Flower19 v Lloyds

[Pondfish]

Sorry Flower mini hijack here.

 

John 72

Agreed, but they have been quick to deduct this payment from claims when it comes to settlement!

So it suddenly changes from a goodwill gesture into a charges refund when the chips are down!

 

Pondy

[flower19]

Good point and very debatable...but in my case they actually stated that the "goodwill payment" was by way of reducing my charges which seems to me as almost an acceptance of liability, and then they went on to say it was a "goodwill gesture" and that they knew they would have to face costs anyway if I was to carry on with my claim.

[flower19]

No probs Pondy

[flower19]

I wonder if a person make such argument at court...to keep it as a "goodwill payment" to maintain good customer relations or a charges refund...

[John72]

Hi

 

Typical of LTSB to want to have their cake and eat it! It's either a charges refund (admission of liability) or a goodwill gesture (ex gratia and without acceptance of any liability).

 

If it comes to it then i'll argue it in court on my case.

 

John

[nicsussex]

If it comes to it then i'll argue it in court on my case.

 

And run the risk of the judge throwing your whole claim out?

[John72]

Hi nicsussex

 

If the issue were to get to court then it would more likely be on the basis that the bank will by then already have admitted liability in relation to the charges themselves, or have settled that aspect of the claim separately.

 

Having argued in the first instance that none of the charges were refundable and stating "...it is denied that any amount is owed.....to the claimant..." would it not be a brave advocate for the bank who would, in front of a judge, say that de facto a refund had already been partly been made (and which therefore should be taken into account) and to contradict their own defence submitted to the court?

 

In that scenario, why do you think it probable that the whole of my claim (as opposed to just say the £750) would be thrown out by the Judge?

 

John

[jessika1]

so i guess i will have to tell them, i cant face having my claim thrown out...at what stage and who do i tell, when i mentioned it to MCOL they said i dont need to tell anyone???

[flower19]

I do think John72 has a point.

 

It would be interesting to see a judge's view on this if argued at court.

 

Jessica, you can always write to the court but most probably it will come out at court anyway.

[jessika1]

I was kind of hoping it didnt get that far! I think maybe if and when i receive an AQ i might include a letter on there to say i have received it.

I have looked back at my letter from Lloyds and it states,

 

'Generally we don't agree to adjust any of these charges, but i can tell you that on this occasion we are prepared to reduce the charges by repaying you £750'

 

However it appears on my statement as a goodwill refund, so i am not quite sure where we would stand on that one...

 

It also says that it is not Lloyds policy to refund interest...yeah right...

[flower19]

That's exactly what I got in my letter offering the £750.

 

That's why I think it contradicts their argument when it gets to court, that it is a refund, and why I think John57 does have a point. Will have to look into this.

 

Yes, I think you can add that in your AQ.

[jessika1]

thanks, lets see if i get one!

[jessika1]

just had a very interesting conversation with MCOL...they have received an order from a district judge stating that they are to no longer send AQ questionnaire to people filing against banks, they are fed up with the fact that no one case has yet to go to a hearing...this is not just for LLoyds but for all banks. Apparantly i will receive this order in a few days and i will post it here for you all to see!

 

Finally, someone is paying attention to fact that the banks are both time and paperwasting...

[John72]

Maybe it's about time that a similar directive was sent to all County Courts which would then speed the whole process up?

 

John

[flower19]

Jess, that's a very interesting development...yes finally someone is paying attention and getting fed up with the banks taticks.

[jessika1]

i quite agree, although it is good news for me

[flower19]

Hi everyone

 

Got an interesting letter today from SC&M, after sending my AQ last Thursday, stating that their client is going to defend the proceedings (well yes, I already knew that because they have filed a defence ) an it goes on to say....

 

" 1. The fees you seek are properly incorporated into your contract with the bank; and

 

2. By making payments (whether by cheque etc etc) from your account where you have insufficient funds to cover them, you are making a request to the Bank for an increased overdraft, which the Bank may meet or decline. If it meets your request, you must pay the necessary charges. The issue of penalties only arises as a matter of law, where there has been a breach of contract, and there is no breach of contract here."

 

And finalises by asking me to contact my branch manager to review my account as it may be useful to consider whether my current arrangements are the most appropriate.

 

Oh please, rubbish...has anyone received one of these letters?

 

Any advice appreciated.

 

Flower:)

[flower19]

This letter was actualy sent before they got my AQ...I wonder why they sent me this letter again reeinforcing that they are going to defend!!

 

They must be very confident....

[jshtr3]

They must be very confident....

 

Or trying to scare you?? I filed on 4th, also waiting for AQ and not recieved one. Hope I don't get one of your letters though. I'm sure it's just a crossed in the post thing. I've seen that letter sent to people just after filing N1

Good Luck

[nicsussex]

Sounds perfectly standard stuff - the fact that they have asked you to do account review i would expect full settlement imminently

[flower19]

Yes jshtr3 I think they might be trying to scare me..as if! :lol:

 

Hope you are right nicsussex.

 

Well I assume I must reply to their letter or maybe not?

 

I think I have seem a thread about someone who also received one of these letters...I wonder what it was called??????

[chloecharm]

I got the same letter but it was stapled to one 'Strictly Without Prejucide' which offered me the full amount. I filed my AQ on Friday

[nicsussex]

Well I assume I must reply to their letter or maybe not?

 

Not really necesarily they are saying nothing that they haven't said in their defence after all

[jshtr3]

Just seen this and you thoguht would be interested

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/lloyds-bank/82626-nlp-ltsb.html#post737658

[flower19]

Thanks for the link jshtr3 !