Is this a good 1st Letter?

[happydj]

Here is the letter which I am about to send away. I would like to know if everyone thinks this is good enough?

 

 

Mr Me

1 My Street

My Town, My Postcode

 

23rd February 2006

 

Halifax Plc Head Office

Head of Customer Services & Complaints

Trinity Road

Halifax

HX3 2RG

 

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Penalty & unfair charges – request for refund for Mr Me, Sort Code: 11-11-11, Account: 12345678

 

Letter Reference Date Amount Charged

JD/HCALET5 7th February 2006 £39.00

JD/HCALET5 9th January 2006 £39.00

JD/HCALET5 6th January 2006 £39.00

JD/HCALET5 8th December 2005 £39.00

JD/HCALET5 8th November 2005 £39.00

JD/HCALET5 3rd October 2005 £39.00

JD/HCALET5 6th September 2005 £39.00

JD/HCALET5 8th August 2005 £39.00

JD/HCALET5 1st August 2005 £39.00

JD/HCALET5 1st July 2005 £35.00

JD/HCALET5 9th June 2005 £35.00

JD/HCALET5 1st June 2005 £35.00

JD/HCALET5 18th May 2005 £35.00

JD/HCALET5 11th April 2005 £35.00

JD/HCALET5 1st April 2005 £35.00

 

TOTAL CHARGED £561.00

INTEREST @ 8% £44.88

 

TOTAL AMOUNT £ 605 . 88

 

I am of the view that your charges represent a penalty and are therefore irrecoverable at common law. In the Scottish case of Castaneda and Others v. Clydebank Engineering and Shipbuilding Co., Ltd. (1904) 12 SLT 498 the House of Lords held that a contractual party can only recover damages for actual or liquidated losses incurred from a breach of contract. This is also the position in English law: Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v New Garage and Motor Co Ltd [1915] AC 79.

 

Your charges do not reflect any actual loss, instead they appear to represent a lucrative profit-making scheme. In particular, charges were applied after I entered into a transaction(s) without sufficient funds in my account. However, payment was declined by you, and therefore, actual loss is the cost of automatically sending me a computer generated letter. I would respectfully submit that is valued at no more than 50 pence.

 

 

 

UK banks have recently given evidence to the House of Commons Treasury Committee on how bank charges are calculated: "The costs are going to pay for all the people we have who pursue debt, collect debt, speak to customers and chase payments. The way these charges are arrived at is by taking these total costs and making some assumptions about the volume that is going to come through to arrive at the individual charges" (2nd report, 25 January 2005, paragraph 50).

 

Accordingly, the charges applied to my account are not a reasonable pre-estimate of the bank’s loss in relation to my account. No-one has had to look at my account or telephone me. No one has had to collect anything. Your charges would appear to represent a device to recover global losses (for example, loan defaulters, bad debt write off, including commercial lending in, and outwith, the UK).

 

On a separate note, your charges appear to represent an unfair term of contract which is contrary to the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (SI. 1999/2083). My account falls within the ambit of Regulation 5 of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 as I am a consumer. Your charges constitute an unfair penalty under reference to paragraph 1(e) of schedule 2 of the said regulations:

 

‘Indicative and non-exhaustive list of terms which may be regarded as unfair - 1. Terms which have the object of effect of - (e) requiring any consumer who fails his obligation to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation’.

 

0n 26 July 2005 the OFT stated that 'a charge is likely to be disproportionately high if it is more than a court would be likely to award if the lender sued the cardholder for breach of contract'. Because your charges include a large profit margin, in addition to actual loss, they are irrecoverable as an unfair term in contract. I believe that your charges require me to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation for incurring a transaction(s) which was ultimately declined by an automated computer system.

 

In addition, it is unfair to require me to subsidise your global debt recovery costs and debt write-off.

 

Please refund these charges (totaling £605.88 ) to my account within the next 7 days. I reserve the right to commence court proceedings without any further notice.

 

Yours faithfully

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mr Me

 

I look forward to your views so I can start on this!

[happydj]

Here is the letter which I am about to send away. I would like to know if everyone thinks this is good enough?

 

 

Mr Me

1 My Street

My Town, My Postcode

 

23rd February 2006

 

Halifax Plc Head Office

Head of Customer Services & Complaints

Trinity Road

Halifax

HX3 2RG

 

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Penalty & unfair charges – request for refund for Mr Me, Sort Code: 11-11-11, Account: 12345678

 

Letter Reference Date Amount Charged

JD/HCALET5 7th February 2006 £39.00

JD/HCALET5 9th January 2006 £39.00

JD/HCALET5 6th January 2006 £39.00

JD/HCALET5 8th December 2005 £39.00

JD/HCALET5 8th November 2005 £39.00

JD/HCALET5 3rd October 2005 £39.00

JD/HCALET5 6th September 2005 £39.00

JD/HCALET5 8th August 2005 £39.00

JD/HCALET5 1st August 2005 £39.00

JD/HCALET5 1st July 2005 £35.00

JD/HCALET5 9th June 2005 £35.00

JD/HCALET5 1st June 2005 £35.00

JD/HCALET5 18th May 2005 £35.00

JD/HCALET5 11th April 2005 £35.00

JD/HCALET5 1st April 2005 £35.00

 

TOTAL CHARGED £561.00

INTEREST @ 8% £44.88

 

TOTAL AMOUNT £ 605 . 88

 

I am of the view that your charges represent a penalty and are therefore irrecoverable at common law. In the Scottish case of Castaneda and Others v. Clydebank Engineering and Shipbuilding Co., Ltd. (1904) 12 SLT 498 the House of Lords held that a contractual party can only recover damages for actual or liquidated losses incurred from a breach of contract. This is also the position in English law: Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v New Garage and Motor Co Ltd [1915] AC 79.

 

Your charges do not reflect any actual loss, instead they appear to represent a lucrative profit-making scheme. In particular, charges were applied after I entered into a transaction(s) without sufficient funds in my account. However, payment was declined by you, and therefore, actual loss is the cost of automatically sending me a computer generated letter. I would respectfully submit that is valued at no more than 50 pence.

 

 

 

UK banks have recently given evidence to the House of Commons Treasury Committee on how bank charges are calculated: "The costs are going to pay for all the people we have who pursue debt, collect debt, speak to customers and chase payments. The way these charges are arrived at is by taking these total costs and making some assumptions about the volume that is going to come through to arrive at the individual charges" (2nd report, 25 January 2005, paragraph 50).

 

Accordingly, the charges applied to my account are not a reasonable pre-estimate of the bank’s loss in relation to my account. No-one has had to look at my account or telephone me. No one has had to collect anything. Your charges would appear to represent a device to recover global losses (for example, loan defaulters, bad debt write off, including commercial lending in, and outwith, the UK).

 

On a separate note, your charges appear to represent an unfair term of contract which is contrary to the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (SI. 1999/2083). My account falls within the ambit of Regulation 5 of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 as I am a consumer. Your charges constitute an unfair penalty under reference to paragraph 1(e) of schedule 2 of the said regulations:

 

‘Indicative and non-exhaustive list of terms which may be regarded as unfair - 1. Terms which have the object of effect of - (e) requiring any consumer who fails his obligation to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation’.

 

0n 26 July 2005 the OFT stated that 'a charge is likely to be disproportionately high if it is more than a court would be likely to award if the lender sued the cardholder for breach of contract'. Because your charges include a large profit margin, in addition to actual loss, they are irrecoverable as an unfair term in contract. I believe that your charges require me to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation for incurring a transaction(s) which was ultimately declined by an automated computer system.

 

In addition, it is unfair to require me to subsidise your global debt recovery costs and debt write-off.

 

Please refund these charges (totaling £605.88 ) to my account within the next 7 days. I reserve the right to commence court proceedings without any further notice.

 

Yours faithfully

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mr Me

 

I look forward to your views so I can start on this!

[happydj]

I have 2 address's which I have found and I dont know which address would get the best responce.

 

Address 1 (From Halifax Phone Call)

Halifax Plc

Customer Services Manager

Trinity Road

Halifax

HX3 2RG

 

Address 2: (From sticky in this section)

Complaints Team

Halifax PLC

PO Box 1037

Liverpool

L69 1ZX

 

Anyone used both? Which came out with the best result?

[happydj]

I have 2 address's which I have found and I dont know which address would get the best responce.

 

Address 1 (From Halifax Phone Call)

Halifax Plc

Customer Services Manager

Trinity Road

Halifax

HX3 2RG

 

Address 2: (From sticky in this section)

Complaints Team

Halifax PLC

PO Box 1037

Liverpool

L69 1ZX

 

Anyone used both? Which came out with the best result?

[BankFodder]

It's a good letter. I would suggest 14 days. The court want to see that you have given them a bit of a chance.

[BankFodder]

It's a good letter. I would suggest 14 days. The court want to see that you have given them a bit of a chance.

[BankFodder]

Why don't you send it to your branch.

 

Also, can I ask that you don't start new threads for every new post. The addresses and the letter are part of the same isse and should be posted in the same thread.

[BankFodder]

Why don't you send it to your branch.

 

Also, can I ask that you don't start new threads for every new post. The addresses and the letter are part of the same isse and should be posted in the same thread.

[happydj]

Sorry!

 

I applologise for that - you could always murge them if you wanted to.

 

My appologies

[happydj]

Sorry!

 

I applologise for that - you could always murge them if you wanted to.

 

My appologies

[happydj]

Point noted - and the days changed to 14.

 

Sending the letter out tomorrow. I will use this thread to keep everyone updated.

 

Thank you

[happydj]

Point noted - and the days changed to 14.

 

Sending the letter out tomorrow. I will use this thread to keep everyone updated.

 

Thank you

 

 

 

Merged threads, please keep to the same one.

[happydj]

This topic was closed on 03/05/19.

If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support their.

If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened.

- Consumer Action Group