2 New letter templates that might be of use

[atomboy]

These two letter templates were published in our local paper, the Argus in Brighton as part of their campaign.

 

I thought they were quite good, and easy to understand. I thought I would post them here for the moderators to examine. And perhaps moderators might like add them to the letter template library?

[atomboy]

Letter One

 

[EDITED]

 

Very good, yes. It's ours.

[Michael Browne]

The reason it's quite good is that it is word for word the DPA letter from this site. Compare here:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/516-1-data-protection-act.html

[half ax I]

Isn't that exactly what is in the Template Library http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/516-1-data-protection-act.html

 

Looks like it word for word the same as the CAG copyrighted version.

[half ax I]

Snap!

[atomboy]

Letter Two

 

[your address]

[their address]

[date]

 

 

Dear Sir/Madam:

 

Penalty & unfair charges - request for refund for [your name]

 

Sort code: Account no:

 

 

According to my records I have been charged £[amount] in paid referral fees and £[amount] in charges for items returned unpaid since [date].

 

0n April 5, 2006, the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) announced that default charges which are set at more than £12 will be presumed to be unfair and unenforceable in terms of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (SI. 1999/2083). Charges above this sum will be subject to legal action by the OFT (press release 68/06 – online here: Current credit card default charges unfair

 

The OFT stated that a charge is not fair simply because it is below this sum and I believe that a reasonable charge would be 50 pence for the reasons set out below. Please refund my charges as a matter of urgency.

 

I would respectfully submit that if your organisation does not agree to immediately refund all unfair charges applied to my account, it will not meet the “fit and proper person” test to hold a consumer credit licence under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. In that eventuality, I will submit a 1974 Act complaint to the OFT.

 

Separately, 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.” (second report, 25 January, 2005, paragraph 50 – online here: House of Commons - Treasury - Second Report

 

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).

 

Please refund all charges applied to my account from the start of 2001 within the next seven days. I reserve the right to commence court proceedings without any further notice and to seek an additional award for distress and inconvenience, together with legal expenses.

 

Yours faithfully

 

[signature]

 

[your name]

[half ax I]

I'd go with the process and templates that have served CAG members well. Much waffle in this 2nd letter me thinks. Timescales may appear unreasonable to a court.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/

[atomboy]

:o ok....is my face red ...so I didn't check all the templates in the library before posting first letter...but second letter I haven't seen in the library....

[Bookworm]

No reason why you should... Although it has appeared a few times in this forum before, I think it might be one of Which?'s templates, top of my head... It's definitely from one of the other sites anyway, and as such, we wouldn't be able to include it, even if we wanted to.

 

Our templates have gone through many incarnations since they were first put up. Part of their design is that they shouldn't be too long, too waffly, and look professional. A sentence like "I believe that a reasonable charge would be 50 pence for the reasons set out below. Please refund my charges as a matter of urgency." looks anything but... IMO.

 

Thanks all the same, and it's nice to see the Brighton press joining in the fight... Ok, it's not quite the Murdoch empire, but hey... we have to reach them in every nook and cranny!!!

[atomboy]

I guess I've been arguing with banks too much....after dealing with them, "too long and too waffly," does sound professional

Night all and thanks