer' from Capital One since my reply, this morning. 1. The £12 limit was suggested by the OFT as a MAXIMUM, and not neccessarily as a correct amount. Tell them that you will be happy to pay them, so long as they produce an audited costing before a County Court Judge, showing that £12 represents an accurate cost, to them, of your breach of their T & Cs. 2. If they wrote offering a' full and final settlement', which you then paid, you do not have ' an outstanding balance'. 3. They owe you the full amount of the charges which they imposed on you before they defaulted your account. PLUS interest charged on those charges (very complicated for you to work out, but they will be able to).If your claim proceeds to court, you will be able to claim the standard 8% interest in lieu of this (or, in my claim against MBNA, as well as!) As usual, Capital One are trying to fob you off. DON'T LET THEM!!!!! In my experience, they are more reluctant to go to Court than you are (however little appetite you may have for the experience). PM me if you need any more support. I'm busy at the moment, with Christmas imminent, but will try to monitor your thread for any progress. Cheers,

Hi Trusty! Sorry for the delay in replying. I hoped that someone wiser than me might beat me to it! It seems to me that if you have come to a full and final settlement with a DCA, then that is separate from your claim with Capital One. If they made a loss when they sold your debt on (which they would recover from the taxman, anyway!), then that was their commercial decision and no fault of yours. Accept their offer in PARTIAL settlement, but tell them that unless they repay ALL the penalty charges they took from you, you will pursue them through the Courts. My claim against MBNA may help http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/mbna/1895-mbna-credit-card.html Good luck!

Hi Blueskies! Won my claim against MBNA some time ago, but it's not in "successful claims" yet It's located here http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/mbna/1895-mbna-credit-card.html

Received written confirmation from the Court on Wednesday, that my claim has been allocated to the small claims track, with the Hearing to be on 29th March 2007. The Judge (as predicted by Gary) has ordered production of all documents no later than 14 days before the hearing. Using Gary's advice and the examples posted by Bankfodder and Mccuth, I've cobbled together the following: Dear Sir/Madam Philip Hindley v Lloyds TSB Bank PLC – claim number xxxxxxxx I am in receipt of the Court’s Notice of Allocation to the Small Claims Track (Hearing), dated 25th November 2006. I note that the hearing of the claim will not take place until 10:00 a.m. on the 29th March 2007, and, as a consequence, I would respectfully ask that the following submission be brought to the attention of the District Judge. Human rights I issued my claim against the Defendant Bank on the 19th July 2006. During the proceeding five months, I had made repeated requests for them to consider the merits of my claim against them. These requests were met with a flat refusal. Subsequently, neither the Bank, nor their Solicitors have made any attempt to negotiate a settlement with me. By delaying submitting a Defence until the last possible moment, and by ignoring deadlines for the submission of an Allocation Questionnaire, I respectfully submit, that the Defendant’s solicitors are treating me, and the Court with contempt. The further delay in hearing my claim interferes with my rights under the European Convention on Human Rights (“the Convention”) directly and as enacted in the Human Rights Act 1998. Art.6 1. of the Convention provides that “In the determination of his civil rights … everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time.”. It is submitted that a further delay of 4 months is not reasonable. The Overriding Objective It is submitted that the Overriding Objective requires that my case is allowed to proceed speedily so that a just settlement may be obtained by the parties to these cases. There is no complicated issue of law. The common law relating to contractual penalties is settled law since the late 1800s and has been reinforced as recently as the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 which itself is the result of a European directive. Lloyds TSB Bank PLC The Defendant in case xxxxxxx, Lloyds TSB Bank PLC (“Lloyds”), has already settled at least 29 similar cases. A list of these 29 cases, where Lloyds was the Defendant, is attached (Appendix 1). In most of these cases, Lloyds actually filed a defence to the case and returned their Allocation Questionnaire, obliging the Claimant to do the same. However, in every one of these cases, Lloyds settled the matter before any hearing. In 2004 the head of personal banking of Lloyds, Peter MacNamara, stated in a Radio 4 interview that Lloyds makes big profits from its default charges and that this money was being used to fund free banking for its customers. The Claimant can supply a copy of this recording if the Court wishes. Other cases It is true that there are currently many other cases, which are litigating against banks on the same issue of contractual penalties. However the court may be unaware that, so far, the vast majority has been settled before any hearing, with only a handful proceeding as far as a hearing. Attached to this letter is a sample list of 286 cases, complete with County Court reference numbers (Appendix 2), of which the Claimant is aware and which have been issued since January 2006. All of these cases have been settled before a full hearing. Many of these cases even received a default judgment against the Defendant banks in question, which has then been set-aside on application by that bank and which has further been settled by that bank rather than go to court. In two cases the Court has even ordered standard disclosure against Defendant banks but those banks have then gone on to settle rather than reveal the details of its contractual penalties. It is submitted that this case is most unlikely to go to a hearing and that it will be settled out of court. It is further submitted that the Defendants have no intention of going to a hearing. It is submitted that the pattern of cases settled so far suggests very strongly that the banks are merely using the justice system as a publicly funded means of intimidating their customers and dissuading them from pursuing their legitimate Right. Any further delay is supportive of the banks’ litigation strategy - which is to take the Claimant to the door of the court and then to settle the case. It is submitted that this is abusive of the justice system and of the public resource. The Status Quo The delay does not maintain the Status Quo. As submitted above, a delay favors the bank by preventing the Claimant’s pursuit of his legitimate remedy without placing any restriction upon the banks’ activities which the Claimant submits are unlawful. Test Case It is agreed that a case in which the issues were fully argued would be of enormous benefit. However, as has been explained above, the banks have so far settled every one of the 286 example cases in Appendix 2, and it is clear that it is their abusive litigation strategy, which is responsible for the problem of the large number of cases being started against them. Every one of the cases settled so far has presented an opportunity to settle the common issue of contractual penalties. Despite their massive resources and access to high level expertise the Defendants have declined to allow the issue to be decided in court. The OFT and their powers under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (“the UTCCR”) gives the power to the Office of Fair Trading (“the OFT”) to seek injunctions to prevent the use of unfair terms in consumer contracts. More than that, the UTCCR specifically prevents the private citizen from pursuing this remedy on his own behalf. The OFT conducted a 2 year investigation of the contractual charges regime. They received a great deal of confidential evidence from the banks. The OFT has already announced that it considers that the contractual penalty charge regimes of these financial institutions are unfair. It is not at all clear why the OFT has not now proceeded to seek injunctions in the face of the banks’ refusals to comply. This is particularly serious when the Regulations have prevented the citizen from doing so Additional orders I respectfully request that the Defendants be ordered to make standard disclosure, and that all documents needed for the hearing should be delivered to the Court and every other party, within twenty eight days. It is submitted these orders will assist greatly in bringing this case to a speedy and just conclusion. The matter is suitable for the Small Claims Track as it involves no issue of law – the law is well established. It only involves questions of fact – in particular the true costs of the banks default charges system. The OFT has already formed its conclusion about this. Standard disclosure will put the matter beyond doubt. As I rely upon the bank as my fiduciary it is clear that they have a duty to act in utmost good faith in relation to their conduct of their contract with me. I submit that they do not act in good faith in relation to me or their other customers in the matter of penalty charges. I remain, Yours sincerely, I've sent this today, together with a copy to our friends SCM, and whilst I don't expect a positive response from the Court, I hope it may provoke SCM to, at least, begin negotiations.

Hi Michael! I've got a court date of 29th March 2007, so in an attempt to speed things up, I'm going to write to the Court ( using a bastardised version of your letter asking for the stay removal ) requesting standard disclosure and exchange of documents within 28 days. Could you tell me where you found the lists of settled cases, as mentioned in the appendices you've attached to the letter. Thanks in anticipation, and I hope you are at last seeing some light at the end of the tunnel!

Thanks Gary, As always, excellent and practical advice! I'll make writing a letter to the Court, along the lines you've suggested, the main job for the weekend. cheers!

Thanks Freebird for the advice ('though you might have warned me how long your thread was!!) As you can see, I began chasing Lloyds for a refund back in February, and, having had success with MBNA, Capital One and Alliance & Leicester, I'm still waiting for them to stop playing games and respond honourably. I haven't received the notification from the Court yet re. the date of the hearing (other than verbally on the 'phone), so I'll probably wait to see what it says before taking any further action. So far, I have had no contact at all from SCM other than the defence they submitted to the Court, but will probably take your advice and write to them. I don't trust myself to remain dispassionate if I were to telephone them, but, after all, a letter is hardly likely to slow things down any more than has already been done, with the Court's unintentional (I hope!) cooperation. Thanks, once again for your interest and inspiration. I'll let you know how I get on.

Update! Preston County Court sent me an Allocation Questionaire to fill in, which I duly completed and returned by the deadline. I heard nothing until 17th October, when I received from the Court a ' General Form of Judgement or Order', which, on the Court's own initiative ordered that " unless the Defendant files an Allocation Questionnaire by 4pm on the 24th October 2006, the Defence is struck out". I telephoned the Court on the 25th October and was told that their AQ had still not been filed. Accordingly, I wrote to the Court asking for Lloyd's Defence to be struck out and Judgement made in my favour. On telephoning the Court, a week later, I was told that the AQ had arrived on the 30th October and that the file, together with my letter requesting judgement was awaiting a decision from a Judge Having 'phoned several times in the ensuing three weeks, I was eventually informed, today, that a date for a hearing had been set for 29th MARCH 2007!!! How SCM can get away with continually ignoring deadlines set by the Court, baffles and disappoints me. The whole process seems to reinforce their tactics of delay and frustration. Needless to say, I still have not heard a word from SCM, either in terms of an Allocation Questionnaire or any attempt at negotiation. The only consolation is that if things continue through to a hearing, they will cost Lloyds another 4 months worth of interest at 81p per day!

Hi Stefan! You may remember me, from your interest in my successful pursuit of MBNA, some time ago. I fully endorse all the advice offered by Allyxia. I must, however warn you that Lloyds/TSB would appear to be one of the most difficult banks to get a reimbursement from. I, myself, have been chasing them since March, with still no immediate end in sight. The lengths to which they, and their solicitors, will go to delay the inevitable and to deliberately misinform and abuse the legal system is beyond belief! All of this, of course, is intended to make claimants give up their legitimate pursuit of the return of their own money. Good luck Stefan, you know where to come for help and advice. Help all the other CAG claimants ensure that Lloyds don't get away with it!!!!

We took out a mortgage with Northern Rock in 1999, transferring it to another property when we moved in 2003. We remortgaged in 2004 to finance an extension, on a two year fixed deal, which is about to come to an end. Northern Rock have offered us a choice of other discounted deals to replace the existing one, and although they incur an arrangement fee, they all seem to offer good value( particularly since Thursday's announcement of increased interest rates. From the start, Northern Rock have consistently offered us mortgage deals as good as, and, in many cases, much better than other lenders, and I would have few qualms about recommending them. Since, in our part of the world, at least, they don't have many offices, all our communications have been over the 'phone, and sometimes their customer services people have been less than efficient, but that seems par for the course with any large organisation these days. All in all, in our experience, Northern Rock have been as good as any lender, and significantly better than some (particularly Alliance & Leicester).

In my experience with 1st credit, they very often purchase debts from the original creditor, at a fraction of their face value. If this is the situation with your debt, then obviously the above does not apply. As has already been observed, 1st Credit are a very shaky company, and I'm not sure how much success you will have in pursuing them You do, however, have legitimate reasons for suing RBS for repayment of unlawful penalty charges and removal of a negative credit reference, which they imposed. I would suggest using the library template letters to send RBS a Data Protection Act request (if you don't know the amount of penalty charges) and follow each step from thereon. I had a similar situation with MBNA and 1st Credit and, if it is of any use you can check out my thread athttp://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/mbna/1895-mbna-credit-card.html?highlight=Philip+Hindley Good Luck!!!

Hi Louise, It's unusual for Lloyds not to have acknowledged your claim. This would have given them an extra 14 days to file a defence (delay and obfuscation being their normal tactics, in the hope you will get fed up and go away!) Perhaps they're starting to slip up. Wait and see if your request for judgement is validated by the court, and, if it is, sit back and wait for your money. If it doesn't turn up within a reasonable time, ask for a warrant to be issued and SEND IN THE BAILIFFS!!!!!!!!!!! Good luck

Hi Aaron, Have you done the spreadsheet? Have you sent the Letter Before Action? If you have, then you have set them a clear deadline to make a refund in full, and could, quite legitimately begin your claim through the court. The advantage to this is that you will show them you are serious, plus you will be able to claim 8% interest on all your charges, from the date they were incurred. On the other hand, Cap 1 do seem anxious to settle before court, so a telephone call to the person who made the partial offer may speed things up. Be firm and polite, thank them for their offer, but explain that, unless they are prepared to refund all the charges, in full, plus interest levied on those charges, you are quite prepared to issue a claim through the court. Make sure they understand that you are not prepared to compromise. The law is on your side (for once!). Good luck

So........ The 21st August came, and went. On the morning of the 22nd, Lloyds having done nothing, I asked the court for a judgement against them. True to form, by the end of the day, Lloyds had filed their defence. No doubt we'll now waste more of everybody's time, and the resources of the court, in the hope that I'll be fobbed off! Their gall, childishness and the continued abuse of the legal system, beggars belief! The fact that Lloyds are prepared to pay out more money in solicitors' charges, court costs and interest, whilst further alienating already disillusioned customers, clearly demonstrates the disdain with which they regard the very people who provide their income. Their arrogance and coception of customer service stinks! But then, we've known that all along, haven't we?

Hi Rjh, Well, as predicted, good old Lloyds didn't let me down! They filed their defence at the very last minute, as they seem to do with everyone else. The pettyness and unprofessionalism of such a large organisation, clearly demonstrates the disdain with which they regard their customers. How they can justify abusing the legal system time after time beggars belief! At least, now, fellow CAG members are aware of Lloyd's tactics and won't allow themselves to be bullied or fobbed off into submission. Going away for a few days now, but I'll keep you posted via my own thread. cheers

Hi Rjh & jadest, If you check the notice of issue, which you should have received from the court, it will tell you when the claim was deemed to be served. This is usually five days after the date of issue, and is the date from which you should begin to count the 28 days (in the case of Lloyds acknowledging your claim). My claim was issued on 19th July, deemed to be served on 24th July, acknowledged on 25th July and the 28 days were up today! Accordingly, I've now asked for a judgement by default, although I wouldn't be surprized if Lloyds still manage to file some sort of defence to stall things further. I'll let you know.

Here's my acceptance letter to A&L: Ms J A McGuirk, Solicitor, Litigation Team Alliance and Leicester PLC Customer Services Centre Narborough, Leicester LE19 0AL 8th August 2006 Dear Ms McGuirk, MORTGAGE ACCOUNT NUMBER: xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Thank you for your letter of 4th August, together with your cheque for £1,630.16. I can confirm that I am happy to accept this sum in full and final settlement of my present claim, which, as you are no doubt aware, resulted in a judgement being made by the Court, in my favour. As it is clear that, without the imposition of unlawful and punitive penalty charges, the Alliance & Leicester is unable to operate on a commercial basis, nor do you seem able to follow the principles of the Office of Fair Trading or the Banking Code, I should point out that it gave me great pleasure to redeem my mortgage with your company, in full, in March 2003. It will therefore not be necessary for you to contact me to discuss the future operation of my account. Yours sincerely Philip Hindley cc. Northampton County Court, 21-27, St Katherine’s Street, Northampton, NN1 2LH

Update Time! Started my moneyclaim against Lloyds/TSB on19th July, which was deemed to be served on 24th July. Acknowledgement of service was filed by Sechiari Clark and Mitchell on 24th July, which gives them until 21st August to file a defence. Meanwhile, on 1st August, £30 was taken out of my account as an "overdraft excess charge". I telephoned the Indian call centre, but because I don't know my "secret 'phone banking number", and because I got one of the security questions wrong (Q. "What is your overdraft limit?" A. "I don't know, because it reduces every month, by arrangement."), they wouldn't speak to me. By chance, I was in town this afternoon, so called into my branch and spoke to a "customer advisor". He called up my details on his PC, but couldn't ascertain what the charge was for, only suggesting that, at some time, I must have exceeded my overdraft limit by more than £10. I asked him how this was possible since I didn't have a cheque book or debit card. He didn't know. I then asked him, regardless of what the charge was for, when did he intend having it refunded to my account? You would have thought I'd slapped him, so resounding was the silence! ( Customers behind me began to fidget.) Since he was obviously stuck for an answer, I pointed out that penalty charges were unlawful and that I was in the process of suing Lloyds/TSB for almost £5000! (Other customers now started to take an interest.) He said he would have to speak to his manager, and disappeared for a few minutes. On his return he said that, in his manager's words, "if the charge was due to an error by the bank, then it would be refunded, otherwise, it would stand." He then had the temerity to tell me that charges were part of the T&C's I'd agreed when I opened the account. I told him that the charge was indeed an error by the bank. They were mistaken in believing that they could steal money from customer's accounts with impunity! I said that any contract which made provision for unlawful penalty charges, was, in itself, unlawful. Finally, I asked him if his manager was a solicitor? "No," he said, "he's a bank manager." "That's why he doesn't know anything about the law then!" I told him. As I left, I overheard this young man say to the next customer, "Can you give me a few minutes until I calm down?" Shame........... I can feel another letter to David Just coming on.

By the way, I forgot to mention that the amount repaid included charges dating back to 1995. Also, the charges which, on my original statements had been shown as arrears charges, but which, following my DPA request, they had tried to pass off as "legal costs", were repaid as well. Perhaps this is further evidence that they don't bother to assess each case properly, and, having tried every avenue to fob you off, they just pay out because they know they will have to anyway!

Received a cheque for the full amount of my claim this morning, from J A McGuirk, Solicitor, Litigation Team. (they've gone all formal now that they've lost.) Of course, "this decision should not be regarded as an admission of liability on the part of the Company, as we consider the charges to be fair and reasonable." Presumably, they like giving money away that they don't need to! They go on to to threaten, "as it is clear you do not accept the terms and conditions for the operation of your account we will shortly be contacting you to discuss its future operation." Oh Horrors!!!!!!!!!! They're going to close my account!!!!!!!!! Wait a minute, I haven't had an account with A&L for more than three years, which, had they actually read any of my correspondence, they would know. Which just goes to prove that they inhabit a culture of threats and bullying, and have no interest in dealing with their customers as individuals. The knee-jerk reaction is always the same: "We are an omnipotent Bank! We are always right! Go away!" Once again thanks to everyone at CAG for the support. A donation will follow when the cheque clears. PS Shame about the Bailiffs!!

Hi Delly, Been very busy of late, but haven't forgotten the Forum, or your claim. I agree entirely with the above observation. It may be worth speaking to Gareth, but make sure that he is left in no doubt that you will pursue MBNA through the courts, unless they satisfy your claim in full. Be polite (I don't think he's a bad lad) but let him see you are convinced that right is on your side, and that you will not hesitate to use the power of the court to confirm it. If he does offer to repay all your charges, ask him about the interest MBNA charged, on the charges. Tell him that if they do not repay that interest, then you will sue them, and that you are confident that the judge will grant you, at least, the statutory 8%. Plus, it will cost them your £120 court fee. Good luck, and give Gareth my regards (perhaps not!!!)

Pam Green never did reply to my letter of 30th June. However, on 18th July, Jackie McGuirk, from A&L's Group Legal Services, filed an acknowledgement with the Court. This gave them until the 3rd August to file a defence. NOTHING HAPPENED! I telephoned the court on the following day to check if they'd received any last minute communication from A&L. As always, they were courteous and helpful and, having acertained that no defence had been received, advised me that there was nothing to prevent me requesting a judgement in my favour. This I did, asking for payment to be made immediately. The judgement was validated later that day. I would love to be there when the judgement is served on them, only wishing that it could be received, personally, by the aforementioned Ms Green. I assume this means that I've won. I'll let everyone know when I receive a cheque, or, alternatively, send the bailiffs in!!

Hi Trusty, I assume you have written confirmation of the "full and final settlement". If you have, you will possibly find, like me, that your credit record shows a 'partial settlement'. In my case my credit record was shot to pieces, anyway, so I wasn't unduly worried. I pursued Capital One for the penalty charges anyway, regardless of their short settlement, and they repaid me well before I made a court claim. I would suggest, if you don't know the amount of charges, serve them with a Data Protection Act request, and them pursue them up to and including a Letter Before Action. If you have had no success at that stage, then you must decide whether to risk losing the court fee if they were to defend the claim. I would expect them to repay you before a court appearance, but, if not, you could always withdraw your claim (and lose the court fee of course!) Only you can decide if the potential gains would outweigh the possible (though I think unlikely) losses. if you feel angry enough, as I did, then go for it! Good Luck!!

Dear Paul. Don't want to hijack anyone else's thread, but my situation is as follows: 1. I asked MBNA to refund all charges. 2. They refused. 3. I sent them a LBA. 4. They wrote saying they had made a payment to the DCA (to whom they had SOLD the debt for £500) of £900 off the outstanding balance. 5. I told them I was happy to accept the reduction as a partial payment, but would continue my action until all the charges were refunded. 6. I issued my claim via MCOL, but neglected to include the 8% statutory interest in the total (an extra £600ish). 7. MBNA sent me a cheque for all the charges. 8. I 'phoned them asking for the interest. They said they would calculate what they'd actually charged me as interest on the charges. 9. They sent me a second cheque for approx £1600. Sorry to be long-winded, but hope this answers your question. I won't know if MBNA actually paid anything to the DCA, or reduced the outstanding balance, until I serve the DCA with a Data Protection Act notice. If they have reduced the balance in addition to refunding their penalty charges and interest, then I consider myself to be fortunate, and might decide not to sue them under the DPA for sending all my statements to the wrong address! cheers