Hi,
My claim is for £60 in charges (£30 in
interest at 8% if they don't cough up in five days)- the first in 02/12/98 and the last in 01/02/2001. I know I am pushing my luck with this claim owing to the statute of limitations. I have included in my particular of claims :-
"6. The claimant contends that the defendant, in it's fiduciary capacity, has concealed the true nature of said charges over recent years."
Barclays in the infintie wisdoms have sent me a template letter that totally contradicts it's self. The first paragraph states they are aware of the elements that support my claim, but that they disagree with it.
They then say they can't find any charges that were applied to my account. MUPPETS!! They were the ones, - in previous weeks, that sent me the microfiche printouts that show me all the charges!
I really can't be bothered with them now. They have had my
letter before action. They have only ever replied with template letters. They now ask me to state which charges I am refering to, when it was they who sent me a breakdown of the charges in the first place. I believe I have acted reasonably in trying to mitigate the matter. They will have a summons in five days.
To that end, would anyone like to comment on my particulars of claim ?
"1. The Defendant is a high street bank. The Claimant has had with the Defendant a current account, number xxxxxxxx, sort code: xx-xx-xx. The claimant is unable to provide the date the contract commenced, owing to the defendant's failure to fully comply, with a recent s7 Data Protection Act request.
2. Between the date of commencemnt and 1 June 2006 the Defendant deducted various amounts in respectof: ‘unauthorised borrowing fees’/‘
overdraft usage fees’/‘
overdraft excess fees’/'unpaid charges'/'cheque charges'
(See attached schedule A).
3. 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.
4. The Claimant contends that the terms of the contract with respect to these charges are unfair and unlawful in light of the fact that:
i. They are punitive charges designed to penalise the Claimant for a breach of contract. That they unduly enrich the Defendant, which exercises the contractual term in respect of such charges with a view to generating a profit. That under the law of penalties they are ‘extravagant’ and therefore unlawful.
ii. They are not a genuine pre-estimate of cost incurred by the Defendant and exceed any alleged actual loss to the Defendant in respect of the breach of contract on the part of the Claimant. It is averred that pursuant to paragraph 8 under schedule 2 (1)(e) of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations (1999), (‘a term is unfair if it requires any consumer who fails his/her obligation to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation’) and under the Unfair Contract Terms Act (1977), in which it is stated that a trader can only include a clause in the contract requiring a consumer to indemnify him against any loss he may incur through negligence or breach of contract if he can show that the clause satisfies
the test of reasonableness, that the charges which have been applied to the Claimant’s account are unfair and therefore unenforceable at law.
iii. In the event that the charges are not a penalty, then they are unreasonable within the meaning of the Supply of Goods and Services Act (1982), s.15, which requires the supplier of a service to carry out that service for a reasonable charge.
iv. Under the law of mistake, the Claimant’s grounds for restitution are that the bank automatically debited the amount of the charge from the Claimant’s account
and was not legally entitled to do so.
5. The Claimant will be relying on, inter alia, judgements made in the cases of:
Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co. v. New Garages and Motor Co. 1915
Ford Motor Co. v. Armstrong 1915
Bridge v. Campbell 1962
Murray v. Leisureplay 2004
6. The claimant contends that the defendant, in it's fiduciary capacity, has concealed the true nature of said charges over recent years.
7. Accordingly the claimant claims from the Defendant a sum equivalent to £60 unlawfully debited to the Claimant’s account in the period 02 December 1998 to 01 February 2001. The sums are detailed in the attached schedule A.
8. The claimant claims interest pursuant to s69 of
the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year from 02/12/98 to
01/06/06 of £31.98 and also interest at the same rate up to the date
of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of £0.048 .
9. The Claimant further claims the court fee of £30.
10. I believe that the facts stated in these particulars of claim are true.
"
I am a little fearful that they will apply for the claim to be struck out immediately before it has even got to court, citing the statutes of limitations act. I am hoping that point 6. in the particulars of claim will stop this.
At the end of the day, it is going to cost them money to defend this. All I stand to lose is £30 (I don't even think there is a cost for
allocation questionnaire for the amount I am claiming).
FP
Parrot vs Barclays - **WON** 
Letter from Barclays 
