Question re 8% statutary interest on unfair charges

[PGH7447]

OK, been offered some charges back but they are refuting the 8% statutary interest siting section 69 of the county court act 1984, stating the interest only becomes payableonce a judgement has been made and any amount is at the discretion of the judge.

 

So they say I am not entitled to any interst, is this correct?

 

They also state that refusal to accept a reasonable offer of settlemnt purley based on the basis that I wish to recover statutary interest could be seen as a breach of the pre-action protocol making me potentially liable to cost sanctions

 

sounds like threat speak to me

[dx100uk]

you are intitiled to int at THEIR purchase rate

 

not 8% till FOS or file for court.

 

use:

[PGH7447]

Cheers DX, obvioulsy I jumped the gun, never mind their offer was derisable anyway

[BankFodder]

Who is it who is saying this please?

 

Secondly you could point out to them that 8% is the standard rate which has also been adopted by the FOS and there are no judgments there.

Thirdly if there is provable evidence of misselling then you could simply go ahead and sue them and claim restitutionary damages which would be very much higher than 8%. If you wanted you could tell them that this is what you were going to do if they don't pay you 8% straightaway. - However don't make this threat if you don't intend to go ahead with it.

 

Technically they are right but there are all sorts of reassons to call their bluff and to stick to your guns.

If you wanted to sue for restitution, would be very happy to support you very closely on this.

[PGH7447]

Quick one, by their purchase rate what exactly are you refering to?

[PGH7447]

Cheers Bankfodder, this is getting messy, I am running this on 3 fronts at the moment, and one party is monitoring my user ID re an upcoming court case for this very account

 

See the following thread

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?325003-IND-debt-collector-**-Court-Papers-Issued-**&highlight=ind

[ims21]

Quick one, by their purchase rate what exactly are you refering to?

 

Hi

 

Its the rate they were charging you on the card for purchases rather than cash advances. Quite often the two rates were different.

 

As BF says, you can go higher for a claim in restitution

 

ims

[BankFodder]

But you still haven't told us who the company is

[ims21]

Isn't this the Cap1 issue?

[PGH7447]

Its Capital one, they also state that the can only go back 6 years, although I did ask the DCA back in 2008 so I will be informing them that they can recalculate their offer

[ims21]

S32(1)© Limitations Act can be used to go back as far as you want. You'll need your statements to get the charges amounts from

 

ims

[PGH7447]

S32(1)© Limitations Act can be used to go back as far as you want. You'll need your statements to get the charges amounts from

 

ims

 

Got them, all charges were presented to capital one recently, and to Robinson way back when they first contacted me in 2008, and when I was under the impression that capital one stil owned the debt due to robinsonway not informing me by an NOA or any other means that they now owned the debt, and assumed that they would pass this to capital one then, but of course they did not, so I let sleeping dogs lie, until IND ltd started ccourt proceedings

[panther12]

I’m helping a friend claim back from CitiCard. For a quick settlement we’ve used the 8% stat int but informed them that should this matter proceed to trial it will be my intention to submit to the court that you repay back the contractual interest that the bank applied to these charges, to which will be significantly higher than the statutory rate that I am prepared to accept at this time to resolve the matter swiftly. Heard nothing back yet but will give them a few more days then issue LBA.