Written by John Kruse, one of the leading experts on Bailiff Law, this consumer friendly guide is essential reading for anyone who comes into contact with a bailiff.
The book is easy to understand and clearly explains the rights
a bailiff has, and also what they cannot do when collecting debts and repossessing goods etc.
It has become increasingly difficult for bank account holders to proceed with claims following the April 24 bank charges judgement in the High Court. Although the judge at the centre of the case ruled that the excessive penalties levied on personal account holders by eight High Street banks, could be assessed for fairness by the Office of Fair Trading, he cast business account customers aside with this decision.
He said in the small print of his conclusion into the case, that he accepted the banks' argument against the part of the case used to reclaim business account overdraft charges, namely, that they are not penalties and can be enforced. However as he referred to the terms and conditions in question as 'the terms now generally used by the banks', he could merely be referring to present terms and conditions and not to historic terms used on accounts before banks began to amend them over the past 18 months.
We can only argue that cases that go back over 18 months may still be considered, proceed regardless if you are reclaiming several years worth of charges. A definitive conclusion on business charges may emerge as the High Court case draws to a close, which will probably be early next year.
I would accept this as a part offer to your claim, and inform the bank that you are still wanting the return of the rest.
you can take it to the fos and the bank will still want to pay the DCA, but at least you'll get a 100% offer.
i've been fighting this bank > DCA thing for a year now at the FOS and no luck. It's not lawful or fair and reasonable but the FOS and bank won't listen.
they have no right managing your debt affairs for you, as the debt at the DCA is bwteen you and them only.
So, in short, the condensed words of wisdom I myself picked from the above are:
Originally Posted by slick132
Hi LL,
They won't repay to you direct while you have the o/draft - any refund will be off-set to reduce the o/d.
Personally, I would not want to settle at only 25%.
Originally Posted by ukaviator
It has become increasingly difficult for bank account holders to proceed with claims following the April 24 bank charges judgement in the High Court. Although the judge at the centre of the case ruled that the excessive penalties levied on personal account holders by eight High Street banks, could be assessed for fairness by the Office of Fair Trading, he cast business account customers aside with this decision.
He said in the small print of his conclusion into the case, that he accepted the banks' argument against the part of the case used to reclaim business account overdraft charges, namely, that they are not penalties and can be enforced. However as he referred to the terms and conditions in question as 'the terms now generally used by the banks', he could merely be referring to present terms and conditions and not to historic terms used on accounts before banks began to amend them over the past 18 months.
We can only argue that cases that go back over 18 months may still be considered, proceed regardless if you are reclaiming several years worth of charges. A definitive conclusion on business charges may emerge as the High Court case draws to a close, which will probably be early next year.
I would accept this as a part offer to your claim, and inform the bank that you are still wanting the return of the rest.
you can take it to the fos and the bank will still want to pay the DCA, but at least you'll get a 100% offer.
i've been fighting this bank > DCA thing for a year now at the FOS and no luck. It's not lawful or fair and reasonable but the FOS and bank won't listen.
they have no right managing your debt affairs for you, as the debt at the DCA is bwteen you and them only.
So, IMHO, in accordance with the above I would say:
1/ No harm in perhaps accepting their current offer, but taking great care to make sure that it is made explicitly clear that you would only accept it as a "goodwill" gesture, with no prejudice to your current or any future actions or settlements (in short, no details of such sums or reasons for such can and should not be brought to the attention of any court).
2/ File a claim based upon the nature and presentation of the charges over the whole period. Then read and research any historical terms and conditions relating to your account over the whole term of the claim, compare them to present ones and bring any changes that have occurred to the courts attention should it get there. This could also be useful if any part of the claim relates to charges that are older than 6 years (search and read threads on section 32 of the statute of limitations act). IMHO, the Banks are more afraid of tackling this aspect than the charges themselves, as it opens up a whole new ballpark for all claims should they lose such an argument in court.
3/ Look into your rights and fight any attempts by them to retain any payments internally by the practice of offsetting them against other debts. This does not mean avoid paying any legitimate debts though, but instead insist that they deal with such issues separately. (You may also want to seek the advice of your accountant or tax adviser on this aspect, dependent upon if and how such charges have been previously entered in your books, and also how any refunds and interest would affect your future tax position)
Just my tuppence worth (well actually mainly just a re-itterance of the good advice posted by others)
Many thanks for all the advice and apologies for the delay in replying, internet still not behaving.
I will write to the bank and accept the offer as part settlement and then decide whether to pursue the remainder through the fos of court. I will also investigate the issue of them using the settlement to reduce an outstanding debt, although by the time I reclaim my charges and BLRI payments they will definitely owe me money.
The charges account for approximately two-thirds of the claim and were deducted between 2005 and 2007.
The offer is in Full and final settlement of the claim and is valid from 28 days from the date of the offer letter (6 August 2007) Nothing at all to suggest that they many withdraw if I don't settle, just the usual blurb that they are mindful of court costs etc and the offer is for commercial reasons without any admission of liability whatsoever.
Ok understood.Yes your comments in post 8 are the way to go then,but by nature of their wording as Full and final-the offer therefore is conditional on that so I would be very suprised if they gave the 25% as partial.
I managed to get rid of the sunglasses-for future info its done by clicking on edit then advanced.
yes, sounds like you need to tread carefully if deciding to accept this current offer in any way, otherwise you could find they try to declare it as a Full and final.
Make your own terms known to them, and see what response you get ?
Also,..... Actually, I think the offer date was meant to be 6 August 2008... otherwise the offer date would already be over a year old !!
I too have had the same glitch sometimes when trying to enter an 8 in a number !
I have been thinking about all the comments and I am now wondering whether to get over the issue of the bank using the charges claim to pay off the overdraft whether to try to settle with the DCA and then go for reclaiming charges and BLRI's?
I have written to the current DCA (about the 4th I think) with an offer of a settlement figure in the interests of a speedy conclusion and written to DG to say we will only accept the full amount in the form of a cheque and will wait to see what responses I receive.
whether to try to settle with the DCA and then go for reclaiming charges and BLRI's?
If the DCA write off any amount (you part settle), the refund will go towards that. Or the bank's write off if you settle with them. The only way to get the refund paid to you (unless the bank offers to pay you directly) is to pay off every penny of a debt to everyone who is asking.
The thinking is (especially at the fos) is that you can't claim anything you haven't paid. And you don't pay a write off.
Sorry to be negative, but this is the way all my claims at the FOS went after the bank wouldn't pay me directly. I've lost thousands to DCAs/banks/write offs. My refunds have gone towards accounts which i thought i had settled in Full and final. But by claiming charges back, you open that settlement again.
HSBC Business account charges offer
which is now with a DCA
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by slick132
