Contractual Interest Discussion

[TANZARELLI]

Well that was a long read, still none the wiser, so here it is. I have had a lot of claims on the back burner and have been doing lots of reading into this issue. I started reading the why is nobody claiming contractual interest thread and to be honest stopped a while back as felt it was going round in circles without a clear route.

 

I have read lots of other thread on this site and have sometimes chosen to read more than comment as have sometime felt a tad out of my depth. However, i continue to spend vast amounts of time on this site reading up cutting and pasting bits and bobs into what i call my "Bank Battle Folder" (which I hasten to add is still with me after nearly loosing it, all backed up now, so no more near heart attacks). I decided last night to crack on with these claims and have today sent 2 prelims to Bcard (not before time, one mine one my partners), 1 prelim to HSBC, and a prelim to Barclays for my second claim. All these are with contractual interest from the outset.

 

Yes I could have waited longer, but I would prob have never bothered if I had read much more than this. So decided to go for it and will spend the next 14 days reading up even more info and working out my arguements until I feel I am ready, then if needed (probably) I will send the LBA, I will then spend even more time reading even more info and fine tuning my arguements until I myself not anyone else (as ultimately it will be me in that court room if it ever gets to that point) is confident that I myself knows what I am TW@TTING on about.

 

If after the LBA deadline is up I feel that I am still not 100% then I may even wait for a bit before filing (thats my choice and my choice only). If and when I am ready I will file. But if the Defendant thinks I will be willing to settle for anything less than what I set out to claim then they can think again.

 

If it goes to court and I loose and the judge awards costs I will deal with that when/if I need too.

 

I think we need to be carefull but I do also think we need to be strong.

 

Perhaps I am being greedy? Perhaps the FAT CAT Banks have been for years?

 

Sorry if thats just a load of babble. Feel free to comment, I may choose to respond, then again I might just watch and read some more.

 

PS Wheres the fighting CAG spirit we all know and love??

[TANZARELLI]

One last thing, don't you think that the Banks and CC Companies will be reading this any patting themselves on the back. I think we should be careful about showing weakness and confusion. JMHO

[TANZARELLI]

If we claim for contractual interest with statutory in the alternative - and that's the alternative that would be deemed appropriate by the Judge, not the bank - then surely an offer of charges + 8% interest is not a full offer. I personally don't think that a court would consider that as a full settlement, providing the contractual rate had been set out properly in the Particulars of Claim. The court may very well disagree with the rate but I don't see how rejecting an offer including 8% interest would be seen as unreasonable or would get you into any difficulties.

 

The issue comes in rejecting the offer entirely so that you are still pursuing the total amount inclduing charges plus contractual. But as I said in my above post you need to have a solid argument prepared for contractual and it is vital that you are confident.

 

Lucid

 

At last,

 

Totally agree, why should we let the banks move the goal posts.

 

Nice one Lucid

[TANZARELLI]

Tanz that's not the point and I'm sorry I don't agree...

 

 

 

The whole point is that if you rejected an offer +8% and fees before filing, you may find that the Judge would be non-receptive to the fact that you are pushing for CI. It's not a case of 'oh but if you don't agree Judge I have the alternative here' as the defendent would shout out 'actually we offered that months ago, before they even filed a claim!'......would he be happy? IMO NO.

 

 

After a claim has been filed and like Lucid says, properly particularised then (if it is small claims) I don't see why you shouldn't go all the way. I would be caucious in fast track or multi.

 

 

Wxxx

 

I can see your arguement here willow, but what if they offered you this after you have filed surely the same thing would be said then as well. I can see that it would seem to be greedy if you went ahead and filed after an offer of charges and 8%. But are you saying that as long as you can get to the MCOL and N1 stage without this offer, then its ok to carry on and leave it to the judge?

[TANZARELLI]

Tanz thanks Im greedy now am I?

 

My opinion now as I have the hump...dont claim contractual then cos this rediculous and going round in circles here be happy and do the normal claim and then you wont be deemed greedy.

 

milly X

 

Milly never meant that as a dig at you in the slightest. Was not even referring to your case. sorry if you have took offence, none intended.

 

What I was trying to say is in your defence if anything. But members are trying to get a conclusive answer here for something that I dont think is even tested. Yes I could see that a perhaps small minded judge who really was not at all that bothered with how important our cases were to us, may, if having a bad day cause he had got out of bed the wrong side, or felt he was wasting his career sitting in a room attempting to deal with small claims that never even showed up half the time cause the banks settled prior to the hearings and he was dreaming of bigger and better things for himself......may see the fact that someone who had already been offered a refund of charges and 8% before filing, but then continued to file purely for contractual, as being greedy.....

 

I am not clear however on what the difference is between the bank offering it before you file and you not accepting it and carrying on, or the bank not offering it until after you filed but before the hearing and you not accepting it and carrying on. Surely its the same thing and the bank would argue the same thing and the judge may say the same thing.

 

Perhaps I am being thick here. (Dont answer that folks) lol

 

Once again no offence meant milly your case seems different as you have explained.

 

I still dont think that we are any closer to the truth here because it is always going to be dependant on individuals case details, research, confidence in speaking in a court, the odd panic attack I dare say, the legals from the bank, and the big scary judge:-o , who may:) or may not:mad: be in a good mood:D .

 

Waffled enough and sorry again.

 

Tanz

[TANZARELLI]

Just resubscribing to this thread which has been moved and re-named.

[TANZARELLI]

That is both hilarious and disturbing all at the same time!! PMSL:lol:

 

Funny that.

[TANZARELLI]

Im very sad about bill-k and I'm am really afraid we won't be seeing him around for a while.

 

Milly X

 

Has he been on today?

 

I might send him an email.

[TANZARELLI]

No probs bill, and thanks for the click. See you here again soon I hope mate.

 

Tanz