Innocent vs Monument (Barclays) CONTRACTUAL INTEREST

[innocent]

Well "hi" all.....

and welcome to this new thread....

 

 

Settled three claims so far (one with barclaycard just last week) and its about time I 'fired off' some more, including my

 

Monument Credit Card (formally Providian) and a trading division of Barclays...

 

I am about to submit my claim form direct to the bank (a first for me as up until now I have used moneyclaim online). This was a neccessity bearing in mind the much longer 'particulars of claim' (POC) for the contractual interest part (another first for me)....

 

 

To date:

 

1/11/06

 

Sent my prelim letter asking for charges+interest

 

I sent to:

 

MONUMENT

PORTLAND BUILDING

25 THE HIGH STREET

CRAWLEY

WEST SUSSEX

RH10 1BG

 

I enclosed a schedule

22/11/06

 

Sent my letter before action (LBA) to same address

 

I enclosed another schedule

16/1/07

 

Re-sent

my LBA to same address asking for

compunded contractual interest

aswell.

 

(Aware I cannot claim 8% statatory aswell)

 

I enclosed another schedule using

'Vampires's Chambers'

 

I asked for £396.00 charges; £51.71 interest on charges

 

and £424.56 compounded contractual interest

 

using

monuments unauthorised borrowing rate of 29.90%

 

A grand total of £872.26

 

The only correspondance derived from these 3 letters has been:

 

12/2/07

 

*Dedicated to customer satisafaction

bla bla blah

*Disagree with my legal analysis.....

*"At Monument we believe it is fair that when a customer pays us late or the balance on the account exceeds the agreed credit limit, the costs we incur are bourne by the customer"

Hmmm??? The costs perhaps?? As for a profit.....

*Pay on time

*Offer of goodwill £338.00

*

"Should you no longer be prepared to accept and wish to be subject to the account Terms and Conditions and close your account, please advise me. Please note you would liable for the outstanding balance on your account."

bla bla bla

Marion Pyle....... and what a pyle of rubbish it is!!!

She gave a phone number of 01293 802 473

I have not replied to this letter yet, but will do so shortly... and show here

 

 

In the next few threads I will show:

 

what I believe to be their borrowing rates

 

My proposed POC (derived largely from the brilliant 'mccuth' and 'mindzai & lucid' threads

 

 

YOUR ADVICE AND HELP WILL ALWAYS BE APPRECIATED

[innocent]

MONUMENTS INTEREST RATES:

 

NOV 2002:

 

MERCHANDISE INTEREST: 1.313% A MONTH

CASH INTEREST: 1.833% A MONTH

 

JUNE 2005:

 

MERCHANDISE INTEREST: 1.396% A MONTH

CASH INTEREST: 1.999% A MONTH

 

JAN 2006:

 

MERCHANDISE INTEREST: 1.527% A MONTH (19.9% APR)

CASH INTEREST: 2.141% A MONTH (28.9% APR)

 

OCT 2006:

 

MERCHANDISE INTEREST: 1.527% A MONTH (19.9% APR)

CASH INTEREST: 2.207% A MONTH (29.9% APR)

 

 

Still investigating these!?! Does everyone agree??

 

Innocent

[innocent]

Ok my draft POC

 

(a huge thankyou particularly to 'mccuths vs RBos' thread:

 

Firstly, I will point out that I will take action against:

 

BARCLAYS BANK PLC T/A MONUMENT

 

and address all correspondance to barclays registered address!!!

 

 

 

Brief details of claim"

 

The Claimant seeks the return of penalty charges and overdraft interest charged thereon, debited to the Claimant's bank account by the Defendant, and interest on these amounts as defined by the contract between the parties.

 

 

"Value"

Penalty charges in the sum of £xxxx and interest charged thereon in the sum of £xxxx. Interest to be determined as the Court deems just, as per section 8 of the attached Particulars of Claim, with the maximum to not exceed £xxxx. A maximum total of £xxxx.

Plus any applicable Court fees.

Plus interest from date of issue to date of judgement or earlier payment at a maximum rate of £xxxx per day or at such rate and for such periods as the Court deems just, according to section 8 of the attached Particulars of Claim.

 

 

"Particulars of claim"

1. The Claimant has a xxxx Account, number xxxx ("the Account"), sort code xxxx) on or around xxxxth xxxx xxxx;

 

2. The Account is governed by the Defendant’s Personal Banking Terms and Conditions ("the contract");

 

3. During the period in which the Account has been operating the Defendant has debited numerous charges to the Account in respect of purported breaches of contract in regards to "Late Payment Fees", "Unpaid Direct Debit Fees", "Overlimit Fees", etc.. on the part of the Claimant and also charged interest on the charges once applied;

 

4. The Claimant understands that the Defendant contends that the charges were debited in accordance with the terms of the contract between itself and the Claimant;

 

5. A schedule of the charges and interest applied is attached to these particulars of claim; (Appendix xxxx);

 

6. The Claimant will rely on the Office of Fair Trading’s ("the OFT") statement of 5th April 2006 concerning default charges in credit card contracts;

 

7. The Claimant thus contends that:

 

a) The charges debited to the Account:

i) are punitive in nature;

ii) are not a genuine pre-estimate of cost incurred by the Defendant;

iii) exceed any alleged actual loss to the Defendant in respect of any breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant;

iv) are not intended to represent or relate to any alleged actual loss, but instead unduly enrich the Defendant which exercises the contractual term in respect of such charges with a view to profit.

 

b) Further to 7.a), the charges debited to the Account are penalties rather than liquidated damages. A charge is held to be a penalty if the sum stipulated for is extravagant and unconscionable in amount in comparison to the greatest loss that could conceivably be proved to have followed from the breach. A penalty clause is void in its entirety and unenforceable.

 

c) The contractual provision that permits the Defendant to levy such charges is unenforceable by virtue of the Unfair Contract Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations (1999) paragraph 8 and schedule 2(1)(e), the Unfair Contract Terms Act (1977) section4, and the common law.

 

d) In the alternative to 7.a), b) and c), if the Court finds that the charges are not a penalty, then the Claimant contends that they are unreasonable within the meaning of s.15 Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982.

 

8. Contractual Interest

 

a) The Claimant claims compound interest on the amounts claimed under the principle of mutuality and reciprocity in the contract between the Claimant and the Defendant, using the rate and method specified in the said contract, and as is applied by the Defendant to monies it is owed;

 

b) The Claimant’s grounds for seeking restitution of the compounded contractual rate of interest is that the Defendant would 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;

 

c) The Claimant contends that the taking of unlawful penalties from the Claimant’s Account is unauthorised borrowing by the Defendant. Therefore, under the principle of mutuality and reciprocity in the contract between the Claimant and the Defendant, in the first instance the Claimant has calculated compound interest at the Defendant’s current unauthorised borrowing rate, being xxxx% EAR;

 

d) In the alternative to 8.c), should the taking of unlawful penalties from the Claimant’s Account not be deemed to be unauthorised borrowing by the Defendant, then, under the principle of mutuality and reciprocity in the contract between the Claimant and the Defendant, the Claimant has calculated compound interest at the Defendant’s lowest current authorised borrowing rate for a xxxx Account, being xxxx% EAR;

 

e) In the alternative to 8.c) and d), if the Court decides that the Claimant is not entitled to the contractual rate of interest under the principle of mutuality and reciprocity in the contract between the Claimant and the Defendant, then the Claimant has calculated interest under section 69 County Courts Act (1984) at the rate of 8% a year;

 

f) Details of interest calculated & rates used are attached to these Particulars of Claim as follows:

Appendix xxxx – Compound interest calculated daily at an annual rate of xxxx%

Appendix xxxx – Compound interest calculated daily at an annual rate of xxxx%

Appendix xxxx – Simple interest under s.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at an annual rate of 8.00%

Appendix xxxx – Evidence of the Defendant’s current borrowing rates

 

9. Accordingly, the Claimant claims:

 

a) The return of the amounts debited between xxxx xxxx xxxx and xxxx xxxx xxxx in respect of charges in the sum of £xxxx, together with interest charged thereon in the sum of £xxxx – totalling £xxxx;

 

b) Any applicable Court fees;

 

c) Compound interest at the contractual rate of xxxx% EAR from the date of each transaction to xxxx xxxx xxxx of £xxxx, and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of £xxxx;

 

d) In the alternative to 9.c), compound interest at the contractual rate of xxxx% EAR from the date of each transaction to xxxx xxxx xxxx of £xxxx, and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of £xxxx;

 

e) In the alternative to 9.c) and d), interest under section 69 County Courts Act (1984) at the rate of 8% a year, from the date of each transaction to xxxx xxxx xxxx, of £xxxx and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of £xxxx.

 

 

10. Save payments into and/or determined by the Court, any sums paid in settlement of this claim are required to be made by cheque, which should be made payable to the Claimant.

 

 

WHAT DOES EVERYONE THINK??

Innocent

[innocent]

Just read this on Uswitch

 

One of the UK's largest banks is in talks to sell off one of its

credit card

businesses which caters for consumers with poor credit ratings.

 

Barclays is reviewing the whole of its Barclaycard operations and this could see its Monument arm, designed to provide credit for those with a bad credit history, being sold off.

 

Clydesdale Financial Services, which offers store cards at high interest rates through retailers, is also likely to be sold, according to the Financial Times.

 

Financial commentators have suggested that this is a sign that Barclays sees little hope of the British consumers' spending habits improving and is looking to distance itself from customers who will eventually cost them money through bad debts.

 

"Barclays' results are going to be very strong, but if they are looking to sell Monument then that tells you they are not especially sanguine about the credit environment," one cynical analyst told the Telegraph.

 

Barclays is not the first major bank to consider selling-off one of its credit arms; Prudential sold of Egg last year after bad debt charges caused huge losses at the finance firm.

 

 

NOW WONDERING (ALREADY) IF IT SHOULD BE:

innocent vs

BARCLAYS

BANK PLC T/A MONUMENT

 

 

Any thoughts???

 

Innocent

[innocent]

Just to thank "Bean" who has been very useful in his thread;

 

HE WON; CONTRACTUAL +8%!!!! AGAINST MONUMENT (BARCLAYS)

 

Thanks Bean

 

 

 

ANY THOUGHTS ON MY OTHER QUESTIONS AND POC EVERYONE?

[innocent]

So what would happen if Barclays sold Monument half way through a claim???? :idea: :idea: :idea:

 

 

And what would happen if only I spoke in my thread????

 

 

 

 

 

Innocent

[ladybird17]

sorry innocent, you're not being ignored! It's just that when you reproduce such a long letter or POC it needs a really experienced member to pick any holes in it - and with the time to read it all! I'm sure someone will eventually do that. Have you checked out other POC threads?

[Mike220359]

Innocent have you asked for your original agrrement yet, I did, seems they don't have the original agrrements from when they were Providian, could get the whole of your interest back.

 

Mike

[Bean]

Hi innocent,

 

8. Contractual Interest

 

d) In the alternative to 8.c), should the taking of unlawful penalties from the Claimant’s Account not be deemed to be unauthorised borrowing by the Defendant, then, under the principle of mutuality and reciprocity in the contract between the Claimant and the Defendant, the Claimant has calculated compound interest at the Defendant’s lowest current authorised borrowing rate for a xxxx Account, being xxxx% EAR;

 

e) In the alternative to 8.c) and d), if the Court decides that the Claimant is not entitled to the contractual rate of interest under the principle of mutuality and reciprocity in the contract between the Claimant and the Defendant, then the Claimant has calculated interest under section 69 County Courts Act (1984) at the rate of 8% a year;

I may be mistaken, but I suspect that you have not ever authorised Monument to borrow from you, have you? I don't see any good reason for a (lower) authorised borrowing rate to be applied to your claim.

......10. Save payments into and/or determined by the Court, any sums paid in settlement of this claim are required to be made by cheque, which should be made payable to the Claimant.

 

Innocent

 

I believe that there is no right to a particular method of payment, but you can stipulate a particular method of payment in your settlement discussions. The Defendant can choose whether or not to accept your stipulation as part of the settlement.

 

Otherwise, it looks good to me, but don't rely on one response. You should get a range of views to form your opinions and make any amendments to suit.

 

Regards,

Bean

[innocent]

Thanks Mike

 

No I have not asked for the original agreement

 

 

Can you push me in a direction to explain why this would be beneficial and recover ALL of the interest??

 

 

Many thanks

 

Innocent

[innocent]

Thanks Ladybird and thankyou again Bean :D

 

Yes I have investigated other contractual interest POCs....

 

I think my confusion perhaps has come from the difference in wording between current account claims and credit card claims....

 

So rather, as Bean you are correct to point out, I word authorised, unauthorised rates I should of course...

 

claim the cash advance rate APR

then in the alternative

the merchandise rate APR

and finally in the alternative

8% statatory interest

 

 

If this makes sense???

 

Everyone agree, and Ill amend the draft POC...

 

"Thankyou"

 

Innocent

[ladybird17]

I don't know - I haven't come across anyone actually calculating the cash advance rate & the merchandise rate separately. Certainly first option is to go for the higher rate and then the statutory as the alternative. Someone should come along & clear this up soon, I expect. Or you could start a new thread on merchandise/cash advance interest, but just ask if anyone has calculated and then claimed on 2 different interest rates. - don't refer to this specific case otherwise you will get your threads merged and you'll be back to square one!

[innocent]

Thanks Ladybird

 

 

Hmmmm pondering :o

 

 

Surely somebody has claimed contractual interest on a credit card before???

[innocent]

An update of my proposed "N1" POC

 

CHANGES HIGHLIGHTED IN BLUE

 

Ok action is against: (even though Barclays may be selling Monument????)

 

BARCLAYS BANK PLC T/A MONUMENT

 

and address all correspondance to barclays registered address!!!

 

 

 

Brief details of claim"

 

The Claimant seeks the return of penalty charges and overdraft interest charged thereon, debited to the Claimant's bank account by the Defendant, and interest on these amounts as defined by the contract between the parties.

 

 

"Value"

Penalty charges in the sum of £xxxx and interest charged thereon in the sum of £xxxx. Interest to be determined as the Court deems just, as per section 8 of the attached Particulars of Claim, with the maximum to not exceed £xxxx. A maximum total of £xxxx.

Plus any applicable Court fees.

Plus interest from date of issue to date of judgement or earlier payment at a maximum rate of £xxxx per day or at such rate and for such periods as the Court deems just, according to section 8 of the attached Particulars of Claim.

 

 

"Particulars of claim"

1. The Claimant has a 'Monument' Credit Card Account, number xxxx ("the Account"), opened on or around 11th October 2002;

 

2. The Account is governed by the Defendant’s Personal Banking Terms and Conditions ("the contract");

 

3. During the period in which the Account has been operating the Defendant has debited numerous charges to the Account in respect of purported breaches of contract in regards to "Late Payment Fees" and "Overlimit Fees", etc.. on the part of the Claimant and also charged interest on the charges once applied;

 

4. The Claimant understands that the Defendant contends that the charges were debited in accordance with the terms of the contract between itself and the Claimant;

 

5. A schedule of the charges and interest applied is attached to these particulars of claim; (Appendix xxxx);

 

6. The Claimant will rely on the Competition Commission’s report entitled "Northern Irish Personal Banking," published on 20th October, 2006, as evidence that the Defendant is aware that the income derived from its default charges is calculated to generate material profits and is not merely a means of recouping losses incurred in relation to Account defaults

 

7. The Claimant will further rely on the Office of Fair Trading’s ("the OFT") statement of 5th April 2006 concerning default charges in credit card contracts;

 

8. The Claimant thus contends that:

 

a) The charges debited to the Account:

i) are punitive in nature;

ii) are not a genuine pre-estimate of cost incurred by the Defendant;

iii) exceed any alleged actual loss to the Defendant in respect of any breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant;

iv) are not intended to represent or relate to any alleged actual loss, but instead unduly enrich the Defendant which exercises the contractual term in respect of such charges with a view to profit.

 

b) Further to 8.a), the charges debited to the Account are penalties rather than liquidated damages. A charge is held to be a penalty if the sum stipulated for is extravagant and unconscionable in amount in comparison to the greatest loss that could conceivably be proved to have followed from the breach. A penalty clause is void in its entirety and unenforceable.

 

c) The contractual provision that permits the Defendant to levy such charges is unenforceable by virtue of the Unfair Contract Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations (1999) paragraph 8 and schedule 2(1)(e), the Unfair Contract Terms Act (1977) section4, and the common law.

 

d) In the alternative to 8.a), b) and c), if the Court finds that the charges are not a penalty, then the Claimant contends that they are unreasonable within the meaning of s.15 Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982.

 

9. Contractual Interest

 

a) The Claimant claims compound interest on the amounts claimed under the principle of mutuality and reciprocity in the contract between the Claimant and the Defendant, using the rate and method specified in the said contract, and as is applied by the Defendant to monies it is owed;

 

b) The Claimant’s grounds for seeking restitution of the compounded contractual rate of interest is that the Defendant would 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;

 

c) The Claimant contends that the taking of unlawful penalties from the Claimant’s Account is 'cash advance' borrowing by the Defendant. Therefore, under the principle of mutuality and reciprocity in the contract between the Claimant and the Defendant, in the first instance the Claimant has calculated compound interest at the Defendant’s current 'cash advance' borrowing rate, being 29.9%APR;

 

d) In the alternative to 9.c), should the taking of unlawful penalties from the Claimant’s Account not be deemed to be 'cash advance' borrowing by the Defendant, then, under the principle of mutuality and reciprocity in the contract between the Claimant and the Defendant, the Claimant has calculated compound interest at the Defendant’s lower current 'merchandise' borrowing rate for a 'Monument' Account, being 19.9% APR;

 

e) In the alternative to 9.c) and d), if the Court decides that the Claimant is not entitled to the contractual rate of interest under the principle of mutuality and reciprocity in the contract between the Claimant and the Defendant, then the Claimant has calculated interest under section 69 County Courts Act (1984) at the rate of 8% a year;

 

f) Details of interest calculated & rates used are attached to these Particulars of Claim as follows:

Appendix xxxx – Compound interest calculated daily at an annual rate of 29.9%APR

Appendix xxxx – Compound interest calculated daily at an annual rate of 19.9%APR

Appendix xxxx – Simple interest under s.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at an annual rate of 8.00%

Appendix xxxx – Evidence of the Defendant’s current borrowing rates

 

10. Accordingly, the Claimant claims:

 

a) The return of the amounts debited between 11th July, 2003 and xxxx xxxx xxxx in respect of charges in the sum of £xxxx, together with interest charged thereon in the sum of £xxxx – totalling £xxxx;

 

b) Any applicable Court fees;

 

c) Compound interest at the contractual rate of 29.9% APR from the date of each transaction to xxxx xxxx xxxx of £xxxx, and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of £xxxx;

 

d) In the alternative to 10.c), compound interest at the contractual rate of 19.9% APR from the date of each transaction to xxxx xxxx xxxx of £xxxx, and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of £xxxx;

 

e) In the alternative to 10.c) and d), interest under section 69 County Courts Act (1984) at the rate of 8% a year, from the date of each transaction to xxxx xxxx xxxx, of £xxxx and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of £xxxx.

 

 

 

WHAT DOES EVERYONE THINK WITH THIS UPDATE??

 

Innocent

 

*I HAVE CONFIRMED THE RATES I HAVE BEEN CHARGED FINDING BOTH LETTERS FROM MONUMENT (EXPLAINING THE CHANGES) AND CONFIRMING RATES ON EACH AND EVERY STATEMENT.

*I HAVE NOT REQUESTED THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT----- HOW WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO CLAIM ALL THE INTEREST BACK????

*I INTEND TO REPLY TO THEIR OFFER OF £338 "NOW", I WILL ACCEPT ONLY AS A PARTIAL PAYMENT BLA BLA BLA.... AND WILL COMMENCE LEGAL PROCEEDINGS WITHIN ONE WEEK FOR THE FULL AMOUNT HAVING GIVEN MONUMENT ENOUGH TIME ETC ETC TO REFUND THIS PARTIAL AMOUNT....

Comments welcome

[ladybird17]

I'm sure people have claimed contractual on a CC - I just haven't come across anyone calculating the cash advances and merchandising separately. I understand why you are doing that, & I guess the way to do it (if you haven't already) is to do 2 spreads - one for merchandise and one for cash advances, and then claim back the total of the 2.

[innocent]

Thanks "earlybird" ladybird lololol

 

 

And I am trying to spark some discussion on this thread....

(thankyou for participating)

 

Yeah, I can see people who have won CI on credit card accounts, and I have now seen about 8 differing (but similiar) CI POCs (guess what?) all quoting authorised and unauthorised rates......

 

 

Let the discussion commence..........

 

 

Innocent

[enaid]

Hi, Innocent

I have only sent my SARs to Monument ,Barclaycard and Cap 1 this week. Just read through your thread is it that Monument are a harder nut to crack or is it that you are claiming different interest rates on this claim that you are seeking more help with this.

[ladybird17]

it's your call! - If you go for the unauthorised you may get it - or you may have to settle for the contractual. Ditto for authorised. You have to weigh up whether there is MORE likelihood of getting the authorised than the unauthorised - who knows?? There have been mutuality & recipricoty - (is that the right word:confused: still too early!) arguments in court, some have won, some haven't!

Not much help here am I? Just thinking out aloud....but when it's at the court stage, no one can pre-empt what's going to happen. So all you can do is make sure all your documentation is spot on (yours seems to now look OK), minimise your risks (oh & keep fingers crossed that it doesn't even to get to court!)

[innocent]

Thanks ladybird........ my thoughts ALOUD exactly at the moment....

 

Enaid..... Having reviewed other threads I do not believe Monument are a particular 'hard nut' to crack, but I am claiming different interest rates this time, as you suggest, ie contractual interest....

 

 

Enaid...... May I suggest you review my...

 

Innocent vs Capital 1 (easy.......)

Innocent vs Natwest

Innocent vs Barclaycard threads;

 

all of which I claimed back the much more proven statautory interest.... I suspect they will proove useful for you

 

 

Innocent

[enaid]

I have had a look at them so I am after the same, have done natwest full result, thought credit cards may differ in some way that is why I am now reading up on these threads. I really don't think I will be going down the contractual route as the claims I am doing are for my son and no way could he afford just now to have the accounts closed, although I know banks are now having to pay compensation for closures.I will follow your threads if you don't mind and also may ask for some advice if thats ok as you seem to have all the same cards as my son. Don't mean to sound rude but the cards that give out money easier than some to the most vunerable.

[innocent]

Enaid....

 

I agree totally

 

 

and 'thankyou' for your vote of confidence

 

Innocent

[innocent]

Any thoughts anyone???

 

Innocent

[innocent]

Ok, based on the letter I received on the 12th February, summarized in post 1 here, and the gesture of goodwill offer; I propose the following letter:

 

Innocents mansion

 

 

9th March, 2007

 

 

MonumentS ADDRESS

 

 

Re: Account number 4265 XXXX XXXX XXXX

 

 

 

Response to settlement offer.

 

 

Dear Sir

 

 

Thank you for your letter dated 12th February 2007.

 

 

As you are no doubt aware from our previous correspondance, the amount in dispute, recalculated, as of today's date, is £408.00 in penalty charges taken plus £56.13, which you have charged me in interest for the sum which you have taken - a total of £464.13. In addition, I am also claiming Contractual interest (compounded) under the principle of equity, and a legal requirement for fairness and balance, at 'Monuments' cash advance borrowing rate of 29.9%. The Contractual Interest element is (to 9th March) is £462.94.

 

 

The grand total of the above is £927.07, and once again, I enclose a schedule.

 

 

Whilst I appreciate your 'gesture of goodwill' offer of settlement of £338.00 credited to the above account, regretfully I cannot accept it on the terms that you have outlined. I would however, be preapred to accept it as a partial settlement, on an unconditional basis and paid directly to me by cheque within the next 10 days.

 

 

Immediate full and final settlement can be achieved by a cheque for the grand total of £927.07, within the next 10 days.

 

 

To enable you to fully reconsider my claim, I am prepared to allow an extension to previous timescales and will give you until Friday 23rd March 2007. At this deadline, failure to comply with this request will result in legal action against you for full recovery, without further notice.

 

 

I have been trying to resolve this now over 5 months. I am aware that their have been many other similiar claims, all of which, you have settled in full before appearing in court. I am sincerely trying to avoid any court action and costs, and have sincere dialogue with you about this matter one final time.

 

 

I trust this clarifies my position.

 

 

 

 

Yours faithfully

 

 

Any thoughts?

 

(And I'd better get on with that POC eh?)

 

 

Innocent

[Exocetjim]

Monument - Thank you for you for this - I have used it as the basis for my claim with Barclays, I am about to go back to MBNA on the same basis. I think you are spot on by effectively asking the court to decide the interest rate. Will the bank or CC company want to go to court to contest the claim? No one has seen one fo the companies in court yet.

[innocent]

Cheers Exocetjim

 

 

Innocent