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.
This is the start of an attempt to recover charges from Natwest dating back to pre 1995. It's a relative's account not mine but they have kept all statements and papers, letters etc.
I wish to reclaim all charges for unpaid dds plus interest. At the time the account was running they were being charged 15% plus 5% over base rate.
I also need business T&Cs from 1991 onwards. Does anyone know how to get copies?
As they have only now realised they can claim these charges I said I would help out. It's a tricky one but the bank involved was odious and deliberately put them under with their punitive charges.
Any help anyone can give would be much appreciated. As it's pre 1995 I am not sure which legislation would cover. Would it be penalties and common law? It can't be UTCCR as that was 1999. It could be Unfair Relationships.
My first move is to add up charges and work out which way to jump re CI or s69 I know we can claim interest paid out on the part paid on the charges.
Over to CAG.
So this was a sole trader type of account rather than a Ltd Company then Rhia?
£20,000 was borrowed for and under the style of the business, but supported by a charge over the property they owned - I take that to mean their home.
The business one would argue was a separate entity to the personal side of life and this is where it becomes a little complicated by comparison to Ltd Co Directors guarantees I believe in that if one obtains a personal loan (which is effectively what you have here) to finance the overdraft of the business it can be argued that if the business failed the proprietor has an interest as a creditor as would other creditors if the business folded.
Therefore, if there were bucket loads of charges which could be reclaimed the proprietor could receive the reclaimed monies to repay his/her loan to the company...I think...!
I've had this with liquidated Ltd company charges of my own where I'd borrowed heavily to support the business in times of need as we business people are want to do, the banks being only too keen to get the Directors house as security over the business. We were liquidated and that came as a result of many things not least of which were a whacking amount of charges which put considerable strains on the business. I've not got all my statements anymore as they went to the liquidator and it could be argued that with creditors like the In.Revenue and Customs & Excise at the time any reclaimed charges may need to be dispersed amongst creditors, but the company is effectively dead, so that creates problems in itself and all my hard work could just be refunded to Gordon Brown and the Treasury.
I think you could pursue this, but there will be hurdles.
It's an odd one Andrew1 as the person was self employed and just chucked in the business when the bank hit them with so many charges they couldn't carry on but they never became bankrupt or anything. They just kept paying the loan back at a reduced rate.
They also raised extra money on their mortgage to pay into the company and were paying that back too.
I think this is just a straight common law approach as it's so long ago but need to think it through properly before striking.
One thing to keep in mind Rhia, when charges are refunded to a business there may be tax issues on the 'profits' of the business. The refund would be paid to the 'company', (although thinking about this maybe as a loan had been taken by the business owner to support the business effectively the business has had a loan from the business owner and therefore can pay it back)...but just be aware of the tax implications when totting up any benefits which could take your loss making business into profit and attracting taxation. Just a thought.
Hi Andrew - there won't be any tax issues as he ceased trading and not nakrupt or anything.
I have now added up all the penalty charges (have every statement from 1988 - 1992) and it exceeds £2,500.
Now this is before I add CI. I am aware few have been successful with the CI but am prepared to give it a go as can see that they were hammering 3/4 charges a week for a whole year and beyond which lead to the problem.
A Prelim is on its way and I will give them a good month to come back to me with a response so watch this space.
I would be very wary of CI unless your 100% sure of what you are doing it ca get complicated . Nat West will say limitation act ie out of time but you can use S32 provisos they may also get it stayed even though its business claim because of OFT case youll have to argue against that regards Gary
Initially there was complications with CI.
But it should always give section 69 in the alternative.
The new thoughts on restitution give greater considerations for claiming more than 8%
Rhia sorry to hijack your thread, but I am in a very similar situation as your friend. Trying to obtain statements for a liquidated Ltd company. Complaint with IC as debt is now personal due to guarantee being given, therefore SAR should apply.
Just received a demand from Lloyds for full amount (complaints been ongoing since Nov 2007) they have added £7000 to the debt, no explanation no statements so how the hell do I know the figure is correct?
I have written to them today stating that and that their best option would be to take me to court, so at least the charges would stop.
Sorry once again, just getting a bit desparate for some much needed advice.
This one is very lucky as he kept absolutely every letter, statement, document etc and all stored away in a box in the loft. They also can't claim SB as when he moved house two years ago they still demanded payment as the whole thing was secured. He paid back a large amount after much arguing but waay more than I think he should but had to agree as they wouldn't release the charge so he could move.
Martin I think you are correct in that it is more damages. This bank clearly wanted him out of business. He had just 3 penalties in 88/89 but in one year I have counted nearly 100 - must be a record. there are such random charges as £40 for a bounced cheque...15 years ago! They seem to have been making it up as they went along.
There is a lot more to it than this but having to keep it simple. I am, quite clear that CI is the way to go but do you mean doing a S69 for the court papers or just offering that in the letter to the bank. I have put letter on hold for a day or so.
Shelbel you need to start a thread I think so you can give more details as unable to comment with what you have posted.
Rhia of course you would need to mention in your pre court action that you are wanting to claim compound .
Whether they will look at it is another matter-CI as s69 is at the discretion of the Court therefore they will argue that out of Court they are not obliged to pay it.
The Sale of Goods and services covers undue enrichment.
Theres also other arguements that can be supported with case law that have not been widely used in reclaims,since these cases are usually well outside SCT.
Its a collective submission of charges themselves under common law,and also the other issues.
The banks in many cases are still trying to halt business claims by using Smiths Judgement-the years we are talking in your case should be easy to show should not be considered with the equasion of Smiths Judgements under Common law-yours are very historic.
The only immediate problems I see is that you will need to try to get hold of the terms and conditions for those periods to try to argue the case for exception.
I dont think NW will be quick to supply them.
I will see what I can dig up as regards post 91 terms and conditions. Natwest werent as quick to pull these from the net as Barclays did-so maybe there will be something about.
Not wishing to get the saliva drewling too much Rhia, but I've been reading up a little in the forums idea about the banks profits being used for re-investing and that if you have been denied these monies you can actually ask for compensation on those profits....now there's a thought! - Keep that one in the back of your mind for later!
In the test case I saw the earliest was 99 and they were student accounts.
You can write and ask at least.
If they say no then you could always ask a Court to order them -with them having to answer by statement of truth if they say they have not.
I would think they would not be too quick to sign any statement of truth to a Court if they DID still have them.
Rhia's attempt at 1990s charges
dating back to pre 1995. It's a relative's account not mine but they have kept all statements and papers, letters etc.
.
Reply With Quote
