Consumer Action Group envelope labels
You are part of a community of over 195,000 people. Let your bank know that you won't give in. Display one of our labels on your envelopes. Full description here
Sheet of 20 self-adhesive envelope labels £3.50 inc p&p
|
Do your Internet search here Reclaim the Right Ltd. - reg.05783665 in the UK
reg. office:- 923 Finchley Road
London
NW11 7PE
| | | | Do your Internet search here:-
| | | CAG Announcements | |
Welcome Guest
Please register
Registration is free
There are no charges for using any of the facilities of this website.
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ.
You will have to register before you can post.
To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
You will also have to register to access our template letters and claims forms
registration is free
Are you being threatened over debts more than 6 years old? This may be unfair
See our new Unfair Trading Guide Bought an extended warranty? Not satisfied?
The warranty may be an example of unfair trading
See our new Unfair Trading Guide Have you been defaulted?
Would you like to clean up your credit file? Check it out Are you a victim of unfair trading? Check it out The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regs 2008 Have you been defaulted?
Would you like to clean up your credit file? Check it out | | | | | | Welcome to The Consumer Action Group and The Bank Action Group
Before beginning to claim your bank charges be sure to read the FAQ by clicking the link above. Read it carefully and also read as much of the forum material as you can manage before you start claiming your bank charges refund.
You will have to register before you can post or view the materials which may assist you in reclaiming your penalty charges: click the register link above to proceed.
To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. Understand what you are doing and you will be able to Reclaim the Right more effectively.
Why don't you come and introduce yourself in the Welcome section at the top of the forum. Then have a look around the rest of it.
Do not post or start claiming until you have read the entire FAQ section and step by step guides and you have a good basic idea of what to do and of the layout of the forum.
Good luck claiming your bank charges. We strongly suggest that you register under a UserID and not your own name |  | |
6th February 2007, 12:52
|
#4 (permalink)
| | Platinum Account Customer | Re: Bizarre.Moogle Vs Barclaycard Quote:
Originally Posted by Bizarre.Moogle Check with Royal Mail and its not showing that my letter to them has been received  Thats been 7 days from when i posted it. | Sometimes the update process doesn't work too clever. Give RM a ring and find out where your letter is. You should be able to find the correct number to ring from the RM website. |
| |
10th February 2007, 10:57
|
#5 (permalink)
| | Basic Account Customer | Re: Bizarre.Moogle Vs Barclaycard Spoke to Royalmail, they still have my letter!!!! How bad is that?
Advised that cannot confirm when it will be delivered  But hopefully this week. |
| |
22nd March 2007, 20:33
|
#8 (permalink)
| | Basic Account Customer | Re: Bizarre.Moogle Vs Barclaycard Received today my statements from Barclaycard also a letter with it as well and will type it below.
Dear Bizarre.Moogle
BAARCLAYCARD CUSTOMER SERVICES
ACCOUNT NUMBER: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx
DATA PROTECTION ACT 1998 - Subject Access Request
Further to your recent request for personal information held by Barclaycard, please find enclosed a copy of the card statements you have requested.
Statements held prior to May 2004 are stored on microfilm which is a means of storage that does not fall within the definition of "relevant filing system" under the Data Protection Act 1998 ("the Act") nor within the bounds of what we are obliged to provide in response to your data subject access request as set out in the Information Commissioner's Office website at Information Commissioners Office – Information Commissioner's Office
The Information Commissioner has indicated his intention to amend this guidance. It is therefore as a gesture of goodwill to you, our customer, and in the light of this proposed change that we enclose copies of our pre May 2004 statements as you requested although we take a different view to the Information Commissioner's Office on whether these fall within the definition of "relevant filing system" as set out in the Act.
This information we have enclosed relating to this account is all that we hold.
Yours sincerely
Karen Thompson (Mrs)
Customer Accounts Manager
__________________ RBoS Settled At LBA £798 Barclaycard Defence Filed, Waiting For Court Date HSBC
LBA Sent 15-05-07, Still No Reply Barclays LBA Received 14-05-07, 2nd Holding Letter Sent To Me Stating Should Have Answer By 09-07-07 |
| |
5th April 2007, 18:53
|
#10 (permalink)
| | Basic Account Customer | Re: Bizarre.Moogle Vs Barclaycard Hi peeps. Just got a letter of Barclaycard from my prelim letter. Not overly happy with there response. Tell me what you think please. Quote:
3 April 2007
Dear Bizarre.Moogle
I write further to your recent letter, your correspondence has been passed to me in order that I may investigate and respond in my capacity as Customer Relationship Manager.
With regards to your request for a refund of charges I am sorry you feel the charges you have incurred are unfair. We believe that our charges are both fair and transparent, and we make them clear in our Terms and Conditions, and on the reverse of every monthlystatement. These charges are avoidable by staying within your limit and making your monthly payment on time.
In your correspondance you have outlined case law which you say supports your view. As I am sure you will appreciate Barclaycard is aware of all the information you have drawn to our attention. I must inform you however, that we diasgree with your legal analysis.
However, as a goodwill gesture and without any admission of liability Barclaycard is prepared to credit to your account the difference between the charges you have incurred and the £12 fee recommended by the OFT. In accordance with the charges incurred this would amount to £102.00. As the above Barclaycard account is now closed, please contact this office on the above telephone number with your bank details to enable us to process this refund to you.
I hope this now clarifie the situation. Should you have any further questions regarding this matter please do not hesitate to contact me. If my reply does not meet your expectations you may ultimately be eligible to refer to the Financial Ombudsman Service. Further details of this service are on available on request.
If I have not from you within 8 weeks from the date of this letter, I will close my file in accordance with our usual practice.
Yours sincerely
Carol Jones
Customer Relationship Manager
| As you can see this isn't even half the charges back, rough calcs make it to be around 36% back.
As far as I'm concerned is that the OFT have and will quote from her letter "recommended" that the fee be no bigger than £12, but if memory serves me correctly (and maybe someone can point me in the right direction) the OFT still feel this £12 fee to still be too high.
Opinions anyone? |
| |
5th April 2007, 20:40
|
#13 (permalink)
| | Basic Account Customer | Re: Bizarre.Moogle Vs Barclaycard Just dug these out of the OFT report. Thinking of sending my LBA with some of these in. Again comments welcomed. Quote:
The statement released by the OFT in April 2006 does state the following,
“1.1 This statement sets out the Office of Fair Trading’s (OFT) view of the principles credit card issuers should follow in setting default charges in their standard contracts with consumers in order to meet the test of fairness set out in the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (UTCCRs). The principles have far wider implications for analogous standard default terms in other agreements including those for mortgages, current bank accounts and storecards.”
“1.9 Our presumption will be that credit card default charges set above this level [1.8 … The threshold is £12.] are unfair unless there are exceptional factors…”
“1.10 Where we conclude hat a fee above the threshold is unfair we are likely to challenge the charge but will have regard to all the circumstances in deciding whether to do so or not. We will regard default charges set below the threshold as either not unfair or insufficiently detrimental to the economic interests of consumers in all the circumstances to warrant regulatory intervention at this time. The does not affect in any way the statutory rights of individual consumers, or groups of such consumers, to challenge the level of the default charges, either above or below this threshold”
“1.11 The setting of the threshold is a provisional practical measure to move the whole market towards compliance. We are not proposing that default fees should be equivalent to the threshold, and a court will certainly not consider that a default fee is fair just because it is below the threshold. Our position is that default fees need to be recalibrated in line with the principles set out in this statement to achieve consistency with the UTCCRs…”
“1.14 It must be stressed that this is a statement of our position and reflects the exercise of our discretion as an enforcement agency. Only a court can decide finally whether a term is unfair, or at what level default charges should be set to meet the requirements of the UTCCRs. It should be kept in mind that other enforcers may apply for injunctions under the UTCCRs and that the UTCCRs may be relied upon by consumers in private claims.”
“3.3 Schedule 2 to the UTCCRs illustrates possible respects in which a term may be unfair to the consumer by means of a “grey list” of possible kinds of unfairness. Of particular relevance to the default charges is paragraph 1(e) of Schedule 2, specifying terms that have the object or effect of requiring any consumer who fails to fulfil his obligation to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation.”
“3.9 So far as a failure to pay or a failure to honour payment are concerned, in general a party to a contract who fails to pay an amount of money due to the other side is not usually liable to pay any damages to the creditor except such interest as may be payable by statue or agreement. The presumption is that in the ordinary course of things a person does not suffer any other loss by reason of the late payment of money.” | The part I like is the last one, saying that the OFT feel that interest alone should be enough of a charge rather than having a default fee on. |
| |
6th April 2007, 02:08
|
#14 (permalink)
| | Classic Account Customer | Re: Bizarre.Moogle Vs Barclaycard Quote:
Originally Posted by Bizarre.Moogle Received today my statements from Barclaycard also a letter with it as well and will type it below.
Dear Bizarre.Moogle
BAARCLAYCARD CUSTOMER SERVICES
ACCOUNT NUMBER: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx
DATA PROTECTION ACT 1998 - Subject Access Request
Further to your recent request for personal information held by Barclaycard, please find enclosed a copy of the card statements you have requested.
Statements held prior to May 2004 are stored on microfilm which is a means of storage that does not fall within the definition of "relevant filing system" under the Data Protection Act 1998 ("the Act") nor within the bounds of what we are obliged to provide in response to your data subject access request as set out in the Information Commissioner's Office website at Information Commissioners Office – Information Commissioner's Office
The Information Commissioner has indicated his intention to amend this guidance. It is therefore as a gesture of goodwill to you, our customer, and in the light of this proposed change that we enclose copies of our pre May 2004 statements as you requested although we take a different view to the Information Commissioner's Office on whether these fall within the definition of "relevant filing system" as set out in the Act.
This information we have enclosed relating to this account is all that we hold.
Yours sincerely
Karen Thompson (Mrs)
Customer Accounts Manager | Get the rest of your statements.. Barclaycard & Microfiche - they are wrong - OFFICIAL |
| |
6th April 2007, 02:10
|
#15 (permalink)
| | Classic Account Customer | Re: Bizarre.Moogle Vs Barclaycard Quote: Following your complaint and others like it we contacted Barclaycard for a detailed explanation of its microfiche system, including how the information in it is stored and retrieved. It was not clear from the response whether or not the system was a relevant filing system; therefore Barclaycard invited me and a number of my colleagues to inspect it and see the system in operation. Following our visit, we concluded that the microfiche system used by Barclaycard is a relevant filing system for the purposes of the Act. This means that in our view the information is personal data and should have been supplied as part of your Subject Access Request within 40 days and for a maximum fee of £10. As a result, it is our view that it is likely Barclaycard has contravened the sixth data protection principle, as this requires data controllers to process personal data in accordance with data subjects' rights. | ... |
| |
10th April 2007, 13:19
|
#17 (permalink)
| | Basic Account Customer | Re: Bizarre.Moogle Vs Barclaycard Hi peeps.
I'm going to be sending the following to Barclaycard soon. Using a mixture of two templates. First is the refusal of offer, and then attached will be the LBA.
I wont post the template bits, but have included the following. Quote: RESPONSE TO SETTLEMENT LETTER Standard Letter To Refusal Of Settlement Offer | | |