Lloyds TSB Bank account overdraft

[prelude2a]

hang on, somethings gone wrong with the upload....

[prelude2a]

This should work!

lloydsdefault.pdf

Edited July 27, 2009 by prelude2a
name left visible in uploaded file

[Undercover-Elsa]

Hi Prelude2a

Just had a look..it seems OK on dates, but what strikes me is the way they have worded what needs to be paid to correct the breach...

£xxx by xxdate PLUS INTEREST WHICH IS ACCRUEING DAILY.

So..presumably you are required to calculate your own interest up to the date of payment??? Dear me!

More expert comments on this are welcome as as far as I am aware they have to state a finite sum which must also be accurate and not incude penalty charges. Do you have penalty charges which make up part of this overdraft?

Elsax

[babybear39]

Surely they should give a figure for the date of remedy

[prelude2a]

Hi Elsa, BB

 

thanks for dropping by

 

theres around £500 of illegal charges in that amount (including £130 odd that they took to service my mastercard after I asked them not to take it because there was no money in the account. That was what started this whole fiasco off in the first place.)

 

I've also just been re-reading the DN and it talks about the terms of the "Overdraft Agreement" - I don't remember ever seeing or signing an overdraft agreement. I was a student and was given an interest free OD which kinda stayed with me.

 

I've tried CCAing them with no response, but apparently CCA's don't apply to overdrafts. Surely I am entiled to a copy of the alleged agreement I have allegedy broken though?

Edited July 20, 2009 by prelude2a
spelling!

[prelude2a]

I've got so many tabs and threads open now I'm getting really confused

 

I've just found this post by 42man and it is beautiful!

 

posting a link here for my reference so I don't lose it cos I wanna re-read it later

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/199543-quick-default-notice-question.html#post2168788

 

2. Practice Direction

Service of Documents - First and Second Class Mail.

 

With effect from 16 April 1985 the Practice Direction issued on 30 July 1968 is hereby revoked and the following is substituted therefore.

1). Under S7 of the Interpretation Act 1978 service by post is deemed to have been effected, unless the contrary has been proved, at the time when the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post.

2). To avoid uncertainty as to the date of service it will be taken (subject to proof to the contrary) that delivery in the ordinary course of post was effected:-

(a) in the case of first class mail, on the second working day after posting;

(b) in the case of second class mail, on the fourth working day after posting.

"Working days" are Monday to Friday, excluding any bank holiday.

3). Affidavits of service shall state whether the document was dispatched by first or second class mail. If this information is omitted it will be assumed that second class mail was used.

4). This direction is subject to the special provisions of RSC Order 10, rule 1(3) relating to the service of originating process.

 

8th March 1985

J R BICKFORD SMITH Senior Master

Queen's Bench Division

 

3. Further to point 2 above, CPR rules on service also state the required timescales to be given for serving of documents :-

 

Under CPR 6.26 First class post (or other service which provides for delivery on the next business day) is deemed to be “served” The second day after it was posted, left with, delivered to or collected by the relevant service provider provided that day is a business day.

 

4. The Default notice supplied by the Claimant is dated Friday 3rd August, to allow service in line with the statutory requirements mentioned in points 2 & 3 above, 2 working days were required to allow for 1st Class postage. Thus the Rectify date should be 14 calendar days from Wednesday 8th August, namely Wednesday 22nd August 2007, not the 14 calendar days from the date of the letter as stated in the Default notice which would have been 17th August.

 

The default I was sent for this account is dated 1st September 2008, so following the points made above that means the 14 calendar days should start two working days later - ie 4th September 2008 and end on Tuesday 23rd September, whilst they have stated the rectify date as 19th September.

 

Can someone check my calculations are right please?

 

If this is accurate then does that mean I only owe them the arrears of £436.22 (which is in dispute anyway because I'm claiming charges off them)? Do I have grounds to sue them for £1000 damages (I read someone did that somewhere?) because of the invalid DN? (if it's invalid) - this could be fun :grin:

[babybear39]

I've got so many tabs and threads open now I'm getting really confused

 

I've just found this post by 42man and it is beautiful!

 

posting a link here for my reference so I don't lose it cos I wanna re-read it later

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/199543-quick-default-notice-question.html#post2168788

 

 

 

The default I was sent for this account is dated 1st September 2008, so following the points made above that means the 14 calendar days should start two working days later - ie 4th September 2008 and end on Tuesday 23rd September, whilst they have stated the rectify date as 19th September.

 

Can someone check my calculations are right please?

 

If this is accurate then does that mean I only owe them the arrears of £436.22 (which is in dispute anyway because I'm claiming charges off them)? Do I have grounds to sue them for £1000 damages (I read someone did that somewhere?) because of the invalid DN? (if it's invalid) - this could be fun :grin:

 

Your calcs match mine so yep Way off and they're not going to like it

[2Grumpy]

My maths says 4th September + 14 calendar days = 18th September

 

Sorry!

[prelude2a]

Oh man! I was thinking it was 14 working days, not calendar days, thats what I get for trying to read this stuff all day long, tiredness => mistakes .

 

Still, Elsa's point on the 'interest accruing daily' still holds. Also the fact that the alleged arrears include illegal penalty charges has gotta be useful.

 

I hadn't disputed the charges at the time the DN was sent. Does that matter?

[2Grumpy]

The DN doesn't give a figure that lets you resolve this & the amount is wrong because of penalty charges.

 

No it doesn't matter that you hadn't disputed the charges - not disputing doesn't make them ok

[babybear39]

Oh man! I was thinking it was 14 working days, not calendar days, thats what I get for trying to read this stuff all day long, tiredness => mistakes .

 

Still, Elsa's point on the 'interest accruing daily' still holds. Also the fact that the alleged arrears include illegal penalty charges has gotta be useful.

 

I hadn't disputed the charges at the time the DN was sent. Does that matter?

 

Oops! I thought it was working days aswell...

[Undercover-Elsa]

I definitely think their biggest c*ckup is the ambiguity about what you need to pay to remedy the default. This should be "clear and unambiguous"

I'd be interested to see BRW's or SurfaceagentX20's views on this one.

Elsax

[2Grumpy]

Looking at the default notice, you should have received an enforcement notice prior to receiving the default notice. Did you get one?

[prelude2a]

Yes, I did get an enforcement notice, should I post it up?

[cymruambyth]

Hi you have left your name on your DN.

Have you sent an SAR? If so, check the date that the DN was posted, mine was a day after the letter.

The other thing, is you need to ask for proof of postage, not just their say that it was 1st class.

[prelude2a]

OK - quick update -

 

1st October: letter from iQor offering me a "substantial discount on your outstanding balance" - sent on 1st Oct - received on 8th Oct giving me 72hours to call them to discuss.

Action taken: Ignored.

 

12th October: letter from iQor "Doorstep Collection Notice" - 'As you have failed to come to a satifactory arrangement blah blah blah, no option but to arrange for a debt collector to visit your home blah blah call us immediately to avoid blah blah.'

Action taken: I don't respond to threats - Ignored.

 

29th October: letter from Geoffrey Parker Bourne solicitors - 'We have been contacted by iQor regarding monies owed to Lloyds TSB - if you don't make arrangements to pay within 10 days of this letter it is likely we will be instructed to take legal action. Contact iQor or else.

letter received 5th November

Action taken: I'm sick of these idiots and have a) more important things to deal with and b) more vital things to spend what little money I have on instead of recorded delivery to these clowns so Action - Ignored.

(I did pen a quick response on the back though with the intention of sending it when my next benefits payment came through - it is at the end of this post.)

 

10th November: letter from GPB - "LEGAL ACTION PENDING" - full payment must be recieved within 7 days or a county court claim may be issued without further warning.

They are still saying "may" - should I be worried?

 

Proposed action: Send the following letter.

 

Account in Dispute

ref: xxxxxxxxxx

 

Dear morons,

I have tried writing to you politely (by "you" I mean debt collection agencies in general, they are all the same to me) with no sensible response, so perhaps you will understand the tone of this letter.

I refer to the letter I recently received from gpb solicitors dated 29th October and recieved 5th November (also the one sent 10th November and received 16th Novemeber threatening court action if payment wasn't received within 7 days)

You guys really are unbelievable, I have had to put up with having my personal data referred by Lloyds to several debt collection agencies.

You have all employed the same low threatening tactics, for example - sending me a letter telling me I have to send you payment within 7 days or you will take me to court and then ensuring it arrives on my doorstep with just ONE day allowed for me to compose a response and get it back to you in the post.

How do you sleep at night? I am tired of being treated so badly so kindly BACK OFF.

As holders of a Consumer Credit Licence you are obliged to comply with the Office of Fair Trading Guidelines on Debt Collection. I would therefore be obliged if you would provide me with an explanation as to why you are attempting to collect on an alleged debt which was disputed with LloydsTSB prior to your first contact with me, and has yet to be resolved.

As per OFT guidelines Section 2.8k "not ceasing collection activity whilst investigating a reasonably queried or disputed debt."

 

Since this is considered an unfair practice and contrary to the OFT guidelines, you should consider this letter as a formal complaint, and provide me with a copy of your complaint resolution procedure.

I also require you to confirm that you will now comply with the OFT guidelines, and will not attempt any further collection activity whilst the dispute is unresolved.

 

After taking advice, I am of the opinion that your continued pursuit is in violation of the CPUTR 2008, Protection from harassment Act 1997 section 3 as well as breaching a number of the OFT Collection Guidelines.

 

Should you fail to provide me with the required undertaking within 7 days, I shall report your breach of the OFT guidelines to Trading Standards and the Financial Ombudsman Service.

 

Take notice that I will not discuss this matter on the telephone, and all further communication must be in writing. Any further telephone calls will be perceived as harassment, and dealt with accordingly.

 

I hope that you will enter into a sincere dialogue with me about this matter and I am writing this letter to you on the assumption that you would prefer to do this than merely respond with standard letters and leaflets.

 

I would appreciate your due diligence in this matter.

 

I look forward to hearing from you in writing.

 

Yours faithfully

me.

 

Any thoughts before I send this?

 

I'm planning on sending it to iQor since the last letter from gpb said all correspondence should be with iQor (but the most recent letter from gpb said I should contact gpb)

I don't have to spare cash to send a copy to both of the idiots.

 

[babybear39]

Can't manageny usually amount but I always heling others with problems helpful

[babybear39]

'Suse the dyslexia

[prelude2a]

well, I figured I really ought to reply today before the buggers sue me, so I took out the dear morons bit all the way up to where i tell them to Back Off, and instead I put in that I was bemused as to why this account had been passed to them as it is in dispute.

The rest of the letter from "As holders of a Consumer Credit Licence you are obliged...." remained the same.

Hopefully that should get them off my back.

[fiftypence]

Most if not all of these DCA's are full of hot air and lame threats, I personally wouldn't even bother wasting a stamp on them. They rarely take anyone to court and most of the time they do take anyone to court they lose as they don't have the necessary paperwork to follow it through (provided the consumer gens up on their rights of course )

 

If you really think they might sue you can always email it, it is just as valid and you can ask for a read receipt (depending on which email client you use) I only ever email DCA's now, never bother sending letters - they always respond via royal mail though, how quaint.

[prelude2a]

Hey

After an acknowledgement letter from iQor telling me they have put my account on hold while they investigate the dispute I have now received another letter from them referring to the recent completion of the OFT test case.

 

the two key paragraphs are as follows:

 

"As you are aware the OFT test case has recently been completed and we would be grateful if you would let us know how this affects your dispute and your current position"

 

"Please let us know if there are any specific transactions that are disputed or any questions that remain unanswered to enable us to review the matter further, however, if the dispute is resolved please let us have your repayment proposals or let us know how you intend to deal with this matter at your earliest convenience."

 

Apparently my account is on hold for 2 weeks from 23rd dec - so it's not now - to allow for my response.

 

ummmm.... I'm not entirely sure how to respond (if at all) to that. As far as I am concerned the penalty charges applied to the account are still ridiculous and I'm damned if I'm paying them back a penny.

 

Does anyone have any advice about how to proceed in light of the OFT test case result? I've looked over the site, but I must be missing something because I keep going round in circles and not really finding any information I can use.

 

Thanks

[cymruambyth]

Hi if you look on the bank charges forum, they are in the process of drawing up new template letters to argue the case on a different point.

[babybear39]

Have you SAR the OC?

[prelude2a]

The story continues....

 

Yes - I S.A.R'd the OC way way back and recieved half a tree in response.

 

I've now had a letter from Credit Security Ltd who tell me that I've diregarded numerous requests for settlement (no - really?) and that if they don't receive payment/repayment proposals by Friday 30th April that a claim "will be prepared for issue in "

 

Interestingly they wrote to me a fortnight or so ago offering a reduced payment scheme of about 65% of the balance. Unfortunately the balance is still in dispute and besides I don't happen to have that sort of money to just conjure up out of thin air to pay them.

 

I will be sending the standard "This account is in dispute and I'm surprised you are dealing with it - return to OC" type thing.

[prelude2a]

So... To resurrect this (ancient) thread....

Quick review:

 

- DCA sends letter regarding debt

- I ignore

- DCA sends increasingly threatening letters

- I ignore

- DCA transfers to solicitors

- I respond with a letter stating "account in dispute, please refer to original creditor, etc"

 

All goes quiet for a bit, then rinse and repeat with new DCA.

 

This looped a few times and eventually went quiet for a long time.

 

During this time I went abroad and have been effectively living abroad for a couple of years.

 

I'm visiting my folks at the moment back in UK and I receive a letter from "Restons Solicitors" about a debt between me and MBNA.

 

I write back (unsigned) - saying I know of no debt between me and MBNA - prove it.

 

They respond, apologise for the incorrect bank name and say actually its about my Lloyds Current account, their clients are Marlin Europe II.

 

They claim they scored a CCJ against me back in Jan 2013 (I wasn't in the country), and now want me to pay up or they may seek an attachment order to my earnings.

They have included one of those forms to fill out that tell them what I earn and when I last cleaned my teeth.

 

Thing is, this account is STILL in dispute.

 

However, does the alleged CCJ effectively render me scr**ed?

 

Any advice gratefully received on how to proceed!

 

Thanks