Nationwide charges - post 6 years.

[pestrick]

Hi,

 

I was wondering if anyone has any experience with Nationwide and charges beyond 6 years? I have succeeded up to 6 years and am still seeking for a few months charges prior to this, please see attached, they say they will actually defend this in Court. Thanks for any experiences you can share with me. Also, is my argument in respect of limitation reasonable? or flawed?

 

Thanks for your time my friends!

 

Pat (PS first is their response, afterwhich is my argument)

____________________________________________________________

Dear Sir,

Thank you for your email. We have reviewed this case with our client. Our client's position remains the same in that the claim is statute-barred. Our client has successfully defended claims for charges debited more than 6 years before the claim was issued.

Yours sincerely

 

Stephen Perry

Team Leader

LSG Litigation

Cardiff

Direct Dial: 0845 498 7143

International: +44 292 047 7143

Home - Eversheds LLP

 

 

 

From: P Anderson

Sent: 27 June 2007 13:19

To: Perry, Steve (Eversheds)

Cc: NBS

Subject: RE: Claim number: *******

 

To Whom It May Concern:

I have now received £1072.79 from nationwide in reimbursement in part of my claim which is £438.84 short of my claim. Nationwide say the reason for this is that their calculations differ from mine in relation to the said charges and the onus is on me to prove my calculations are correct. I again refer you to my schedule.

It appears to me that the difference is that Nationwide have only reimbursed charges back to 29/5/01 yet the charges I have actually claimed date back to 10/10/00 and I believe nationwide have omitted the following in reimbursement, along with the relevant interest from these.

I should put you on warning that this is not a case that I believe the statute of limitation of 6 years applies and in my amended particulars of claim I will be asking the Court to consider the issue of limitation and it's relevance, and ask the Court to waive limitation. My argument without prejudice will be that as a layman (and given one is ultimately forced to have a bank account, all of whom have similar charges) did not, at that time, have the full knowledge and appreciation that as a Claimant I do now. Therefore I consider limitiation should only begin from any such time as an overall agreement is made by a regulatory body such as the ombudsman. I am of course also aware that many other litigants have recovered going back 10 years. I am not seeking charges before 10/10/00 (which there are many more) and therefore have every faith that a judge will agree that I could not have reasonably have expected to know, at the time of 'offence', that the penalty charge was unreasonable and woefully disproportionate to the actual and real cost incurred by the Society.

I therefore urge you to return to Nationwide with my comments and seek urgent instructions from them, I will not be advising the Court that the matter is settled and will proceed to trial for the remainder of the penalty charges applicable prior to 29/5/01 (the first charge reimbursed by the Society).

Finally, please acknowledge receipt of this email, thank you.

Below is charges that have not been reimbursed:

10/10/00 - £17.50 cheque card misuse fee

31/10/00 - £10 unauth overdraft fee.

01/11/00- £25 unpaid cheque fee .

21/11/00 - £25 unpaid cheque fee

28/11/00 - £25 unpaid cheque fee

19/02/01 - £35 cheque card misuse fee

21/02/01 - £25 unpaid cheque fee

28/02/01 - £52.50 - cheque card misuse fee's

28/02/01 - £10 unauthorised overdraft fee

15/03/01 - £52.50 cheque card misuse fee's

20/03/01 - £17.50 cheque card misuse fee

21/03/01 - £150 unpaid cheque fee's

31/3/01 - £10 unauthorised overdraft fee

30/04/01 - £10 unauth overdraft fee

11/05/01 - £25 unpaid direct debit fee

Yours Faithfully,

P Anderson