£8,600 of charges in 42 months

[thunderpuss2k]

Also, a big factor in this decision is that NatWest didn't bother telling us, in the entire period of having the account - until now, about a facility called 'account factoring'. For those not familiar with this, when you run a business and you have your invoices, Natwest will pay out most of the invoice before the payment from the customer has cleared, thus preventing any cashflow problems in your business banking. Had we been told about this when opening the account, there is no way we would have incurred even 5% of the charges we have in this period.

Interesting. Although factoring isn't just 'another simple service' that banks can provide (as you probably know it's a little more involved than that), I'd seriously be questioning Nat West's total lack of care for your relationship with them. I mean any business account manager worth his or her salt should be working with their clients to not only make life easier, but also to see which of the banks products would help them run their business.

 

Alternatively, they could have at least increased your overdraft limit to stop these charges

 

Had we known about 'account factoring', we would still have these massive contracts now but for Natwest's negligence. I think it's fairly obvious that these charges have been a massive reason in the huge loss of business for us, and therefore surely would not have a case against us if they decided to take it to court.

Depends. As far as I understand it, each factoring decision is taken on a case by case basis. You might not have got the best deal with a slower paying 'big client' than an SME client, but at least you would have had a good chunk of your money.

 

I'm no expert, but I think the legal grounds (vs moral and 'common sense' ones I was working by earlier in my post) for claiming against Nat West for negligence is a bit shakey. They don't have to, by law, have to tell you about products that'd save you money in bank charges. Cue the argument about the bank being a fiduciary and having assumed confidence in their integrity, but I'm erring on the side of caution here.

 

However.. bank charges - bring it on. I know you spoke to your business account manager, but have you sent anything in writing? If so, what stage is it at?

[thunderpuss2k]

I'm going to send the preliminary letter tomorrow morning requesting repayment of the £13,591.19 in full (I'll let them off with the 19p if they're nice about it). Should I send this to the business manager, or just the general NatWest address on here?

Judging by what you've said so far the business manager wouldn't be able to tell the difference between his arse and his elbow even if you pointed out that it's not normal for people to go to the loo from halfway down their arm.

 

So, I'd send it somewhere else.. sure there's plenty of suggestions as stickys in this forum Oh and also it'll get back to him that you're corresponding 'above his head' as he's as much use as a chocolate teapot. That's bound to annoy him too.

[thunderpuss2k]

From when they receive it. Did you send it recorded?

[thunderpuss2k]

OK, so that'll be 34th July

 

(moves the beads on the abacus)

 

3rd August. Of course if they write back and say they're not going to do anything about it, you can move straight to the LBA stage. And if they reply to that saying 'this is our final response on this matter, sod off', again the timeline moves. But.. only if you feel comfortable doing this. Otherwise wait til the 14 + 14 expires.

[thunderpuss2k]

Depends. Five days to receive the claim, then they'll probably acknowledge it giving them 28 days to defend. Once the defence goes in it can be a couple of months before a trial, or might be quicker. All depends on how long they chose to drag it out for. On a positive note, interest at 8% a year accrues from the date of each charge to the date of the claim, then at a daily rate of the equivalent of 8% but for a day, if that makes sense. So therefore it's in the banks interest to settle as quick as possible as the interest on a claim of your size will certainly clock up quick.

[thunderpuss2k]

Looks like a standard response to me, ableit a rather patronising one. I'd keep going with your timetable, and as soon as the 14 days are up move to the next stage - ie Moneyclaim.

 

Whether the OFT's investigation related to business banking or not, and whether it was credit cards or not, the same fact still remains that you have asked them to explain their costs, in order to show that these aren't penalties. They haven't, so at this stage it is a penalty - and therefore irrecoverable under law. You know the rest of the details I'm sure so I won't bore you with them

 

Keep going.. they're assuming your threat of legal action was just that - a threat. They'll take it a whole lot more seriously when a claim lands on their desk.

 

Good luck, keep us posted!

[thunderpuss2k]

Can someone please give me a quick breakdown of what costs I will incur to initiate my claim? Need to get it sorted out ready to proceed at the 14 day deadline.

 

£250 for the actual claim, if it gets to the stage where you need to submit an allocation questionnaire that'll cost another £100.

 

Then, if it actually gets to trial (highly unlikely), and assuming it gets allocated to the fast track, there'll be a £275 trial fee.

 

Should I respond to NatWest's letter and get them to confirm that they will not be repaying the money before I commence legal action?

 

Wouldn't bother. You sent the 14 day letter, they wrote back and said sod off, and said they were expecting your claim - so you've covered your actions as far as you can.

[thunderpuss2k]

I'd say tops of a month, might be sooner. From the date of service they've got 14 days to either file a defence or an acknowledgement of service. The AOS gives them an additional 14 days to file a defence. If a defence is filed, both sides will be asked to fill out allocation questionnaires, that's where the £100 comes in.

 

After that, the District Judge considers the allocation questionnaires, and sometimes there's an allocation hearing. Otherwise, it gets allocated to the relevent track (in your case it should be fast track as it's under £15k and over the small claims limit), then it'll start moving towards trial.

 

Of course each stage that's reached means more legal costs for the other side - as you've not got solicitors bills to foot that means your costs won't be clocking up. However the banks costs will - and at some point they'll take a decision on settling out of court, as their mounting costs would have exceeded your original claim.

[thunderpuss2k]

Right then. Sorry for the delay, been a bit sidetracked with a few other things.

 

The claimant needs to be the Limited Company name. If it's a sole trader, you'd be Mr Ant84 t/a XY & Z - if you get my drift. Partnerships, god knows as I've never been involved in one (and would rather not as they're always prone to arguments, but that's just my 10p worth!)

 

Anyway.. try this for size. God knows whether it's gonna fit, but sure you can jiggle it.

 

The claimant has a bank account with XYZ bank ([sORT CODE][ACCOUNT NUMBER]) conducted on their standard terms and conditions. The claimant claiming return of money taken by the defendant in way of charges between [sTART DATE] and [END DATE] totalling [£XXXX.XX]. These charges are a disproportionate penalty and therefore unenforcable as they are contrary to common law. Further, as a disproportionate penalty they are invalid under the Unfair (Contracts) Terms Act 1977 s4. In the event the charges are not a

penalty then they are unreasonable within the meaning of the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 s15. I have repeatedly asked the bank to justify their charges but they have declined to do so. I also claim interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year from [sTART DATE] to [END DATE] of [£INTEREST AMOUNT] and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgement or earlier payment at a daily rate of [£DAILY RATE]

 

I've taken out the bit about the 'Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999' as you're not a consumer, you're a company.

 

Any thoughts or feedback appreciated.. I've set the ball rolling, it's up to everyone else to add to it now

[thunderpuss2k]

Hmm ok, that's when it starts getting tricky. Is it a limited liability partnership (LLP)?

 

Daily interest, easy enough. Total charges (not including interest or court fees etc) multipled by 0.00022.

[thunderpuss2k]

To be honest I've never heard of a public liability partnership. Google doesn't throw up much either (two results, both not much help).

 

What does your company cheque book say, in terms of account name? Don't need the full details, just blank the relevent bits if you're posting here - or PM me.

[thunderpuss2k]

Right, here we go. If the claimant or defendent is a partnership (ie more than one individual carrying on business together), it would be the name of the partnership or individual names of partners. So to clarify, you can put down either the trading name or the name of some or all of the individual partners.

 

That's what it says in this book anyway..

[thunderpuss2k]

All depends really. If you're a sole trader then you're technically still an individual, however it could be argued that your business account agreement is with the 'business', even though it's just you trading as the business. Of course if you're claiming on behalf of a limited company it's a whole separate issue, as a limited company is in effect a legal 'person' in it's own right.

 

Best thing you can do is start your own thread (if you haven't already), and put as much info on there as possible. Once you've done that, give me a shout and I'll take a look