Thread: Claiming back bank charges - Hardship cases - Help needed please

i FOUND THIS ON PENALTYCHARGES.CO.UK, ITS A NEW POC FOR PEOPLE IN RECIEPT OF BENEFITS, ACCORDING TO THIS YES YOU CAN AND IT SHOULD BE TREATED DIFFERENTLY THAT A NORMAL CLAIM BECAUSE YOU ARE ON BENEFITS


Please do not reproduce copyrighted material from othersites without their express permission.You may provide a link to the thread on the other site.

Just looked at the penaltycharges.co.uk website and found a list of benefits re the above POC; I can see Child Benefit on there but none of the others. However IMHO Child Benefit is for the kids, so I'd have a go.
Looking again at the POC, according to the POC section 1(B) mentions
b) any income related benefit, or
c) child benefit.

WTC, CTC are all income related n'est pas?
If it was me I would crack on. (I think I need to adopt these POC's myself!)


All advice offered is without predjudice and without liability. If in any doubt, consult a qualified legal practitionner.

If you have a case of genuine financial hardship, your bank or building society must deal with your complaint – see the Banking Code for how they can help. If you're not happy with the firm's response to your complaint, you can take it to the Ombudsman, who will consider whether your complaint can be dealt with before the test case is resolved.

Consumers who are in very difficult financial circumstances - 'hardship cases' Banks and building societies will have to conduct a filtering process to ensure that cases of genuine hardship are still dealt with during the waiver period. Cases of hardship would still be entitled to be referred to, and dealt with by, the fos.

Hi so fed up - have you seen the threads on this site - like mine. The POC above is likely to get stayed as it still relies mainly on arguments relating to contract penalties and unfair terms. Also that POC as written doesn't apply to Child Tax Credit or Working Tax Credit.

The POC on my thread does cover these other benefits and relies only on the charges being unlawful by virtue of the acts governing payment of benefits. You cah therefore argue that the OFT case is irrelevant if the bank goes for a stay.

Also in discussions today we have realised that the POC posted above from penaltycharges is incorrect in its appliction of the SSAA 1992.

We also think the case law quoted only applies to Scotland - but we're checking that.

My advice - don't use it.

Originally Posted by so*fed*up

Many thanks for your replies

I'm off to the court today to file my claim.

Just to clarify - we receive WTC, CTC & Child Benefit - are these acceptable benefits to be using the POC in this thread?

all tax credits are inalienable (sperate law) and so is child benefit (same law) see http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...-benefits.html


I would define hardship cases using the common law definitions of poverty BBC - Poverty - Definitions

edit: eh? Steve moves fast

thanks tomterm

The discussion on inalienability of benefits needs some honing - see the linked thread in post 17.

so*fed*up - if you haven't filed at court please see post 16 above.

Hello all

I have some knowledge and experience with regards to the SSAA1992 and its application to the bank charges.

If you need help with them please PM me your details and I will help. This unlawful practice (according to SSAA 1992 section 187), which continues even though the banks have been made aware, needs to be stamped on immediately.

I have a set of POC for Benfit related claims. In my opinion the one above crosses over into penalty charges to easily and therefore may cause confusion. I suggest you only use the SSAA 1992 as it is in black n white that they cant take it, if you keep crossing over onto penalty claims then it becomes wishy washy.

Here are my POC for anyone who wishes to use them.

Brief Details:
The Claimant has an account with the Defendant XXXXXXXXXXXXX and this is conducted on the standard terms and conditions. The Claimant contends the charges applied to the account are unlawful in accordance to Social Security Administration Act 1992 section 187. This applies to charges being held against any benefit that is received by a claimant via an income related benefit. The Claimant is in receipt of XXXXXXX and XXXXX which is rendered unalienable under this Law.
The Claimant understands that, under the contract between them and the Defendant, there is a penalty for a breach, in this case for unpaid Direct Debits / Unpaid cheques. However as this is the only income for the Claimant, and the law is very clearly set out with regards to the usage of the benefit for charges. The Claimant has contact the Defendant on numerous occasions to ask for them not to take the said benefit, however this Bank has continued with this practice which has resulted in this action being brought.

Particulars:
1. The claimant has account XXXXXXXX with the Defendant. This is conducted on a standard terms with a clause included for a charge to be paid by the Claimant to the Defendant on the breach of the agreement. In this case this is for the returned DD and unpaid cheques against the account.

2. A Breakdown of charges and amount claimed is attached.

3. During the term of the account the Claimant has been in receipt of an income related Benefit, namely XXXXXXX/XXXXXXXXX. This is an amount which is given to the Claimant at a level set by Department of Working Pensions. (if only past of the term was in receipt of benefit only put this time into here)

4. For the claim the Claimant relies on the Social Security Administration Act 1992 s 187 which renders any income related benefit inalienable. The Defendant has been aware of this since XX/XX/XX when the Claimant first requested the refund of this money; however the Defendant has continued to apply charges to this benefit.

5. Accordingly the Claimant claims

(a) The amount applied in charges to the account £XXXXXX

(b) Court Cost (if on benefit this will be nought and should be deleted)

(c) Costs in relation to bringing this case for which a breakdown is attached (DPA cost + postage)

(d) interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year, from [date when the money became owed to you] to [the date you are issuing the claim] of £ [amount] and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of [enter the daily rate of interest]

Dont forget to attach your charges and costs spreadsheet!!!