Hi I have just received a letter with cheque attached from Santander stating that 'while reviewing my closed business account they have noticed they applied the wrong interest to the unauthorised overdraft on a business account between 2009 to 2014.' Now this account was closed after being paid in full in 2014, but what they have refunded is the difference between the wrong interest and the correct interest and then have applied interest to that as accrued to current date. While this is OK, my question is would I be entitled to compensation on this error as well as any charges on the account that were applied. The additional interest that I had to pay off at the time certainly delayed the settlement due to the extra interest added by them and this was at a time of hardship . I did not have use of that money for use by my family as it was paid to Santander, and it prolonged the time that it was reflected on my credit report. My thoughts are to request copy statements from them for the time period noted and details of charges applied so that I can check what they are referring to, details of how they have calculated the refund, have they included the amount of interest applied to the incorrect interest, along with a request for compensation for the hardship stress and lack of use incurred by their error. Any thoughts and additional suggestions on this would be appreciated along with what level of compensation would be reasonable to expect/ request. Thanks in advance for your thoughts and comments

Ok, I think your right about the letter. However I will be adding a paragraph about my administration and associated cost charges in responding to them. They have now incurrred a cost of just under £60.00 for me reading and responding to their letter. Will give them 14 days to send a cheque before further action is taken. Have also told them that every further communication and response will incur a similar if not higher charge. Very happy to go down the small claims court route to recover these costs, so up to them. They obviously seem to be getting very concerned after the FSA have asked them how they are planning to repay their excessive charges. My suggestion is that they sack the majority of the **** in senior positions within their organisation, that should easily cover it. However moral values feature very low within these type of organisations so not likely to have much progress there!

Hi all, I have just received one of these letters demanding payment, however I very clearly remember the judge at Leeds Mercantile Court in August 2007, telling DG solicitors that he would stay claims until the outcome of the OFT case, however no further action or attempt to recover amounts would be made by HSBC - otherwise he would grant the lifting of the stay and hear the claims. How do I now go about having the stay lifted? In my view I will call the court on Monday to get the name of the Judge who presided at the August 2007 hearing and send a letter to the court with a copy of the letter from HSBC(MCS) asking for the stay to be lifted as per the instruction from the judge as HSBC have ignored and acted in contempt of his instructions. Any other thoughts on how to approach this with the court to have the stay lifted. Anyone else going down the same route. Cheers JJF

Just to update everyone on this and thankyou to all those who responded and your advice. After 5 letters from the parasites at Wescot, and our responses to their lies and deceptions around statute barred timeframes and that the amount was outstanding in the first place, we have now received a letter saying that their client (HBOS) has withdrawn the account and that no further action will be taken by Wescot. I have just taken great delight in calling Wescot (withheld my number)to tell them that whilst they may not be taking any further action, we are. I pointed out that they were made fully aware in each of our letters to them of the statute barred situation, and that the amount outstanding was disputed as existing anyway. Yet they still continued to put pressure on and attempted to deceive us into paying the amount they were demanding. I have now told them that I am reporting them and sending copies of all corresspondence from them and us to the OFT and FSA complaining of their tactics, and that it was tantamount to attempting to obtain money by deception, or attempted fraud. Strange they went rather quiet. Another thing if anyone else is having problems with Wescot, rather than write to them using their PO Box address in Hull, use thier head office address in Ayrshire, it makes them have to sign for recorded delivery items. Full address is:- Wescot Credit Services Ltd Kyleshill House 1 Glencairn Street Saltcoats Ayrshire. KA21 5JT Any thoughts on whether we could also put in an invoice to Wescot for the time we have spent in dealing with them, administration costs, postage etc. Once again thanks for the advice and support.

Thanks a lot Rory & Rooster for the confirmation of my thoughts and the additional detail to include in a letter, much appreciated. Will let you know what response we get. Think we will also send copies as you say to OFT etc, after all anything that can be done to make Westcot's life a misery needs to be done. JJF:)

Can someone just confirm my thoughts on a situation that my wife is having with Westcot please. Thought I would try to give as much detail as possible so appologies for length of this. Situation is that out of the blue 2 weeks ago she received a letter from them saying that she owed money on an old current account with HBOS. The last time this account was used was back in 2000/2001, at the time she had moved bank accounts, had shifted direct debits and as far as she was concerned closed the account. No further statements were received or have been received from HBOS. In a letter(recorded delivery) to Westcot this was advised and that she disputed their claim for money in the first place, then pointed out that in any case this would now be statute barred as over 6 years since account used, and no corresspondence from her or from HBOS. In fact the name on the Westcot letters have noted my wife's pre-married name, as we were married in June 2002 this would prove that they have info over 6 years old. Also as we now live in Scotland the statute barred timeframe is 5 years. Received letter back saying all on hold while they look into it but this may take a few weeks. Letter received today advising that the account had been closed in July 2008 due to arrears, so therefore was not covered by statute barred!? Since last using this account we have moved 3 times but have lived at addresses for 3years, 1 year, and most recently 3years, so they have had plenty of time to trace us through electerol role etc prior to 2 weeks ago. My understanding is that statute barred applies if no contact/corresspondence occurs within 6 years in England & 5 years in Scotland, however Westcot appear to be saying that it is from when the account is closed. Personally I believe they are wrong, is there any wording that we can quote in a letter that specifically details this. In the first letter we detailed this with the following paragraphs:- 'In addition, I would point out that under the Limitation Act 1980 Section 5 “an action founded on simple contract shall not be brought after the expiration of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued.” In Scotland this is 5 years. I would also point out that the OFT say under their Debt Collection Guidance on statute barred debt that “it is unfair to pursue the debt if the debtor has heard nothing from the creditor during the relevant limitation period”. We will be getting her credit report to check if any adverse entries have been made by either HBOS or Westcot against her name, God help them if they have, compensation demands will be huge. I will then be adding that any further corresspondence will be treated as harrassment, reported to OFT and will also enclose our invoice for costs due to postage, our hourly rate cost, inconvenience etc etc. Look forward to any thoughts, information and advice on this. thanks JJF

Yes, I received one of these annoying letters from HSBC, I am just wondering if this goes against the judge's instructions that cases will be stayed until the conclusion of the test case, on the provision that the banks are not allowed to communicate with claimants. Not sure if the communication had to be specific to amounts being claimed or just communication in general. After all this is the first communication I have had from HSBC or any of their associated companies such as DG Solicitors or Metropolitan Collection Services in 10 months. Does this letter from HSBC constitute unwarrented and unnecessary communication and is it worth asking the judge to lift the stay? What ever happens, I am making a note to write a similar annoying, gloating and unpleasent letter to HSBC when they have to repay the huge amounts of money that they owe us.

Funnily enough I picked up on this yesterday and emailed OFT to point out that RBS barrister was incorrect and misleading on this and used similar explanation to yours. Awaiting to hear back from them. The banks even now are attempting to deceive and manipulate the situation and I really do hope that OFT continue to come back hard on them. This highlights exactly how banks and the banking industry works, why not just rely on the facts to put their case rather than mislead.

Whats the current remuneration for this role at the FSA, maybe we should apply!!!!!. I would certainly be happy staying there for more than 2 years if the salary is 6 figure. Think of all the fun to be had in not cooperating with banks, not being swayed and generally making their lives a misery. Some bias in favour of the consumer is long overdue within these organisations. Banks have had it their own way far, far to long.

Thats a hell of a gesture of goodwill from an industry only known to act in their own best interests and stuff everyone else. If any representative in a bank ever asks if they can help me I am instantly concerned that they believe they can screw some money out of me for their own benefit. Once had a cashier advising me that as I had a certain level of funds in my account, just sold house, that they would like to help me invest it. Yeah right, into something that I cannot access or have to pay a charge to use. Told him it was none of his or the banks business.

Have just noted that reportedly FSA chairman Sir Callum McCarthy has been forced out. In the City, there have been rumours that the likely successor would be James Crosby, a former chief executive of HBOS, the big bank – who is currently deputy chairman of the FSA. What hope is there when they employ individuals who have a big interest in the financial institution such as HBOS, (yes he may be former ceo but I bet he still has a substantial share portfolio) the very bank that so many people are attempting to claim back unlawful charges from. How many other 'insiders' do banks have in the FSA and other organisations that purport to represent the consumer, is it any wonder these organisations are not working more effectively for us. If they are going to replace FSA employees then from the chairman downwards they should be made to declare publicly any interest that they have in the banking industry. An informed view and decision about their suitablility and impartiality in that role can then be made.

Who is going to ask the question to the banks of, "if you so firmly believe that all your charges are lawful, fair, above board, reasonable etc, then why on earth have you paid out so much in returned charges prior to this case?" and then demand an actual answer to the specific question. The fact that they have settled out of court on so many claims has to have made some form of prescedent that the banks have voluntarily agreed to as a result of the return of the charges, thereby indicating that they believe they are on very thin ice when it comes to justifying their charges, again something to date that they refuse to openly do. The test case is fine and I hope the OFT really do seek answers to questions such as this, as well as many more. We will wait to see!!

Makes you wonder what else the OFT do not realise. Bet the banks knew, how many representatives are they getting in there for this?

Many thanks, as you say its worth the ask and see what happens. Let you know what if anything is achieved.

Hi Chris and thanks for response. Default removal was included in my POC as a result of the bank showing default after accounts were put in dispute. Prior to this no entry by them had been made with CRA's, not even that I had an account with them. I have printouts of my credit file proving this. The issue that I have is that if the OFT case drags on then it will take longer to remove the default as part of the claim, so was looking more at my options to remove the default without involving courts. Possibly through letters to bank noting the evidence that I have proving that they made the entry to the CRA's when the accounts were in dispute which is contrary to the banking code that they say they abide by.