Could this be the biggest claim on the site?

[GaryH]

Better hope he does'nt charge interest - we'd be doomed!!!:grin:

[TANZARELLI]

Send a prelim addressed to Bankfodder giving 14 days to respond, stick to your deadlines as they will attempt to delay

 

PMSL

[photoman]

Are you all aware of this?

Visit Peter Bards threads to get more info, and join the campaign.

It appears that Baliffs are about to perhaps get vastly increased powers, which includes the right to forcefully enter your home whether or not you are there. If you do happen to be there, they will also have the right to use force against you !!

If this goes through it would give bailliffs massive powers that even the Police don't have, and plunge us back into a Medieval times !

 

The following is taken from Peter' signature,

Copy and paste it into your own.

VITAL IF YOU HAVE AN ISSUE ABOUT THE INCREASED BAILIFFS POWERS TO BREAK INTO YOUR HOME AND USE FORCE IN ORDER TO GET YOUR GOODS JOIN THE PETITON hERE

http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o....l#post53879 9

TIME IS LIMITED IT HAS TO BE PRESENTED AT THE LORDS BY 20TH FEB

[photoman]

Couple of things

 

Firstly, just to say that I'm still here, still on track, still angry, and still VERY keen to do something about it.

Meantime, I've been watching and learning from all on here................and spent some of the time out from posting, by working on my own spreadsheets, and working out what is really actually owed to me from day one.

Now decided.... screw SOL, it's no excuse, they only have one of two defences against any challenges to this.

Firstly that they were incompetent and didn't know they were breaking the law,

Or secondly that they broke it and concealed they did so.

Either way not winners,(and also not good for business to confess to).

 

So, now decided to calculate right back, and that with CCI, it's about £35k on my busines account and about the same again on my personal account.

After the grief their actions have put me through in life, I really won't take a penny less !

 

Secondly, just to say that recieved the Patricia Pearl book I ordered on here, so thank you BF and others for sorting that.

Looks to be a very useful read, and will be getting teeth into over next couple of days.

[TANZARELLI]

Hey photoman, long time no post.

 

Have you seen: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/66851-contractual-confusion-compounded-daily.html

 

Lively debate going on.

 

I sent a prelim to Barclays for 1996-1999 claim yesterday so will be watching with interest your thread.

 

Tanz

[maxine989]

Hmmm... interesting. I am gonna subscribe to this and watch to see how you get on photoman.

 

Good luck...

[thereshope!]

So, now decided to calculate right back, and that with CCI, it's about £35k on my busines account and about the same again on my personal account.

After the grief their actions have put me through in life, I really won't take a penny less !

 

 

 

 

A big decision and one that you have thought through, I would imagine !

 

Loadsa dosh !:o

 

I am also claiming against NW for charges and contractual, so will keep a beady eye on your progress .

 

Well done and good luck in your claim Photoman:)

 

Hope xx

[SurlyBonds]

I took NatWest to Court for £25,385.16, plus interest and costs on charges on a business account. I also had to defend their legal costs of £8k+, and claim my costs of nearly £5k.

 

Whilst it wasn't not a Fast Track case, it still proves that bigger cases can be won.

 

The method shown on this site does work, if you follow the process precisely, methodically, and don't give up. Another huge batch of these cases were undefended in Poole County Court today.

[photoman]

Thank you all !!

Will check out your threads surlybonds please post them.

 

PS:

Could any Business claimants please subscrube to this thread.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/post-586623.html

[paulpb123]

Very best of luck to you, Photoman. I'm sure you will succeed.

Paul

[photoman]

purely by co-incidence, not knowing of my current actions, a friend sent me this email, thought it might amuse you all, it was originally posted by a 98 year old woman, here goes:

 

A 98 year old woman wrote this to her bank. The bank manager thought it amusing enough to have it published in the Times.

Dear Sir,

I am writing to thank you for bouncing my cheque with which I endeavoured to pay my plumber last month.

By my calculations, three 'nanoseconds' must have elapsed between his presenting the cheque and the arrival in my account of the funds needed to honour it. I refer, of course, to the automatic monthly deposit of my Pension, an arrangement which, I admit, has been in place for only thirty eight years. You are to be commended for seizing that brief window of opportunity, and also for debiting my account £30 by way of penalty for the inconvenience caused to your bank.

My thankfulness springs from the manner in which this incident has caused me to rethink my errant financial ways. I noticed that whereas I personally attend to your telephone calls and letters.... that when I try to contact you, I am confronted by the impersonal, overcharging, pre-recorded, faceless entity which your bank has become.

>From now on, I, like you, choose only to deal with a flesh-and-blood

>person.

My mortgage and loan payments will therefore and hereafter no longer be automatic, but will arrive at your bank by cheque, addressed personally and confidentially to an employee at your bank whom you must nominate.

Be aware that it is an offence under the Postal Act for any other person to open such an envelope. Please find attached an Application Contact Status which I require your chosen employee to complete.

I am sorry it runs to eight pages, but in order that I know as much about him or her as your bank knows about me, there is no alternative.

Please note that all copies of his or her medical history must be countersigned by a Solicitor, and the mandatory details of his/ her financial situation (income, debts, assets and liabilities) must be accompanied by documented proof.

In due course, I will issue your employee with a PIN number which he/she must quote in dealings with me.

I regret that it cannot be shorter than 28 digits but, again, I have modelled it on the number of button presses required of me to access my account balance on your phone bank service. As they say, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

Let me level the playing field even further. When you call me, press buttons as follows:

1-- To make an appointment to see me.

2-- To query a missing payment.

3-- To transfer the call to my living room in case I am there.

4-- To transfer the call to my bedroom in case I am sleeping.

5-- To transfer the call to my toilet in case I am attending to nature.

6-- To transfer the call to my mobile phone if I am not at home.

7-- To leave a message on my computer (a password to access my computer is required. A password will be communicated to you at a later date to the Authorized Contact.)

8-- To return to the main menu and to listen to options 1 through 8

9-- To make a general complaint or inquiry, the contact will then be put on hold, pending the attention of my automated answering service.

While this may, on occasion, involve a lengthy wait, uplifting music will play for the duration of the call.

Regrettably, but again following your example, I must also levy an establishment fee to cover the setting up of this new arrangement.

May I wish you a happy, if ever so slightly less prosperous, New Year.

Your Humble Client

 

(Remember: This was written by a 98 year old woman; DOESN'T SHE MAKE YOU

PROUD!!?)

[maxine989]

Very amusing email... lol

[Pondfish]

Thanks for that Photoman! :D

 

I am now back on the seat, and have regained control.

 

Excellent, if i could write a letter like that at 98, i would be a happy Fish!

 

Did she get a reply????

 

Exits still chuckling

 

Pondy

[photoman]

I have encouraged a friend to also go ahead with claiming his charges.

He has signed up on site, but been a bit slow off the mark, stating that he's concerned that the Bank might call in his overdraft in retaliation.

Firstly, I have given him the advice about opening a parachute account, But I also recall some posts or info about how to respond if they still try to call in an overdraft (ie: writing something along the lines of the amount they are asking for back, is currently in dispute etc etc), and also told him I believe there is some legislation to protect him in such a case.

Can anybody direct me to the relevant legislation/law, and letter templates for dealing with such a scenario if it happens?

Thanks all

[Pondfish]

PM,

I think i have seen something along these lines here as well, but after a bit of a search i cannot find anything either.

 

Perhaps someone else can track this down for PM??

 

Pondy

[Guest ian cognito]

I think it's the banking code thats says they should not act in retaliation of complaints. The FOS has recently fined A&L for closing the account of a charges claimant. Not sure there's any legislation in place tho'.

[TideTurner]

If I remember rightly, the A & L were fined a measerly sum for a breach by closing an account 'vexactiously'. If this helps. May have been NWide. EDIT it was the FOS who have fined banks for 'vexatious' behaviour when closing accounts.

[isidore]

I'm pretty sure I heard it was Nationwide.......

[elsinore]

Hi PM, this seems to carry a bit of weight.

Briefing Note BN 023/06

4 July 2006

 

FSA position on account closures and default charges

 

Generally, under FSA rules on dispute resolution and complaints, we would not expect any regulated firm to discriminate against a customer who makes a complaint.

 

However the relationship between a bank and its account holders, including the circumstances and manner in which accounts are closed, is governed by the Banking Code.

 

We have therefore raised this issue with the Banking Code Standards Board, and informed those firms involved that we have done so. As a result of those conversations, we understand that the Banking Code Standards Board intends to state its position on this issue presently. We encourage the industry to use this opportunity to demonstrate the value of the Code in ensuring fair and reasonable outcomes to such disputes.

Els

[isidore]

PM, the default letter you are referring to is something like this. I guess this can be amended as appropriate but that is the general gist.

[maxine989]

Hmmm... very interesting stuff guys... I am enjoying learning about all of this.

 

[photoman]

Okay,

Even though I have a lot of statements, and done my spreadsheets and upto the LBA stage, when I come to do my POC and Court bundle I want as much information as I can get. I also do not want to be surprised by something they may try to rely on later which I have not seen. So I sent off an SAR for everything.

When I sent off an SAR in order to get all the information I could on all accounts I have held with Lloyds (personal, Business and loans). I clearly stated that I wanted EVERYTHING.

I recieved some information back last week. However it was a really poor provision of information, and much of it was missing or ignored. In fact all they sent me was a few printouts of some charges, and oddly a few screenshots making reference to some letters that had been sent to me (but not copies of the actual letters...... so I do have some evidence that much of the info I want is actually held by them) !!

So, I called the Data Controller, and even though we were polite and civil to each other, I got the impression that they are a teensy bit sick of all this, and she asked me directly if it was in relation to Bank Charges.

I explained that yes it could be, but that I was also concerned about credit reference repair etc, and so this is why I required EVERYTHING.

She asked me to put in writing what I required, (and to stipulate that I had in fact already paid my £10) and so I have drafted this, and will post this afternoon.

 

 

 

DATA PROTECTION ACT 1998

SUBJECT ACCESS REQUEST

 

ACCOUNT NUMBERS:

xxxxx

xxxxx

xxxxx

xxxxx

xxxxx

Dear Sir/ Madam

Thank you for the information you recently provided me with regards my Data Protection Act Request. Unfortunately however it does not fulfil my request.

It appears that my original request was either not read properly, or was misinterpreted.

In light of all the recent publicity regards the reclaiming of bank charges, most Banks appear to now only be providing a breakdown of charges in response to all and any Data requests.

My requirements for this information primarily concern Credit file reference, and other purposes, and so for the avoidance of doubt I do actually require all information held by yourselves.

It seems a lot of banks are also wrongly interpreting the Data Protection Act (DPA) 1998 as a requirement to only disclose six years worth of personal data, and this is also wholly wrong.

The DPA clearly states that all information held must be disclosed and it has no correlation to the Limitation act 1980 at all.

You have only provided me with partial information regards accounts xxxxx, and xxxxx, which is far from complete, and not in accordance with my request. (Interestingly though, you have provided some screen printouts that indicate that much, if not all of this information does indeed exist, yet still you have not provided it)?

Despite my request, I have also received no information at all regards accounts; xxxxx, xxxxx and xxxxx, no acknowledgement of my request, and no explanation as to why the information has not been provided.

 

Once again I now ask that you provide me with all records relating to my banking history with yourselves regards the above accounts.

 

Whilst not exhaustive and for the avoidance of doubt I shall list what I require:

• Full copies of all contracts that exist between myself and your organisation; including copies of any documents you hold in support of same.
  
• Copies of all statements relating to the above accounts.
  
• Copies of all correspondence, including all letters, faxes, emails and memos sent and received between ourselves, and any other third party in relation to any of the above accounts.
  
• Copies of all documents which include any of my personal information including copies of any contracts or invoices, emails or computer records containing my personal information, or any records which pertain to this information.
  
• Full details and copies of any documents upon which you relied when you have provided my personal or financial information to any individual, organisation or third party.
  
• Full copies or transcripts of any computer logs or database records kept in relation to myself or in relation to my financial or personal information..
  
• Details of all systems you currently have in place to ensure my personal or financial information is kept securely, including details of those officers who currently have control of same, and at the time it was held or provided to a third party.
  
• Where any previous information or records held have been deleted or disposed of, the methods used to do so, including dates, reason for deletion, certificates or references confirming details of destruction. Where you are unable to provide such certificates, please provide a declaration, signed by an authorised officer of your company, confirming the dates and methods of destruction of this data.

As I have previously issued this request, and given you a full 40 days to comply, I can not now be expected to wait the same period again, so shall give you a further 14 days from the date this letter is deemed served, in order to comply. If retrieval of any of this information should require longer than this, I would like an explanation as to why, and a reasonable estimate of the length time it should require (up to a maximum of 40 days).

In the meantime I would like any information that is more readily accessible to be sent without delay.

I have previously provided you a cheque for £10 to cover the cost of this request.

 

Please contact me to arrange a secure method and time to deliver to my home address.

Yours faithfully

 

 

 

 

You have 14 days to comply with this request.

If you fail to comply fully I shall enter a formal complaint with the Information Commissioners Office which could result in a fine and prosecution.

[GaryH]

I have encouraged a friend to also go ahead with claiming his charges.

He has signed up on site, but been a bit slow off the mark, stating that he's concerned that the Bank might call in his overdraft in retaliation.

Firstly, I have given him the advice about opening a parachute account, But I also recall some posts or info about how to respond if they still try to call in an overdraft (ie: writing something along the lines of the amount they are asking for back, is currently in dispute etc etc), and also told him I believe there is some legislation to protect him in such a case.

Can anybody direct me to the relevant legislation/law, and letter templates for dealing with such a scenario if it happens?

Thanks all

 

Here you go PM, this thread should help - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/lloyds-bank/29826-help-enforcement-notice.html?highlight=sweetpants

Just goes to show that Lloyds are bullies - stand up to them and they soon back off.

[photoman]

Okay,

Got a couple of weeks yet until I file my N1, but decided to use the time productively by starting on the particulars. (remember this is for a Business account) !

Here's a draft of what I have done so far, and all comments appreciated.

 

I have yet to source and read up on the actual case laws cited, and will do so taking particular care that I am not trying to rely on precedents and case law that are specific to Consumer case law (anycomments or pointers in that direction by anyone appreciated)

Also, yet to compile a section suggesting the application of Authorised Interest rates in the mid alternative to Unauthorised or Statutory, so that will be added soon.

Also, the History/ Background to the claim will need to be compiled nearer the time dependent upon any correspondance or communications in the intererim.

 

Anyhow, any other comments anyone ??

 

 

1. The Claimant had a bank account xxxxx (branch sort code xx-xx-xx) with the defendant, between the periods of xxxx and xxxx governed by the Defendant’s Banking Terms and Conditions (“the contract”).

2. The Claimant admits to breaches of the terms of the contract that required the Claimant to stay within any agreed overdraft limit.

3. The breaches have led to the Defendant debiting the account with numerous default charges, and interest on the default charges, between xxxxx and xxxxx. A list of the charges and interest on the charges is annexed to the Particulars of Claim at pages 1 & 2.

4. The Claimant seeks the refund of said charges along with the additional interest levied by Defendent on said charges. In addition the Claimant claims interest on the full amounts as detailed in paragraphs 12 & 13.

5. In support of his basis of claim the Claimant contends that the charges are:

i. Excessive in that they are not truly reflective of any actual or genuine pre estimated loss incurred by the Defendant in respect of any alleged breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant;

ii. Devised and enforced by the Defendent with a view to profit in that they do not truly represent any alleged actual loss in respect of any alleged breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant, but instead unduly enrich the Defendant which conducts its regime of charging with a view to profit.

iii. Punitive in nature in that they are used in "in terrorem" to discourage the Claimant from presenting items on the account for

payment where there are insufficient funds to cover such payment of said item, thus can be deemed as penalties, which are unenforcable under common and/or statutory law.

Accordingly the Defendant’s default charges are:

a. A penalty and therefore unenforceable as they are an unreasonable pre-estimate of the probable loss to the Defendant and therefore contrary to common law - (Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v New Garage and Motor Co Ltd [1915] AC 79).

b. Invalid under s.4 Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977.

c. In the event that the court finds that the charges are not a penalty they are unreasonable within the meaning of s.15 Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982.

 

6. The Claimant makes reference to inter alia the following cases, in relation to the notion of stare decisis, to support his case:

Dunlop Pneumatic Tvre Co. v. New Garages and Motor Co. [ AC 79 ];

Lordsvale Finance PLC v. Bank o/Zambia [ QB 752];

Murray v. Leisureplay [ EWCA Civ 963 ];

Bridge v. Campbell Discount Co. LtLL [ AC 600 ];

Alfred McAlpine Capital Projects Ltd v Tilebox Ltd [ EWE-IC 281 (TCC)];

Commissioner of Public Works v Hills [ AC 368 ]

 

Additionally, the Claimant makes reference to inter alia the following Office of Fair Trading cases, as reported in their Unfair Contract Terms Bulletin 21 (July to September 2002). as persuasive authorities:

Case 4 — Dampcure-Woodcure/30Ltd

Case 15 — Kids of Wilmslow Ltd

Case 18 — Legal & General Franchising t/a Parker Estate Agents.

7. The defendant has declined to answer the claimant’s written requests for information about any manual intervention necessitated by, and/or any actual administrative costs incurred as a result of, the said breaches.

8. The claimant will rely on a report from the Competition Commission entitled “Northern Irish Personal Banking,” published on 20/10/2006, as evidence that the defendant is aware that the income derived from its default charges is excessive, does not truly reflect the actual costs incurred in dealing with such breaches, and unduly enriches the Defendant.

 

9. The claimant will further rely on the statement of the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) concerning default charges in credit card contracts, published on 5/4/2006, to demonstrate that:

a.The OFT’s recommendations regarding standard default terms in credit card contracts have wider implications, as regards bank account agreements.

b. In a contract, where the parties are not of equal bargaining power, any estimate that included costs which could not legitimately be claimed as damages from an individual in a case brought at common law, and which made a material difference to the overall charge, is likely to constitute a penalty at law.

c. The interest ordinarily charged on an overdrawn balance of account would of itself be deemed sufficient compensation to the defendant in a claim for damages arising from account breaches of the said nature.

10. The Claimant seeks permission to proceed with the claim under s.32 (1)(b) Limitation Act 1980 on the ground that the claimant could not reasonably have discovered the defendant’s deliberate concealment of the facts relevant to the claimant’s right of action before the report of the OFT was published on 5/4/2006.

The facts relevant to the Claimant’s right of action under s.32 (1)(b) are that the the Claimant is entitled to know whether the charges paid represent a justifiable business cost, or whether they are in fact a penalty, and to expect that the Defendant will always conduct itself with integrity. The Defendant has continually presented its charges as if they were a in respect of a legitimate loss or cost, whilst it is in actual fact profiting in a material sense from the charges, thus the Defendant can be seen to have been operating without accountability to its customers, and so to have consciously concealed the facts.

11. Alternatively, the Claimant seeks permission to proceed with the claim under s.32 (1)© Limitation Act 1980 on the ground that the payments were conceded on the mistaken presumption that the said charges and interest thereon did not amount to penalties - citing the case of Kleinwort Benson Ltd v Lincoln City Council [1999] 2 AC 349 as a precedent in this matter - and that the Claimant would not reasonably have discovered the said mistakes before the report of the OFT was published on 5/4/2006.

 

12. The Claimant claims compound interest on the amounts claimed - using the rate and method specified in the said contract, and applied by the Defendant to monies it is owed. The Claimant’s ground for seeking restitution of the compounded contractual rate of interest is:

i. That there is an explicit or implied term of mutuality and reciprocity within the contract and equity dictates that sums owed by the Defendant should be subject to interest under the same terms and at the same rates that the Defendant has itself imposed upon the Claimant throughout the term of the contract.

ii. That the defendant has and would continue to be unjustly enriched if the Claimant's entitlement was limited to the statutory rate of interest in that the Defendant has had use of the sums and would have used these sums to re-lend at commercial compounded rates.

Under the terms of the contract money taken without prior permission constitutes Unauthorised Borrowing and is subject to specific rates for such. The Defendant is clearly in a privileged position to have a direct means of withdrawing monies from the Claimant’s bank account. That the charges were taken by the Defendant from the Claimant without prior permission is by the Defendants own definition equivalent to Unauthorised Borrowing and so should be deemed subject to interest at the same rates and in the same manner imposed by the Defendant. A schedule of the interest calculated in such manner is annexed to the Particulars of Claim at pages 3 & 4.

13. Alternatively, if the court decides that the Claimant is not entitled to the contractual rate of interest, then the Claimant claims interest under s.69 County Courts Act 1984. A schedule of the interest calculated is annexed to the Particulars of Claim at pages 5 & 6.

14. Accordingly, the Claimant claims:

a). The return of £xxxxx taken by the Defendant in charges and interest applied on the charges between xxxxx and xxxxx.

b). Court fees

c). Compound interest at the contractual rate of 29.85% EAR from xxxxx to xxxxx of £xxxx, and also interest compounded at the same percentage rate up to the date of judgement or earlier payment.

d). In the alternative to c., interest under s.69 County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year, from xxxxx to xxxxx of £xxxx and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgement or earlier payment at a daily rate of xxx

[paulpb123]

Hi Photoman,

If you need transcripts of any of the cases pm me your email and I'll send them as Word documents. I have access to several legal databases, which is very useful.

All the best,

Paul