Proving the banks knew the charges were unlawful- thereby negating The Limitation Act

[coldcarpet]

most companies look for 80% of balance as a full+final and shows a amount o.s but also shows the company are not chasing for remainder, if its less than that its shows account settled with a p flag indicating amount o.s but a agreement was made between both parties and again remainder not been chased for hope this helps

[andrew1]

The way i see it:

 

The charges are unlawful, the bank has not told me or anyone else, therefore they have concealed the fact. It would be reasonable to presume that any qualifeid contract lawyer would understand the difference between a fair and lawfull charge, and a penalty charge.

 

Therefore the first question to ask the defendant if the opportunity arises is how many people work inthe legal dept, what their qualifications are/were and when the dept was set up.

 

Second if they argue that its not self evdient and actually you have to have some kind of special knowledge to work out that the charges are unlawful, then they have made a mistake and fooled their customers into paying said unlawful charges.

 

I am probably being totally naive here but it seems straigh forward to me.

 

I intend asking the judge for standard disclosure and will ask for specific matters to be targetted if thats the right phrase.

 

JMHO

 

Glenn

 

Glen, one thing that has been going through my mind of late is ' historian' I believe most banks have an historian of some kind and I seem to remember Natweststaffmember mentioning a historian on one of her threads.

 

Couldn't somebody somewhere dig up some old bank documents from a library or somewhere that would actually state when the charges were introduced. I bet your bottom dollar that somewhere in the archives there must be a reference to when these charges were introduced.

 

I am sure there are people out there who know this info and would be happy to impart some of it and tell where we might go looking. Where might we ask I wonder?

[Stopthethieves]

most companies look for 80% of balance as a full+final and shows a amount o.s but also shows the company are not chasing for remainder, if its less than that its shows account settled with a p flag indicating amount o.s but a agreement was made between both parties and again remainder not been chased for hope this helps

 

All my settlements have been for 40%....near TRUE value...considering charges and interest.

 

Do you know this for FACT or guessing? My credit file shows a balance of #0 on the account entries so are they abiding by their obligations or is it goodwill?

 

Regards

[meagain]

So, onto page 4, can we have a potted summary?

 

Part-payment as F&F not binding apparently?

Is there enough here to also demonstrate criminality?

 

Primarily for those people who might lack the ability or desire to trawl through reams of legal wranglings.

[Bigmac versus]

great thread

[Stopthethieves]

This thread contains the messages relevant to

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/32217-payment-made-respect-final-3.html

 

and

 

Proving the banks knew the charges were unlawful- thereby negating The Limitation Act

 

 

 

 

The first thread now has now had any messages relevant to it copied to a seperate thread in the general forum and so posts should be posted there.

 

If you are posting regarding the second thread then continue to post on this thread.

 

Regards

[bill-k]

Hi all, I haven't perused this entire thread, yet, but I will (have they sorted it out yet ?). I intend to go for current account charges back to about 1980 if I can, and hope to to do by splitting my claim up into small SCC-sized chunks.

Currently awaiting DPA SAR reply - does anyone know if that covers my ENTIRE history or just the past 6 years ?

Anybody help with splitting claim up - any special procedure?

FWIW - I have some correspondence and statements going back to 1990. If there is anything on these that I should be looking for that might be useful here, please let me know, and I'll post up what i find.

I have a current account statement which has printed on the reverse "Interest Rates and Charges, as at 1 March 1990"

Further down:-

"Overdrawn Accounts:- Administration costs for operating overdrafts are high and it is necessary to apply a quarterly charge of £12 for accounts which become overdrawn."

Further still:-

"If exceptionally we refuse to pay a debit transaction because a...Current account is overdrawn a charge of £10 will be made to contribute towards the administration cost of handling these transactions.

Similarly, if it is necessary to write to you in connection with an overdrawn account a charge of £8 will be made to contribute to the cost of reviewing your account before deciding whether to pay, or return, a transaction."

 

I'll see if I can find anything else, later, and let you know.

 

HTH

[Glenn UK]

Hi all, I haven't perused this entire thread, yet, but I will (have they sorted it out yet ?). I intend to go for current account charges back to about 1980 if I can, and hope to to do by splitting my claim up into small SCC-

sized chunks.

 

There are risks, the basic premise is that you are suing the bank for penalty charges imposed, the courts expect you to act in good faith, part of which is not suing them several times for what in effect is a single issue.

 

So if you do end up going to court then you could find that the defendant request subseqeunt claims are stuck out because its an abuse of process i think they call it. Theres a legal phrase for it which i cant remember.

 

So if you want to split claims its best to have a logical reason why, not having statements might be good for example. how this might work for you is difficult to say.

 

Currently awaiting Data Protection Act S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) reply - does anyone know if that covers my ENTIRE history or just the past 6 years ?

Anybody help with splitting claim up - any special procedure?

 

If you used the template letter it covers your entire banking history with an organisation.

 

FWIW - I have some correspondence and statements going back to 1990. If there is anything on these that I should be looking for that might be useful here, please let me know, and I'll post up what i find.

 

You should be looking for anything which indicates that the charges are standard, not a genuine pre estimate etc.

 

I have a current account statement which has printed on the reverse "Interest Rates and Charges, as at 1 March 1990"

Further down:-

"Overdrawn Accounts:- Administration costs for operating overdrafts are high and it is necessary to apply a quarterly charge of £12 for accounts which become overdrawn."

Further still:-

"If exceptionally we refuse to pay a debit transaction because a...Current account is overdrawn a charge of £10 will be made to contribute towards the administration cost of handling these transactions.

Similarly, if it is necessary to write to you in connection with an overdrawn account a charge of £8 will be made to contribute to the cost of reviewing your account before deciding whether to pay, or return, a transaction."

 

I'll see if I can find anything else, later, and let you know.

 

HTH

 

HTH

 

glenn

[bill-k]

Thanks Glenn - good stuff. I'll continue rummaging for more.

 

Yes, I used the template SAR letter, but can I legally expect the bank to actually HAVE the data further back than 6 years?

[hagenuk]

There is no time limit on the DPA, they should send you everything they have. If they only send you six years worth, ask them why?

[Glenn UK]

Banks are apparently obliged to hold the last six years worht of transactional data plus the current accounting year.

 

SO unless you contacted them on the 1st day of the new accouinting year they will have more.

 

However, information i received from various memebrs suggests that the Abbey have historical records going back to the early 1920s.

 

Of course just because they have the data doesnt mean they have to supply it if its not on a relvant filing system.

 

Im not thinking of fiche here, its more than likley that as records get older they may still be in paper forms depending on exactly what they are.

 

Anyway when they write back saying they dont have data older than a certain date, then i would write back and ask them to confrim what they did with it, when and why?

 

JMHO

 

GLenn

[bill-k]

I'll do that, then Glenn, thanks. I suppose that as long as I have done all I can to get them to supply me with the info, then the Court can assume that the bank has supplied all it can, or will. In that case, I assume that I then have a stronger case for estimating the charges, and claiming them.

 

I have a vague memory of going into my Post Office around 1920 and emptying my piggy bank out on the counter. Now that would be some claim if I could claim Contractual for a bounced 2/6d Postal Order !!

 

No, I'm kidding - I ain't that old.

[JonCris]

Only 6 years is what the banks would like us to believe they hold & its nonsense. Their records go back much further & they are holding onto everything of late for the purposes of Money Laundering reporting

[bill-k]

Yes, thanks JC.

 

I'll expect 6yrs details unless I'm lucky, then expect to grill them as regards the rest .After a full grilling, I'll at least expect to have a few written admissions which I can use to support my own estimates. If they have already told me they don't have the data, then at least they can't later refute my estimated claims with more precise figures.

 

...or can they?

[JonCris]

If they say they no longer have the data ask them to confirm (in writing) when it was destroyed & whether this was achieved either by incineration or security shredding.

 

If they have it (as they most certainly will) to frustate you they wiil have to lie outright. An act which may return to bite them at some later date

[Rbphot]

Sorry didn't relise the threads had split again, will post in the F&F payment thread.

[bill-k]

If they say they no longer have the data ask them to confirm (in writing) when it was destroyed & whether this was achieved either by incineration or security shredding.

 

If they have it (as they most certainly will) to frustate you they wiil have to lie outright. An act which may return to bite them at some later date

 

Yes, that was roughly my thinking, JC - thanks. It will put them on the spot.

[Rider]

Hi Bill

 

Yeah I've been through this 6 year's worth of data issue with my bank. I sent the SAR to my branch who sent it on to their central Network Support people. They replied that they had received my request for six years and would supply it. I got back to them and said - no not six years, all - they wrote back saying that six years was all they could provide. At that stage I wrote to them asking them where it said this in the Data Protection Act and also wrote to my branch manager informing her as to what was going on with an SAR that had originally been addressed to her branch. Within two days I had a letter back from her apologising for me being given incorrect info and promising all my records. They arrived a few days later 39 days after the date of my SAR (which I reminded them of in all my letters). Which was quite a coincidence...

[bill-k]

Rider, thanks for that. I've taken my meds now and they're kicking in, so I'm lucid for a while...

They've cashed the cheques (I've got 3 on the go), but I'm about 20 days in, so we'll see. I'm in 2 minds (uh-oh - he's off again !!) as to whether I would be better off getting them to confirm that they have no more records, then hitting them with a whopper amount of estimated charges which they could then not easily contest - or forcing them to supply full info as you did - in which case I may well find that the reality is less than the estimate would have been.

 

I guess I will have to decide what reply I want from them, then word my further enquiries accordingly. I think I should also try and find out about claiming estimated charges in earlier years. Do you know if there are any threads on this - or what chance I have of success with it ?