Thread: jellybabe vs Egg Card (closed acct)

In 2006 lawyer Nelson St Clare made Egg the hardest nut of all. Towards the end of 2006 Egg was sold by the Pru to Citigroup and Nelson was replaced.

Very much a softer Egg now, probably the most cooperative of all credit cards for penalty charges reclaiming, see:

Sticky: V-E Day: Victory over Egg 5)

Correpondence with Egg is a dialogue with the deaf, with neither side bothering to read or to believe what they read. Eggployees go through a drill of sending out what I thought were two letters of defence, but from PennyPenny's latest experience may have turned into a series of 3 Egg template letters.

The moc1982 letter basically refutes Egg's Genuine Preestimate Letter, so if after sending the former you get in return the latter, it is because Eggployee chose not to pass your claim to the reclaims authorising manager, thinking it was his or her primary duty to try it on by sending out the next Egg letter in the series. Basically moc1982 removes Egg's last defence argument, and when Egg manager eventually gets to read it he will concede, as there is no point fighting on.

If authorisiing managers have gone on July hols, then lba and N1 will also work as they have done before, but probably taking longer.

Good luck.

Yes, with Eggployees going on hols in July it could be a new hand receiving your letter. Suggest you perhaps staple your moc1982 reply to Egg's Pre-estimates letter to make it obvious that their point has been refuted, that their First Service at 130 miles per hour has been returned at 140 mpg into their court. Egg does not have a Second Service prepared.

So after this unanswerable refutation Egg has the option to meet you in court to face a recitation of your ready-phrased questions which Egg do not want asked. Going on past form Egg will pay you --
"Here's your money, go away and be quiet, please."

Good luck.

ok, "magic letter" didn't seem to work for me. Shame.
They came up again with the pre-estimate argument and are offering a settlement by reducing the fees by £4 to come to the £12. And wait.....they are required to credit my account with the money????Stating that if i'm not happy, it would be best to close my account?????This account has been closed a while ago????
What should i do now??Send the same letter again with my lba? Or has anyone got a good reply i could send please?? I will post theire letter up in a bitI think i really need to remind them that the account is closed already, and that it's not worthwhile for them to push it as far as to court.I'd appreciate if anyone could help me with a strongworded letter. Please.

double post...sorry

Egg still have about 2.2 million cardholders, and obviously in August Egg would be shorthanded, not to mention hard up in these Credit Crunch days.

Reading the postings I get the impression that when claimants write into Egg these letters are read by junior staff who then input a marker onto the computerised account, value 1,2,3,4,5 etc. From that point on Egg's response will be automated depending on the marker value, this being the reason why Egg's template letter to you bears no relationship to the letter you wrote to them or the situation of your closed account.

Recent postings suggest Egg's chain of template letters has grown from 2 to 3. It may be that Egg's system has now been changed so that escalation of response has to go through all their choreographed stages regardless of what letter they receive from the cardholder, i.e. escalating from marker 1 to 2 to 3, not jumping from 1 to 3 the way Egg managers authorised even a few months ago.

Hilariously Egg's automated system may recognise it has already sent off its Pre-estimates defence which I believe is Egg's last-ditch defence. If Egg has no more template responses available, then Egg's choice upon receiving the next letter will be

either full settlement offer by Egg,
or a summons to Small Claims Court.

When the second option appears imminent the first will come through, as happened before. A pity though to waste time and postage on both sides.

The fight over charges reclaim has actually ended up in Small Claims Court several times with claimant victory though not full victory. A fight over Egg interest reclaim to my knowledge has never reached court. Lets look at several points.

(1) Contractual Interest - if you are claiming interest under this clause quoting the Mutuality and Reciprocity Principles it will be an uphill struggle. This has already been beaten with binding precedent in the High Court, and the Small Claims judge is likely to dismiss the case out of hand, possibly even with a curt comment. See thread: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...dent-lost.html
If you want to contest this you will need to be an expert barrister, possibly one costing £2K per day.

(2) Demonstrable Interest - you reclaim only such debit interest as was visibly listed on your monthly statements, apparently accrued from unlawful charges. "Apparently" is the problem. Monthly debit interest is accrued on outstanding balance made up of: cash advances, purchases, balance inward transfers, penalty charges, and previous months debit interest. Monthly payments I remember for sure will go towards wiping out outstanding cash advances before purchases. To find out where penalty charges come in this order of precedence will require detailed research on Egg T&C, otherwise Egg barrister can spring a surprise in court, brandishing Egg T&Cs, saying that the debit interest apparently accrued on previous months' unlawful penalty charges was actually lawfully accrued on purchases. The judge is there to rule if the claimant's computation is correct, he is not there to recalculate the incorrect. The onus of correct claim computation falls on the claimant, or else there is risk of immediate dismissal.

(3) S69 Statutory Interest at 8% per annum. I like to think of this as Statutory Compensation for denial of the use of capital. It is an approximate compromise solution to a thorny problem preferred by the county court circuit, who will therefore nod it through. To go beyond this the claimant will have to make the running. Egg has nothing to defend unless a correctly computed claim is presented.


The best hope is to show Egg a detailed and faultless computation of Demonstrable Interest (after reading the T&Cs), then hope Egg will back down and pay the full claim, rather than face the cost of an Egg barrister, and the risk of an Egg defeat in court at the hands of a determined claiment. There is danger however, that should an interest claim be dismissed in court, even the 8% award would be lost in the melee. If Egg were to be cornered in court, the day before they can offer full settlement of penalty charges without admitting liability. The claimant will be obliged to accept settlement for that part of his claim. The final fight in court would be over interest only, a fight not favouring the claimant.

As for the confidentiality clause, Egg always try it on half-heartedly, and always backpedal if you refuse this clause.

Good luck.