Claiming From 1991 To 2000 The Fight Begins

[livelylad]

bong - I think one further letter should suffice

 

 

Lively - have a look at Jannercobblers claim Abbey - he has asked fro unauthorised, or in the alternative authorised rate, or again in the alternative s.69 at 8%...... just keeps the options open.

 

Hi the prob is that with the unauth rate my claim is massive the first charge of £15 in 1993 @ rbs rate of 29.84% = int of £502!!! i have about 50 charges. I am speaking to mOds because i am challenging the limitation act and claiming compounded contractual. i am rather worried.

[livelylad]

the limitations act is the bit to concentrate on for the moment, the contractual interest element is a second issue in realtion to that, in my opinion.

 

You're looking at fast track which ever way you do the interest so you need to get the limitations act bit right.

 

Did you claim contractual in your last claim ?

 

Hi Karn i did not claim contractual interest last time although i wish i had now!! When i started my first claim it wasnt really an issue on the site then.

 

My thoughts at this moment are that if the limitations act issue is just and would be the basis for a successful claim then surelyto quote Bankfodder

 

there is an implied term in the bank contract based on the principle of "mutuality" or "reciprocity" -- in other words what is sauce for the goose is also sauce for the gander.

 

If this is correct then I think it is entirely reasonable to argue that where penalties have been unlawfully taken that this is the equivalent of borrowing by the bank and therefore the sum borrowed should attract a contractual rate of interest e.g. 16% - or if one wanted to say that the levying of penalties was unauthorised -- which of course it is -- then one could say that the contractual rate of interest was the unauthorised borrowing rate.

 

 

This is the basis for my argument. I do understand that the stumbling block is the amount of interest which this claim would draw, taking it out of the small claims track. Personally i would feel agreeved to allow the bank to get away with not paying contractual interest for the simple reason that they would and have done it to us.

[BaldyBaldwin]

when i first posted on this site in june, i expressed regret that i wuold not be able to claim against nat west, as between 1986-1993 they made my life a misery. so, to say i am watching you with interest is something of an understatement.

best of luck

regards kevluff

[livelylad]

thanks

[livelylad]

Ok using the Royal Bank Of Scotlands own rate for unauthorised Borrowing, I calculate they owe me £21265.07. Obviously this includes the actual charges they are £1290.

[BaldyBaldwin]

the problem i have is getting the statements for that period, i suppose a straight forward DPA request will get ball rolling, i think i will send a couple off to nat west and first diect.

[Guest bong]

livelylad I don't know if this is useful or relevant to your claim but here is the link anyway http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/mercantile-court-cases-stays/36034-case-management-conference-13th.html#post299960

[livelylad]

livelylad I don't know if this is useful or relevant to your claim but here is the link anyway http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/mercantile-court-cases-stays/36034-case-management-conference-13th.html#post299960

 

 

Thanks yes i have read it. I am grateful for any advice particulary regarding the Limitation Act

[livelylad]

the problem i have is getting the statements for that period, i suppose a straight forward Data Protection Act request will get ball rolling, i think i will send a couple off to nat west and first diect.

 

Hi I just asked my brach to go back asfar as possible its normally 10 years.

[darling]

Hi Lively I'm just watching and waiting and wishing you all the best with this claim hun.

[livelylad]

Hi Lively I'm just watching and waiting and wishing you all the best with this claim hun.

 

Thanks very much i am quite nervous but i have a few tricks up my sleeve.

[livelylad]

Ok i have decided to send this letter.

 

 

 

 

Dear Mr Mclean,

Further to our conversation on Thursday 12th October I have, as stated, submitted my request for repayment of charges taken from my account.

I have requested on numerous occasions a refund of charges from my current account these are unpaid DD/CHQ/SO also Referral charges and card misuse. I am sure you are aware the bank customers are challenging their respective banks regarding the level of these charges, to date all requests have been paid out and no case has reached a court stage. I am a member of the Consumer Action Group an we firmly believe that these charges are unlawful at Common Law, Statute and recent Consumer regulations.

I request repayment of charges dating from 25th March 1993 to 04th May 2000. I have requested numerous occasions a complete breakdown of how you arrive at your figures for charges, I have been told that you will under no circumstances provide this information. I have enclosed a copy of a letter from RBOS Bolton Central branch stating that you will not provide this information. This in my opinion is an attempt to “deliberately conceal” the true cost of the said charges.

I am of the opinion that there is an implied term in the bank contract based on the principle of "mutuality" or "reciprocity" -- in other words what is sauce for the goose is also sauce for the gander.

I think it is entirely reasonable to argue that where penalties have been unlawfully taken that this is the equivalent of borrowing by the bank and therefore the sum borrowed should attract a contractual rate of interest , I believe the levying of the penalties was unauthorised therefore I believe that the contractual rate of interest is the unauthorised borrowing rate.

As you are aware I have a contract with RBOS in relation to my current account. I believe that I am bound by the terns and conditions as are RBOS. To that effect as I firmly believe that RBOS has taken unlawful charges (monies) from my account this constitutes unauthorised borrowing from my account. The standard rate of unauthorised borrowing set by RBOS is 29.84% I shall therefore charge this rate on my claim. I have enclosed a spreadsheet detail each charge.

A case management hearing last week by Judge Haverlock-Allan QC allowed a similar case regarding contractual interest to proceed to a future hearing .Also numerous bank shave already paid claims using contractual interest.

The amount of settlement I require to bring this matter to a satisfactory conclusion is £1290.00 in actual charges and £19,975.07 in interest at the said rate. The total amount payable is £21,265.07.

I fully believe that the points and principles of this claim are just and valid. I have just settled a previous claim against RBOS after stalling tactics by your solicitors Cobbetts this in the hope that I would “lose heart” and abandon my claim this seems to be the common tactic employed. Please be aware that I fully intend to pursue this claim to completion. I am willing to negotiate to bring this matter to a swift and satisfactory conclusion for both parties.

I will give you 14 days to reply to me accepting, unconditionally, my request in principle and letting me know a date by which I will receive payment. If you do not respond, or you do not respond positively, within this time period, I shall submit a claim through the courts to recover the amount due . I believe that these targets are more than sufficient for a large company such as yours with dedicated staff and departments.

 

 

Any thoughts on the structure before i post tomorrow.

 

Regards Michael;)

[Thailand]

Hi LL,

 

What you are undertaking, IMHO, is enormous - every credit to you, I wouldn't have the kahuna's to do it! Thats why that letter you are preparing to send is soooo important. If I sound like an ass, I'm sorry - thats not my intention, but it could do with a bit of tweaking. I'm no genius by any stretch of the imagination - but would help a bit with the grammar etc if you liked??

 

I really hope this post hasn't offended you,

 

Thailand.

[livelylad]

Hi LL,

 

What you are undertaking, IMHO, is enormous - every credit to you, I wouldn't have the kahuna's to do it! Thats why that letter you are preparing to send is soooo important. If I sound like an ass, I'm sorry - thats not my intention, but it could do with a bit of tweaking. I'm no genius by any stretch of the imagination - but would help a bit with the grammar etc if you liked??

 

I really hope this post hasn't offended you,

 

Thailand.

 

 

Please do help thats why i posted it, i dont speak proper England like wot offer people does!

 

I would gladly recieve any help with the construction of the letter. I am hoping to get it away as soon as possible. Regards Michael

[livelylad]

ok new and improved letter (thanks Mumofthreeboys) just going to add 7 days to reply then post tomorrow.

 

Further to our conversation on Thursday 12th October I have, as stated, submitted my request for repayment of charges taken from my account.

 

I have, on numerous occasions, requested a refund of charges from my current account. These are for unpaid DD/CHQ/SO and also Referral charges and card

misuse. I am sure you are aware that customers are challenging their respective banks regarding the level of these charges, to date all requests have been paid out and no case has reached a court stage. I am a member of the Consumer Action Group and these charges are unlawful at Common Law, Statute and recent Consumer regulations.

 

I request repayment of charges dating from 25th March 1993 to 4th May 2000. I have requested on numerous occasions a complete breakdown of how you arrive at your figures for these charges. I have been told that you will, under no circumstances, provide this information and have enclosed a copy of a letter from RBOS Bolton Central branch as clarification of this. This, in my opinion, is a deliberate attempt to “conceal” the true cost of the said charges.

 

There is an implied term in the bank contract based on the principle of "mutuality" or "reciprocity" - in other words what is sauce for the goose is also sauce for the gander. I think it is entirely reasonable to argue that where penalties have been unlawfully taken that this is the equivalent of borrowing by the bank and, therefore, the sum borrowed should attract a contractual rate of interest. The levying of the penalties was unauthorised, ergo, the contractual rate of interest is the unauthorised borrowing rate.

 

As you should be aware, I have a contract with RBOS in relation to my current account. I believe that I am bound by the terms and conditions, as indeed are RBOS. To that effect I firmly believe that RBOS has taken unlawful charges (monies) from my account

and this constitutes unauthorised borrowing from my account. The standard rate of unauthorised borrowing set by RBOS is 29.84%. I shall, therefore, charge this rate on my claim. I have enclosed a spreadsheet to detail each charge for your information.

 

A case management hearing last week by Judge Haverlock-Allan QC allowed a similar case regarding contractual interest to proceed to a future hearing. As you are no doubt also aware, numerous banks have already paid claims including contractual interest.

 

The amount of the settlement I require to bring this matter to a satisfactory conclusion is £1290.00 in actual charges and £19,975.07 in interest at the said rate. The total amount payable is £21,265.07.

 

I am contactable at the above address, I am also available by phone should you so wish. My number is

[Thailand]

Hi LL,

 

Sorry I was too busy to get online until now, that letter sounds great - and far better than anything I could have come up with!

 

Keep us updated

[livelylad]

Letter on its way to Mr Mclean.

[Guest bong]

Ok using the Royal Bank Of Scotlands own rate for unauthorised Borrowing, I calculate they owe me £21265.07. Obviously this includes the actual charges they are £1290.

 

Livelylad I don't mean to scare you or anything but your figures seem really high compared with mine. My claim goes back to July 1993, with charges of £2800 and the compound contractual interest only comes to £2,652. Admittedly I am only using a rate of 15.9% but even if I put in 30% it only goes marginally higher - nowhere near your £20k. I've used Mindzai's spreadsheet. I'm not asking this because I want help with my claim, just wondered if you are confident with your figures and where the difference lies since we're claiming back roughly the same period.

[Guest bong]

sorry - it's ok I've just realised that your charges are all pre 2000 whereas mine are spread over 1993 - 2006 so the difference is that yours are all older than mine. sorry!!!

[TaylorMade]

Livelylad - just spotted your thread, and more power to your elbow. I hope that once the recipient of your letter picks themselves back up off the floor they will come to a quick resolution for you

 

The worst of the damage done to me by HSBC was 1996-2000, and I have the statements to prove it. Feel free to check my progress (or lack of it) - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/hsbc-bank/10614-taylormade-hsbc.html

 

I think I need to try that interest rate as well - I'm sure that will make a heck of a difference to the figures I'm currently looking at.

 

Good luck

[victimnomore]

livelylad,

 

Just a note to say that I'm following your thread with a great deal of interest.

 

I have no help to offer at the moment - you seem to be doing well enough without - but I'm certainly cheering you on from the sidelines.

 

I'm edging towards a similar position myself but with Barclays Bank. I have a "standard" (6 yrs "8%") claim that's chugging its way through the court system but I'm already looking to make a second claim for older charges and at contractual rate. So, I admit, I'm here to shamelessly cash in on your experience - I hope you don't mind!!

[paulwlton]

Good luck with your claim, i like the contractual interest bit, odds on you will get a response saying the claim is time barred.

i'm in court on the 1st Dec regarding a time barred claim, if it all goes well i'll post the arguments and facts relied on.

The judge has allocated 2 hours for the hearing, he'll need it.

[Guest bong]

Good luck with your claim, i like the contractual interest bit, odds on you will get a response saying the claim is time barred.

i'm in court on the 1st Dec regarding a time barred claim, if it all goes well i'll post the arguments and facts relied on.

The judge has allocated 2 hours for the hearing, he'll need it.

 

Paul is your claim against HSBC? I can't find your thread.

[livelylad]

Good luck with your claim, i like the contractual interest bit, odds on you will get a response saying the claim is time barred.

i'm in court on the 1st Dec regarding a time barred claim, if it all goes well i'll post the arguments and facts relied on.

The judge has allocated 2 hours for the hearing, he'll need it.

 

Thank you.

[paulwlton]

My claim is against RBS from 1995 to 1998, the hearing date is Dec 1st, time allocated 2 hours, standard defence recieved, both sides have sent AQs off, the banks solicitors(cobbetts) stated they were applying to strike out the claim, i don't know if the application was made or the judge has turned it down, has i've heard nothing from court, keep an eye on my thread for updates.

 

Court hearing Walton v Barclays 8th Nov

Court hearing Walton v Royal Bank Of Scotland 1st Dec

Awaiting court hearing Birmingham Midshires