Claiming on a Business account? Lets join forces?

[TINK660]

I have just managed to find a copy of "doing business with Nat West - our code of practice for business banking" dated March 1996. Does anyone know if this is the same as t&c's. In the booklet it refers to further booklets "ADvice of Account charging terms" "Advice of borrowing terms" and "Charges for business customers", which unfortunately I dont seem to have.

 

Unfortunately my scanner doesnt work but I can copy them and send them if it helps - let me know

[photoman]

I have just managed to find a copy of "doing business with Nat West - our code of practice for business banking" dated March 1996. Does anyone know if this is the same as t&c's. In the booklet it refers to further booklets "ADvice of Account charging terms" "Advice of borrowing terms" and "Charges for business customers", which unfortunately I dont seem to have.

 

Unfortunately my scanner doesnt work but I can copy them and send them if it helps - let me know

 

I'm sure they could be useful.

 

Perhaps send a PM to Zootscoot, and I think they have a mailing address you can send stuff to.

 

regards

 

PM

[JOSH_IOU]

It is my understanding that if one party of a contract holds Unequal bargaining power over the other then this contract is unfair. How can a standard contract be fair?

[zootscoot]

Postal address for CAG:

 

Consumer Action Group

PO Box 7481

Derby

DE1 0LE

 

Thanks

[Parkvale]

Zoot, i have found some of my old terms and conditions on my Nat West business account between 1998 - 2005. Will put them in the post today.

Parky.

[photoman]

Zoot,

 

I also have various letters received from LloydsTSB at the time of such charges.

 

These clearly refer to the sums as being in consideration of of costs incurred dealing with such matters.

 

I also have a copy of the Business Banking code from 2005, which stipulates that the are bound by its' terms to provide 14 days notification of any "standard" account charges.

(Which given that such charges were often debited prior to, or shortly after any letters regards such charges were debited, means that such charges can clearly not be considered as being for "standard" account charges).

 

So, I still think that with regards to Business account claims, the laws regards Liquidated damages can still be invoked.

 

I shall email copies of the letters to you.

 

PM

[Enron]

Subscribing.

 

Nat West Business customer here, dont have any previous T&C (unfortunately I didnt keep them), however they're new T&C have just come through - with surprise, surprise charges going up.

 

Got stung in the past on this account so would like to persue it if possible.

[JOSH_IOU]

Hi Enron

 

Natwest comes over as a nice nice bank and most people think they will never get charged. I refer people to this bank on a daily basis through my online business and charge a £75 fee for the referral. All application forms are taken care of and I even pass Natwest the ID on behalf of the customer. My customers never have to walk into the bank before there account is opened.

 

I follow up with my clients 4 months after they have there account opened. The vast majority of them incur charges of £20 -£30 i have found out. And refer allot of them to this site.

 

I know from reading other threads that before the waiver was introduced the banks were settling accounts when the customers had threatened court action.

 

I think it would be a shame if we let these folks down as most of them i deal with have debts over £70,000 (yes ouch) .

 

Which is why I always appear on this site as if I am pushing the matter which I most certainly am.

 

I would also be interested in pursuing this myself if any one has any ideas.

[Enron]

Spoke to one of the admins in person at the beginning of this week.

 

Think that avenue's are being looked into for business penalty charges to be persued.

[photoman]

Spoke to one of the admins in person at the beginning of this week.

 

Think that avenue's are being looked into for business penalty charges to be persued.

 

Thanks Enron (and thanks to all other admin, mods & other site helpers)

 

I do hope that something can be worked out, because (as has been noted) there are a lot of Business claimants who've really fallen foul of these malicious practices, and taken a real serious beating. The double whammy has then been the knock on effect regards their personal accounts.

[TINK660]

Thats good news - I'm waiting for a reply from Nat West from LBA letter at the moment. They have until the 14th to respond.

[Enron]

Doesnt particularly help that the banks seem to think they have got the better of the business customer.

 

Nat West charges have just gone up, and I would expect other banks to do likewise soon.

[JOSH_IOU]

I thought I would bring this case to evryones attention which is being discussed on this thread. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/oft-test-case-updates/139905-oft-banks-round-one-31.html#post1516414

 

UK weights and measures legislation is of a Byzantine complexity. If a legislative assembly had chosen to confuse the public, then it has succeeded in this case.

In passing the 1972 European Communities Act, Parliament surrendered its sovereignty to the European Union.

Every national court must set aside any national law that conflicts with Community law. Implied repeal of the 1972 Act by the 1985 Weights and Measures Act cannot apply since the old principal which said that where two laws are incompatible the later one is good, is no longer relevant. The 1972 EC Act is a "bold new source of law".

The 1998 Human Rights Act is similar in nature to the 1972 EC Act. It states that the courts can overthrow any act that contravenes it in the future.

The European Union would be destroyed if states went on legislative frolics of their own.

Membership of the European Union is not entrenched. The 1972 Act may be repealed.

[andrew1]

Link doesn't work, not on my machine anyway..

[photoman]

Link doesn't work, not on my machine anyway..

 

You must have an "imperial" computer !

[JOSH_IOU]

try this one

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/oft-test-case-updates/139905-oft-banks-round-one-31.html#post1516407

[Parkvale]

Thats really interesting Josh. I am convinced there will be a way round the business charge problem. The banks and their huge legal teams up to the recent court case must have thought the law was against them. Otherwise they would not have paid out all the monies they did. I myself received £25K back. We will find a way through this and all you claimants will receive back what is rightfully yours. There is alot of thought and work being carried out at the moment. So don't despair and hang in there. This thread is now turning out to be a real centre piece for ideas and thoughts on the way forward with busines claims. Well done photoman and everyone.

[JOSH_IOU]

Hi folks.

 

This is another verry interesting link from business link.

 

The Unfair Contract Terms Act | Business Link

[JOSH_IOU]

It is not unreasonable to rely consumer law aparently if your a sole trader and the credit terms are under £25,000. please see link in previous post.

[tifo]

yes .... it states :

 

Sole traders count as businesses rather than consumers for any purchases they make in connection with their business activities. However, if the trader offers you credit terms up to £25,000 you receive the same protection as individuals under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for this element of the contract.

[JOSH_IOU]

im going to report this link sowe can get some help on this one folks because i think this willchange things.

[steven4064]

Sole traders count as businesses rather than consumers for any purchases they make in connection with their business activities. However, if the trader offers you credit terms up to £25,000 you receive the same protection as individuals under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for this element of the contract.

I'm not sure I understand this - who is being offered credit by whom? Is it saying the sole trader gets the same protection as an individual for loans (s)he takes out up to £25k or that an individual borrowing money from a sole trader does

im going to report this link sowe can get some help on this one folks because i think this willchange things.

What do you think it will change?

[JOSH_IOU]

Something else here as well.

 

Remedies for breach of contract | Business Link

[JOSH_IOU]

Hi Steven.

 

As a soltrader I have been told i dont have the same protection as a consumer. I understand this. But as a soletrader we do have a level of certain protection under the act thats in that link.

 

The soletrader that purchases the service off another company/soletrader is the consumer. Not the other way around.

 

Sorry steven but i dont understand the question.

[steven4064]

Sorry steven but i dont understand the question.

Maybe I misunderstood, but you seemed to be implying that this was news that somehow change everything.

 

I'm a sole trader too - it is good to see that we do get some of the protection that consumers get.