Claim for charges taken from benefits

[steven4064]

not completly sure why s7(b) would limit the meaning of "charge"?

Its a basic problem of definition (and one that penalty charges have misunderstood - see posts 7 & 16 on this thread)

 

In the section quoted above the word 'charge' is used in a legal sense as a legal claim on money, for example an attachment of earnings.

 

My current thinking is that bank charges are an assignment not a charge as far as SSAA 1992 and TCA 2002 are concerned.

[tomterm8]

Its a basic problem of definition (and one that penalty charges have misunderstood - see posts 7 & 16 on this thread)

 

In the section quoted above the word 'charge' is used in a legal sense as a legal claim on money, for example an attachment of earnings.

 

My current thinking is that bank charges are an assignment not a charge as far as SSAA 1992 and TCA 2002 are concerned.

 

I disagree, the section obviously includes both judicial, legal and equitable charges, for example on future income. http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2004/670.html&query=charge+and+legal+and+equitable&method=boolean .

[steven4064]

I'm just telling you what I have been advised. The section title is "Attachment of moneys payable by the Crown."

[mrsfoot]

Can I butt in if possible??

 

I have been successful in completing a claim for charges to be refunded on the basis that according to Social Security Administrayion Act 1992 section 187 that certain benefits are inalienable. This means a charge cannot be applied to any benefit which falls into the category of income related. This includes:

Tax Credits

Income support

Child benefit.

 

I contacted the review team on 0845 603 9793. I also emailed the customer services address and copied in the CEO. In the review dept I spoke to Sean who was extremely helpful and refunded the charges within 15 min of our conversation.

I am more than happy to help you with this claim if you need it.

 

Mrsfoot

[Vital Spark]

Vital Spark, contact details for the C.A.B. are both public knowledge & accessible to the public at large... Get advice .

 

Private contact details of particular members of staff, which were given to me in confidence, will remain in confidence... sorry, but there it is. that's not negotiable.

 

I would note that if steven were to pm the member I mentioned earlier it would work to his friends advantage:cool: .

Ah, right. My mistake. Full apologies. I thought you were declining to pass on the Debt Agency's number.

 

I applaud your steadfastness in confidence.

[Vital Spark]

Mrs Foot, you little wonder. GONGRATUATIONS!

 

Was your claim made north or south of the border?

[mrsfoot]

England and Wales have both had success in the Benefit charges refund. Give me a shout if you need anything

[Falkirk1298]

Can everyone who has posted here please go to Stevens first post and complete the petition, assuming you are in agreement.

Stevens post has a link and it is easy to complete.

Any questions, please ask.

Thanks:) or here as easier

 

Click here to sign Downing Street petition on banks unlawfully taking claimants' benefits

 

Signed

[jontah 2006]

i am contributing to this thread.

[stonedecroze]

Hi Steve just popping to see how you are getting on.

 

Any progress yet?

[steven4064]

Finally got a letter in reposnse to SAR today (after 63 days). All they sent was a list of charges!

 

We have sent off a complain to ICO naming HAlifax and Data Controller by name.

 

Still, we have enough info to file at court which we will be doing in the next dya or so. THe letter from Halifax also said "you should be aware that if you choose to issue a claim in the courts the bank will immediatlet apply to the court for an order to stay your action until reslolution of teh bank's proceedings with the OFT" - We will see about that. In fact I'm thinking of putting a note on the N1 or as an attcahed letter to the court pointing out that the OFT proceedings are completely irrelevant to this claim. My court still issues AQs so we shall certainly include something there.

[steven4064]

We have incorporated comments on POC from all you lovely people

IN THE XXXXX COUNTY COURT

 

BETWEEN

 

XXXX, CLAIMANT

 

AND

 

HALIFAX plc DEFENDANT

 

PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

 

1. The Claimant has an Account Number xxxxxxx, Bank Sort Code xxxxxx ("the Account") with the Defendant which was opened in September 2003.

2. During the period in which the Account has been operating the Defendant has automatically debited numerous charges to the Account in respect of referred Direct Debits and the Claimant exceeding his overdraft limit. The Claimant understands that the Defendant contends that the charges were debited in accordance with the terms of the contract between itself and the Claimant.

 

3. A list of the charges (“the Schedule”) applied is attached to these Particulars of Claim.

 

4. Since August 2003, the Claimant’s entire income has been derived from Income Support and Child Benefit paid by the Department of Work and Pensions and Child Tax Credit paid by HM Revenue and Customs paid directly into the Account. This money does not belong to the Claimant but is public money to meet the basic needs of the Claimant and the Claimant’s family.

 

5. The Claimant contends that the charges constitute an assignment of money by the Defendant and to the Defendant contrary to

 

a) s187 Social Security Administration Act 1992 regarding Income Support and Child Benefit, and

 

b) s45 of the Tax Credits Act 2002 regarding Child Tax Credit,

 

and are thereby illegal. The Claimant contends that the contract terms that the Defendant relies on to justify debiting these charges are void by virtue of the same sections.

 

6. The defendant has, in addition, levied interest on these charges which is also detailed in the Schedule.

 

7. Accordingly the Claimant claims:

a) the return of £xxxx (xxx Pounds Sterling) taken by the defendant in charges detailed in the Schedule and interest applied on the charges of £xxx (xxx Pounds Sterling and xx pence);

 

b) court costs;

 

c) interest under section 69 County Courts Act 1984 at a daily rate of 0.022% (8% per year) up to the date of judgement or earlier payment.

 

8. The Claimant also respectfully asks the court to make an order requiring the Defendant to cease making assignments in contravention of s187 of the Social Security Administration Act 1992 and s45 of the Tax Credits Act 2002 of benefits from the Claimant's account.

I believe that the contents of these particulars of claim are true

[jontah 2006]

We have incorporated comments on POC from all you lovely people

 

 

 

please stephen, check ouy this link:-

 

 

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/barclays-bank/109831-help-please.html

 

:-? :-? :-?

[steven4064]

please stephen, check ouy this link:-

 

 

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/barclays-bank/109831-help-please.html

 

:-? :-? :-?

See my reply

[jontah 2006]

i like your style.

totally confident.

thanks for that.

i tend to 'spy' the other threads, mainly to pick up new info.

[Josie8]

subscribing

[steven4064]

i like your style.

totally confident.

thanks for that.

i tend to 'spy' the other threads, mainly to pick up new info.

We are hoping to actually test out the unlawfulness under SSAA1992 and TCA2002 in the courts.

[jontah 2006]

We are hoping to actually test out the unlawfulness under SSAA1992 and TCA2002 in the courts.

 

 

 

 

gosh, well wouldn't that be something.

i am doing my friend's who has MS + on DLA.

 

 

i have successfully done my son's at LTSB. we ended up in the london mercantile court, last month.

 

 

this site is fantastic with all the help, cameradie + humour.

[steven4064]

Was it transferred to the London MC? If so, from where?

[jontah 2006]

Was it transferred to the London MC? If so, from where?

 

it was transferred from uxbridge CC.my daughter works near uxbridge, so she filed there on behalf of my son, although we live in NE london.yes it was transferred to the LMC.LTSB settled 10 minutes before the judge mackie walked it.i now actually need your advice.the ORDER was made signed by barrister james, myself as i was representing my son + the judge.to date, i have yet to 'eye-ball' the said document.i called the court 2/7 ago + was told LTSB has not registered it.i called LTSB + was told someone will get back to me in 72hrs.i wll write to them on monday.

[deadlykiss]

hi steven glad you got all your documents will watch your thread with interest

[deadlykiss]

lol sorry jontah wont take me to the link so cant do nothing about it

[jontah 2006]

oh dear!

[MARTIN3030]

Yes looks like this one will rock.

Steven there is additional stuff related to this scenario in the recent guidance for objecting to stays.

If memory serves me right it has been drawn up by PC and is reproduced of course as a sharing excercise.

There may be bits and bobs within that to customise within your pocs.

Either way.....its very well laid out and will I believe prove a godsend for all those going down this road stay or no stay.

[steven4064]

Martin

 

I've seen it. The trouble is that the PC stuff quotes case law (Woods v RBOS) that is only relevant in Scotland. Scottish cases should be dead easy because of the precedent in Woods. In England and Wales there is nothing quite so helpful, unfortunately.

 

However, we intend to file a claim along the lines above, including the request for an injunction. THat should stop them settling out of court, too, as i doubrt they will agree to stop levying charges, effectively forever!

 

At allocation, we may ask for the case to be referred to the MC and try and get a precedent. Thanks for the advice.