Your MP

[BankFodder]

You have a member of parilament for your area. You have been a victim of unfair charging by the banks.
Have you written to your MP?

Why not?

It doesn't take very long to do. Just complain that the banks are flouting the law and ignoring the OFT report.
Do't be fobbed off by the first standard letter.
Write and tell your MP that his/her repsonse is a standard rep;ly and you want something better.
If you receive a reply then post it here so that we can all compare.

In fact tell your MP that you are going to post it here.

It is quite straightforward to put some gentle pressure on your MP

[adamski]

Hi Bankfodder
I love the idea for this section.
I have a thought is there an MP who is sympathetic to our cause if so then we could get the members of this site to write to this particular MP and if he/she got enough response would be duty bound to bring this up in parliment,
also maybe we could have an electronic petition based on this site? to back this up?
I would appreciate your thoughts
Regards
Adamski

[zootscoot]

Hi Adamski,

When writing to an MP it has to be your own, otherwise they just tell you to write to your own. I did this about 10 years ago and it was on the very subject of bank charges too! I chose a neighbouring MP because I thought he would be more sympathetic, but unfortunately not. When I did write to my own MP he wrote back stating if I had an individual complaint I should take it up with the Banking Ombudsman whereas I had asked him to raise the fairness of bank charges in Parliament with a view to changing the law. (Well I was young naive and keen).

As you can tell my one woman campaign was unsuccessful. But I'm sure the more people that do this the greater the impact. With all the letter writing people have done on here one more should not be too much to ask?

We should all commit to write to our respective MPs

	The Financial Ombudsman Service For the most part, don't bother. The Ombudsman is an industry arranged service which is under-resourced, takes too long, lacks clear transparency. You have no idea what evidence the FOS has received from the bank or how your complain has really been handled. The FOS is the preferred complaints route for the banking industry. The county court is to be preferred by consumers for its speed, openness, the quality of its awards and also because it will award 8% interest on top of any damages won by you. The Ombudsman should normally be used to solving little technical difficulties or customer service problems which you have expereinced with your bank.

	Bank Charges You should have started your claim for your bank charges by now. Don't wait. You should send your bank a Subject Acess Request asking for all personal data they hold on you - not just statements. You should calculate all of your bank charges and related interest as far back as 1995. You should send your bank a demand for a refund giving them 7 days. You should commence your legal action adding 8% statutory interest. If you wait for the outcome of the test case, you may not be able to claim like this. you may not be able to claim interest. You may only be offered the difference between the charge and the OFT "fair charge". The repayment scheme will try to limit you to refinds from 2001 only. A repayment scheme will not deal with any bank charges related defaults on the credit register whereas in a court action you can ask for these to be removed and to be compensated for the damage caused to you and your family by them. You should also write to the bank and to the CRA and put all charges related credit entries in disupte and warn them that you will want them removed from the Register when the test case is over. Warn them also that you are likely to be seeking compensation for these wrongful data entries. Full and final settlement Have you previously accepted a partial repayment of your bank charges in full settlement? You will still be able to claim the rest of your money back after the Test case is decided. Get all your information back to 1995 and put in your claim now.

[kevb0444]

Hi Bankfodder.

I wrote to my MP (Tony Wright) about all this and got a reply. Not sure if it's a "stanard" reply that some MP's give out. He wrote....

"....I agree with the sentiments expressed in your letter and have written to Ed Balls MP, Economic Secretary to the Treasury, raising these concerns and to see what action can be taken. I will contact you again when i receive a responce....."

Like i said i'm not sure what other MP's have said to people, he sounds convincing but who knows...

PS. Just spotted CAG on wikipedia. Search: Bounced check You'll get a few lines about the OFT and about the charges plus a link to CAG.

[JonCris]

Hi I don't see this on the site. It gives the email addresses/telephone details of all the MP's

http://www.parliament.uk/directories/hciolists/alms.cfm

I use it to contact mine all the time as it's quicker & cheaper & the MP can access it from anywhere (& does) I always get a response. Whilst he's in the wrong party for me he's still a good MP so can't speak for the rest

[zootscoot]

Hi Bankfodder,

Hope you don't mind, but I thought more people might be willing to write to MP if the template letter was to hand when reading this thread so I've copied and pasted it here to save them looking. I've also added a couple of points which I feel are valid and should be bought to Parliament's attention. I've put them in purple pending your approval. Will remove if you object or change to black if you approve. Have also swapped the last two paras as seemed to make more sense with the additions. Again hope you don't mind I can always return to original state if you desire. Hope you don't think I'm being cheeky!



Insert MPs name*
House of Commons,
Westminster,
London. SW1A 0AA

Or constituency address.

Dear Insert MPs name,


I am writing to you to ask you to let me know what your views are on the serious problem of unlawful penalty charges which are levied against their customers by the UK High Street Banks.

It is a well established rule of Common Law that contractual penalty charges which exceed the actual losses suffered, in this case by the banks when a customer exceeds limits or a direct debit or cheque are returned, are invalid and will not be enforced by the Court. A series of judicial decisions going back over 100 years shows this to be true.

More recently, The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 has confirmed that a disproportionate penalty would be an example of an unfair term and that this would therefore be unenforceable at law.
The Director General of the Office of Fair Trading announced in 2005 that any penalty charge which exceeded actual losses was disproportionate.

Yet despite this, the Banks continue to apply these charges, and of course the vast majority of bank customers accept the banks’ authority that these excessive charges are valid and they pay up without a lot of fuss.
It is not possible that the banks do not realise what they are doing?

A survey reported this year by the BBC and others, concluded that one in five bank customers suffered from these charges in 2005. This is a large proportion of your constituency. Most of these people have incurred penalty charges because they are in difficulty. Many of these people are vulnerable and already have difficult lives. The spiralling effect of bank charges makes it very difficult if not impossible for these people to escape debt and the brunt of the charges is disproportionately placed on the poorest members of society.

The banks practice of pursuing the poorest members of society to subsidise free banking for the rich creates a kind of converse Robin Hood situation and not only runs counter to sound business practice, but also demonstrates the gross inequities and unconscionable behaviour of the banks.

The problem to some extent has been exacerbated by measures sanctioned by Parliament in pressing those in receipt of benefits and old age pensioners to open bank accounts to receive their benefits and thus exposing them to the risk of incurring penalty charges.

The OFT, which is empowered to investigate, shows signs of being reluctant to do so.

Many people have taken legal action against the banks. The banks almost never go to court. Fearing a formal judgment against them they bluff and threaten, but eventually settle before the day of the trial. This amounts to an outright abuse of the court system and their behaviour is in direct contradiction of the overriding objectives set out in the Civil Procedure Rules. Through the Internet sites at www.ConsumerActionGroup.c o.uk and also at www.BankChargesHell.co.uk I am in touch with many people who are challenging the banks, some of whom are beginning legal actions.

The Unlawful Penalty Charge racket is apparently worth £3 billion per year. It is not surprising that they are not anxious to give it up. In taking it upon themselves to penalise, or put more simply punish, their customers they are usurping the power of Parliament. Only an elected body in any civilised democratic society should have the right to impose a punishment. The punishment here being particularly barbaric given that often the only crime is being poor.

Can you think of any reason why, by their dominant position the UK, banks should hold themselves above the civil rule of law and demonstrate such a blatant disregard to the OFT, the civil justice system, their customers and indeed Parliament?

I would be grateful if you would reply to me and let me know what your views about this are, and what steps you would be prepared to take to bring this scandal to an end.

Thank you for your time.

Yours sincerely,


Your Signature

(if any body has any figures on current benefits or pensions could include this as an example to demonstrate the suffering imposed by a say 39 quid bank charge+ 28 for going over limit... I know there is discretion to have these set aside in some instances but do the people in receipt of these benefits generally know this? or should this just be left alone completely).

	County Court guidebook by Judge Patricia Pearl Follow this link to read the review of this excellent Small Claims Guidebook. This comprehensive and very accessible guide will take you through the process of suing or defending a claim. This guide will help you take control of your litigation and make you more confident about doing it yourself. Applies to England and Wales

	The Direct Debit Guarantee • The Guarantee is offered by all Banks and Building Societies that take part in the Direct Debit Scheme. The efficiency and security of the Scheme is monitored and protected by your own Bank or Building Society. • If the amounts to be paid or the payment dates change, we will notify you three working days in advance of your account being debited or as otherwise agreed. • If an error is made by us or by your Bank or Building Society, you are guaranteed a full and immediate refund from your branch of the amount paid. • You can cancel a Direct Debit at any time by writing your Bank or Building Society. Please also send a copy of your letter to us. This is a term of your banking contract and you can sue on it.

	Bank Charges You should have started your claim for your bank charges by now. Don't wait. You should send your bank a Subject Acess Request asking for all personal data they hold on you - not just statements. You should calculate all of your bank charges and related interest as far back as 1995. You should send your bank a demand for a refund giving them 7 days. You should commence your legal action adding 8% statutory interest. If you wait for the outcome of the test case, you may not be able to claim like this. you may not be able to claim interest. You may only be offered the difference between the charge and the OFT "fair charge". The repayment scheme will try to limit you to refinds from 2001 only. A repayment scheme will not deal with any bank charges related defaults on the credit register whereas in a court action you can ask for these to be removed and to be compensated for the damage caused to you and your family by them. You should also write to the bank and to the CRA and put all charges related credit entries in disupte and warn them that you will want them removed from the Register when the test case is over. Warn them also that you are likely to be seeking compensation for these wrongful data entries. Full and final settlement Have you previously accepted a partial repayment of your bank charges in full settlement? You will still be able to claim the rest of your money back after the Test case is decided. Get all your information back to 1995 and put in your claim now.

[Glenn UK]

Zootscoot

FWIW mostr banks appear to have 'rules' designed to reduce the opportunity for a customer to have charges removed.

I believe the Abbey imposes a once a year/once in six months. This may not be a formal 'rule' but i have been told this over the phone before.

Im not sure this helps any but it appears to be specifically aimed at discouraging custoemrs from challenging the imposition of charges on an account.

Glenn

PS just going to copy and send sai letter.

[JonCris]

Why don't you email him/her where possible & this will help

http://www.parliament.uk/directories/hciolists/alcm.cfm

[Glenn UK]

JC

I emailed her this very afternoon.

To be honest Im pretty disappointed, she hasnt responded and it was almost 4 hours ago since I emailed her!!

You said they check their email regularly and from anywhere, why hasnt she respondend??

Glenn

PS : wheres the tongue in cheek emoticon?

[JonCris]

Yeah right!

MINE always responds so there! Even if its' the auto response "sorry on my hols" To be fair mine HAS responded whilst on holiday.

Conclusion? You must have a lousy MP so move

[Al-G77]

Hi there i only signed up for this site today so am just starting to find out what i should do, but have e-mailed by MP using the standard letter given earlier, i will keep you informed of any reply.

Thanks,

Al.

[Glenn UK]

Originally Posted by JonCris

Yeah right!

MINE always responds so there! Even if its' the auto response "sorry on my hols" To be fair mine HAS responded whilst on holiday.

Conclusion? You must have a lousy MP so move

Ill get back to you on that!!!

[Steven1964]

Just emailed Alistair Darling

[sohoscribbler]

MPs try not to give priority to people who e-mail over those those who use snail-mail or make contact in other ways. Give it a day or two.

Think about it.

How would you like to have to answer 1000 e-mails a day instantly?

But keep the pressure up.

[JonCris]

Not my experience, just the opposite in fact

[noobrider]

here is a copy of what I sent my MP

Sir, I am very concerned over the unlawful practice that the high street banks are conducting regarding there regime of bank charges. As you may be aware, the OFT ruled that credit card companies and bank were making enormous profits from their charges which are a breach of contract law and imposed regardless of circumstances. I would like to draw your attention to Abbey Plc who are proving particularly difficult in a number of areas. Firstly they are refusing to comply with the Data Protection Act by claiming their filing system for statements is not a relevant system under Data Protection Act rules. Secondly, they are abusing the county court system by delaying all actions against them to the final day insisting on every delay tactic they can before settling out of court. Their actions and the similar actions of other banks are causing considerable hardship to thousands of people daily. I urge you to ask questions and support the Consumer Action Group in their campaign. www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk I would value your response and support in the same way I support you in your campaign.

	County Court guidebook by Judge Patricia Pearl Follow this link to read the review of this excellent Small Claims Guidebook. This comprehensive and very accessible guide will take you through the process of suing or defending a claim. This guide will help you take control of your litigation and make you more confident about doing it yourself. Applies to England and Wales

	Bank Charges You should have started your claim for your bank charges by now. Don't wait. You should send your bank a Subject Acess Request asking for all personal data they hold on you - not just statements. You should calculate all of your bank charges and related interest as far back as 1995. You should send your bank a demand for a refund giving them 7 days. You should commence your legal action adding 8% statutory interest. If you wait for the outcome of the test case, you may not be able to claim like this. you may not be able to claim interest. You may only be offered the difference between the charge and the OFT "fair charge". The repayment scheme will try to limit you to refinds from 2001 only. A repayment scheme will not deal with any bank charges related defaults on the credit register whereas in a court action you can ask for these to be removed and to be compensated for the damage caused to you and your family by them. You should also write to the bank and to the CRA and put all charges related credit entries in disupte and warn them that you will want them removed from the Register when the test case is over. Warn them also that you are likely to be seeking compensation for these wrongful data entries. Full and final settlement Have you previously accepted a partial repayment of your bank charges in full settlement? You will still be able to claim the rest of your money back after the Test case is decided. Get all your information back to 1995 and put in your claim now.

	Hardship By and large the "harship" provision in the FSA waiver is a myth which is intended to create a sense that the banking industry is sufficiently well-intentioned to act fairly towards its customers even though their right of access to the courts has been blocked. In fact there are very few guidelines as to procedure and very little definition of "hardship". One unfortunate spin off is that many people in difficulty get their hopes up and go to considerable lengths to plead hardship to their bank in order to get a refund or partial refund of their bank charges only to be refused. Neither the courts nor the FOS have the power to order a bank to make a charges refund on the basis of hardship. We hear of some people obtaining a partial refund quite easily. Others have obtained money by being very persistent - but mostly we hear that people are refused. Even benefits claimants do not automatically receive hardship refunds. By all means try to get a bank charges refund on the basis of hardship - but don't bank on it!

[JonCris]

Here's a little tip refer to them by their 1st name Dear Fred, Tom etc. They meet & greet so many of us peasants they'll think they have already met you & respond accordingly Also don't forget to sign...........Best Regards Stan. June etc

[Rbphot]

Hi , I think it's all well and good writing to your MP to keep the pressure up, so that they take action eventually.

But what about writing to our Euro MP as these companies especially credit card ones operate in many EU countrys besides the UK, and charge minimal charges in many compared to the £30-40 we get ripped of by, there must be some protection in EU law which prevent them from doing this.

I'm currently going head to head with CitiCards and am trying to find out what penalties they apply in Germany and Spain, I've been told by some foreign co-workers that the charges are really small compared to here in the UK.

[JonCris]

There is but they won't enforce it.

Couple of years ago full of promises to reduce car prices to European levels. Look at the price still compared with the continent.

The UK is known throughtout the world-wide business community as "Treasure Island"

[Rbphot]

I totally agree, but the more uncomfortable it is for them the better for us the consumer, let's turn the screws tighter.

And with the government in the crap at the moment maybe time to get a monster pertion underway, one to the brussels lot and to our idiots in power.

This is the reason we have the disparity like this, look in the post below.

Bank And Credit charges in EEC Countrys