Contractual Interest Discussion

[lucid]

I agree with you Tanz. I can't see any difference in rejecting an offer of charges + 8% interest before of after filing the claim. Unless the idea is that the Judge may not appreciate you rejected it and then pursued a higher amount in a court claim - but surely this could be said of any type of offer if they don't offer you the full amount?

 

I know what I think on the matter, but it is (as you say Tanz) completely down to each individual and what suits them for their own claim. I still believe that if you prepare a good case then the worst that will happen if you reach court and appear before a Judge is that the Judge will award an alternative rate if they don't agree with your case.

 

Lucid

[Guest willowb]

but surely this could be said of any type of offer if they don't offer you the full amount?

If, for example, a £200 offer towards a £300 claim for penalty charges was rejected that would be fair because all charges are unlawful whereas the interest issue is at the discretion of the Judge.....does that make sense?

 

I know that you'll say that CI is part of the claim and that's true, I agree with you but let's not confuse the right to interest with the right to reclaim our charges. IMO the two will be seen as separate issues by the Judge.

 

Wxxx

[TANZARELLI]

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

[sn00psmum]

Hear hear Lucid.

 

Just want to say, if anybody needs a smile by the time they get to this part....read this...made me chuckle....even when I was grumpy!

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-knowledge/58505-quick-survey-compounded-contractual.html

 

ok...enough play...carry on the debate

 

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

[millymollymoo]

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

 

Milly X

[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.

[millymollymoo]

Tanz I sent him a Pm and he replied and Im afraid he is not going to be around for a while and I don't know how long. Please Pm him:( .

 

Milly X

[Guest willowb]

Hi folks:) ....hummm the 'other thread' in the bear garden has been closed and in my opinion in a very rude manner! I really want to keep this on-topic so let's (in honour of the OP) get back to the issues.

 

Though, having said that, they are issues that have not been re-dressed in any great length by the mods on this site (other than Caro, thank you). So, any mods who actually do agree with claiming contractual interest, would you care to post here and tell us your views?

 

I know I said let's keep this on- topic but I would like to quote Bong from the 'dumped' thread because what she says is so very true......

 

 

 

 

If you want to know what it was about, it was written in the first post of his thread, a serious thread which got dumped in the bear garden when people started posting rubbish in the latter stages simply because the questions raised were being ignored. IMO this was done hastily and indiscriminately, as well as disrespectfully, and without any heed to Bill's original intentions to get some clarity on the CI issues, through healthy discussion with the team leaders, and move forward from the conflicting advice that was, and is, being given. Ultimately the aim was to create a uniformity of approach in helping and advising claimants, as Bill devoted so much of his time to doing. For some reason it was seen as Bill seeking attention.

 

How has this been allowed to happen? I cannot stand back and watch a very much respected and loved co-user, who offers so much support to others, being crushed like this. Where is the willingness for mature and constructive discussion? If people felt attacked by this thread then why?

 

 

Hummmm well, Robert.....for fear of being attention-seeking or boring, would you care to comment...... just will not do I'm afraid, we are all intelligent people and won't be 'fobbed off' in such a bombastic way!

 

I may not agree with the way Bill handled this and he knows that but I certainly do not agree with the way this site and mods have handled Bill either......boring, attention-seeking? got something to say about this subject? well, just say it!......anyone?????

 

LET ME SAY THIS NOW, I AM NOT BRINGING BILL'S ISSUES WITH THIS SITE UP AGAIN! I AM INVITING SOME/ANY INPUT FROM MODS ON THIS SUBJECT, WHICH IS WHAT BILL WANTED ALL ALONG.......HE WAS TRYING TO GET THIS SUBJECT SOME ATTENTION NOT HIMSELF!!!

 

 

Wxxx

Bong if you are unhappy about being quoted just let me know hun and I'll delete it!

[Guest willowb]

When did I insult another member? I didn't call anyone attention-seeking or boring? Yet I'm the one getting a slapped wrist? I don't understand anymore....I really don't.

 

I just merely wanted to get this topic started again and stressed the need to 'stay away' from previous issues. But I felt it important to stress that this was Bill's intention all along, is that so wrong? to stick up for a friend?

 

Wxxx

[Spiceskull]

So, any mods who actually do agree with claiming contractual interest, would you care to post here and tell us your views?

My two penneth remains as it was on the "why is no-one claiming..." thread - if you claim contractual and are lucky enough to get it, then good luck. However, do not make contractual the focus of your claim. I was shot down for suggesting this approach, and I believe that the shooting down was unjustified...

 

In the first instance the claim is about the refund of penalty charges, unlawfully applied due to the unfair nature of the contract terms. This always has been, and always should be, the focal point of any claim. The claim is not about "get as much as you can..." and anyone who approaches a claim from this perspective is going to run into problems.

 

Additionally, the basic focus of the claim is about demonstrating that the bank has unduly enriched itself at the expense of the customer, and pushing hard for contractual puts the claimant in a similar position to the bank...and as such the bank would have a good lever to counter the claim, and deflect attention from the real issues.

 

Again, I repeat my own view, and some would describe me as reasonable and level-headed - if you want to claim contractual then by all means do. Just ensure that this is not the focus of your claim, and ALWAYS defer to the judgment, position and advice of the courts...

[Guest bong]

So Phoenix, this appears to be moving away from the spirit of BankFodder's original case promoting contractual interest claims. This was about the statutory rate of 8% being a bit niggardly when the banks are charging us between 15 and 30% for the use of their money. It would be helpful to know if there has been a climb down, and whether this is now thought to have been a step too far. As has been said before, there is not much, if any, point in claiming contractual from the outset if the aim is to accept an offer with no interest before court, and an offer with 8% once it has gone past the court claim stage. This depletes people's confidence if they start out from the position of thinking the court will find their claim unreasonable.

 

Have I got the wrong end of the stick?

[thereshope!]

My two penneth remains as it was on the "why is no-one claiming..." thread - if you claim contractual and are lucky enough to get it, then good luck. However, do not make contractual the focus of your claim. I was shot down for suggesting this approach, and I believe that the shooting down was unjustified.

I really hope luck doesnt come into it as I dont tend to be very lucky !.Hopefully being able to put across a good argument will help !

In the first instance the claim is about the refund of penalty charges, unlawfully applied due to the unfair nature of the contract terms. This always has been, and always should be, the focal point of any claim. The claim is not about "get as much as you can..." and anyone who approaches a claim from this perspective is going to run into problems. why shouldn't we "get as much as we can" ?. If they have charged us contractual interest , why should we be left out of pocket ?. If they didnt charge it in the first place we wouldnt be in a postion to claim it, right ?

 

Additionally, the basic focus of the claim is about demonstrating that the bank has unduly enriched itself at the expense of the customer, and pushing hard for contractual puts the claimant in a similar position to the bank...and as such the bank would have a good lever to counter the claim, and deflect attention from the real issues

If we claim back what the banks unlawfully charged us in the first instance, plus apply the rate of interest that they applied to us,hopefully we are put back to where we started prior to being unlawfully penalised ?

 

.Again, I repeat my own view, and some would describe me as reasonable and level-headed - if you want to claim contractual then by all means do. Just ensure that this is not the focus of your claim, and ALWAYS defer to the judgment, position and advice of the courts...

Yes. Difficult decision to make. Took me a week of swaying to one side then the other before I was able to make an informed choice lol !!!

Hope xx

[maxine989]

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

 

Milly X

 

I go away for the weekend and I come back and see loads has been going on... OH no...!!

 

I have had a quick shuffty through some of the threads to catch up what has been going on...

 

I can't beleive it...

 

Bill has quit? For good?

[maxine989]

And... back to the CI issue.

 

I still beleive there is nothing to loose other than to go for it. I have said it before in many other threads..

 

This is just MY opinion and appreciate that some of you are still not too sure about claiming the 16.9 or higher interest. That's fair enough. I think the general movement towardas this debate...was for each to imform themselves well and if they felt confident in claiming it then that is up to those individuals.

 

 

I hope you have all been fine and dandy over the weeknd...?

 

ANy exciting developments?

 

There was nothing exciting in the post for me today... only a letter from the court saying the TSB have defended... which I was expecting anyway...

 

Another £100 to pay out with the AQ form!! Shucks!!

[thereshope!]

Hi maxine

 

Good to see you back

 

I have been in contact with Bill over the last few days and he feels that he needs time away at the moment.

 

Never is a long,long time and I would be really sad too if he felt he couldnt come back.

 

I miss him already.

 

As I feel sure many do....

 

Hope xx

[maxine989]

BTW... Where's all our Avatar's gone? And I noticed my number of posts has gone down... Does that mean some posts have been deleted (the ones from Bills thread by any chance)?

 

Blimey... What HAS been going on while I was away???

 

Someone PM me to fill me in... I am confused.

[Guest bong]

And... back to the CI issue.

 

I still beleive there is nothing to loose other than to go for it. I have said it before in many other threads..

 

This is just MY opinion and appreciate that some of you are still not too sure about claiming the 16.9 or higher interest. That's fair enough. I think the general movement towardas this debate...was for each to imform themselves well and if they felt confident in claiming it then that is up to those individuals.

 

Agreed Maxine. People must understand their reasons for claiming CI. However, what will you do if the bank now offers to settle your claim with 8%. Will you feel confident enough to proceed for what you have claimed?

 

Just trying to be constructive, please don't think I am attacking you at all.

 

EDIT- BTW avatars have gone for the time being and emails as well. well mine have all gone, I hope its not just me thats been singled out

[millymollymoo]

Bong hi:)

 

Honest opinion please. If you rejected fully and the offer was including unfair conditions threatening return of money if you did not agree and took this into court as I have.

 

Would you believe your WHOLE claim was intact and reasonable considering the circs?

 

Milly X

[Guest bong]

hi milly, my opinion is that if they have made unacceptable conditions then you have a valid reason for rejecting it and pursuing the whole claim to a hearing.

[maxine989]

Hi Bong.

 

I have had an offer for the full amount + 8% from Egg... after they initially offered me a £4 refund on each fee.

 

I have rejected the offer. Egg have done nothing but mess me around. And... the charges I am cliaming for were fee's that snowballed out of control when I was at University.

 

Egg offered me a re-finance loan to pay the credit card and the snowballing fees off which I am still paying back now. Of course it has cost me a lot over the years in interest... and all of this could have been avioded if they hadn't of hammered me with fees at a time when I was financially struggling to pay my rent, feed my kids and pay my tuition fees at Uni.

 

I have been seriously thinking about the whole situation concerning CI. I have made a decision to go the whole hog, after all my claim was for full refund of charges + CI right from the beginning and so I don't see why I should accept less.

 

I know it may be a risk. However, I feel confident about arguing my case. And... if I have to state my reasons before a judge, then I will... I am happy to see what happens and I will accept the outcome whichever way the judge decides.

 

I am not worried about loosing. If I do... then at least we know the score eh?

 

[Guest bong]

maxine I think you have made the right decision. not saying anything about whether you have a good chance of winning it or not, cos that will depend upon the judge you get and the way in which you present your case and counter the banks arguments. the point is they haven't offered to settle your claim and if you lose - on the point of costs - you had a reason to be there, it was not unreasonable conduct to deem that you have a case to claim CI, and therefore should not be ordered to pay costs, in small claims track. presumably Egg also asked for small claims track. That is my opinion. GOOD LUCK.

[maxine989]

Thanks bong

 

I have the AQ to fill in and so will have to wait for a date after that.

 

I will keep progress as it happens on my egg thread, which I will update a bit later.

 

[TANZARELLI]

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

 

Tanz

[millymollymoo]

hi milly, my opinion is that if they have made unacceptable conditions then you have a valid reason for rejecting it and pursuing the whole claim to a hearing.

 

 

 

Thanks for the moral boost It is much appreciated. XXX

 

Just hope the judge aint grumpy if it gets that far. Cos it wont matter what I say then!!1

 

 

Milly X