Thread: Gaz V Egg

WAs this letter regarding one or both of your accounts?

I copied this from the OFT site:-

4. The OFT is 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. Where there are exceptional business factors, so that the presumption that a default charge over £12 is unfair is not applicable, this does not necessarily mean that the current level of the default charge is consistent with the OFT's interpretation of the requirements of unfair contract terms legislation. But for example, where a card issuer has a policy of requiring customers to pay minimum monthly repayments by direct debits, such as that operated by Egg, and offers credit cards only to customers that satisfy a relatively high scoring requirement it may be able to set a fair default fee at a level above the threshold.

Stick with your claim and follow through the whole process and you will get it all back, not just the difference between the charge and £16.

03 weeks - 22 JAN 2008 - WINNING TEMPLATE LETTER - andrew_nwide - WON!! Egg Smashed £900

See V-E Day thread in Stickies for background and perspective.

The OFT pronouncement of 5th April 2006 was a red herring. It is not binding, only court rulings are binding. Egg talks about the OFT but dares not step into court. You would of course do the opposite of what the opponent wants -- you would stress the court route, not the OFT guideline which even the OFT said was not set in stone. The OFT CEO John Fingleton said in so many words, the OFT did not decide -- the courts decide.

Let Egg talk about the OFT all they want, you can focus on seeking to unveil Egg's true penalty cost price in court, a place where Egg do not want to go. When Egg are convinced you are clear in purpose and strong in heart they will throw in the towel as they have done 83 times before. You do NOT want to get drawn into a thesis about the OFT pronouncement - Egg would love it.

Originally Posted by Mistermind

The OFT pronouncement of 5th April 2006 was a red herring. It is not binding, only court rulings are binding.

form the OFT document

5.7 It is also important to note that the threshold for action is a statement of our regulatory intent. We have no power to constrain private civil actions or to determine what a court should decide and other enforcers may apply for injunctions under the UTCCRs.

Thanks Steven.
Nobody can be held to account over the inaccuracy of pre-estimates. That Egg after 15 years in business chose to submit their pre-estimates rather than their year-end audited figures to the OFT for consideration, was simply comical. If anyone is interested, my own pre-estimates are that I shall win the lottery this year, marry Miss World, and live happily ever after.

The proven template letter makes this crucial point, and after one year of receiving variants of said template letter Egg has not even tried to refute the central point.

You are absolutely right - Egg have no excuse and deserve everything they get (and that is coming to them)