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.
My other half has sent a claim for charges, but just asked for the difference instead of whole charge.
They have replied and said basically the OFT said they can set the limit at £16:
'Following the conclusion of the investigation, the OFT indicated that it would not proceed further against Egg on the basis that Egg reduced its charges from £20 to £16. Accordingly without any admission of liability as to the previous level of charges, Egg reduced its charges to £16. The OFT has taken no further action against Egg.'
They are now offering £4!!
I was under the impression that all banks etc had to reduce their charges to no higher than the threshold of £12. Can anyone shed some light on this?
I offer help and advice in good faith, based on my knowledge and experience. I am NOT a legal or financial expert. There are many CAG members and site team who are better qualified. Please do not make major decisions based on my advice alone.I do not give advice via P.M's. If anyone can correct my mistakes or improve on my advice, please do.
on 5th April 2006 the CEO of the OFT set a limit of £12 for credit card penalty charges. If the cards did not comply he "did not rule out taking legal action against them." He gave the cards an action deadline of 31st May 2006. However Egg being a cyber bank managed to persuade the OFT they were a special case in that fewer of their cardholders incurred Overlimit and Late Payment charges because they had a scheme of compulsory DDs for all their cardholders. The OFT gave Egg a special dispensation of £16 instead of £12.
The OFT at no stage said £12 or £16 charge was fair or lawful. For praqmatic reasons the OFT will not take action to lower the bar at this time, but in no way has the OFT ever ruled £12 or £16 as lawful. The Egg story is pure fantasy and misrepresentation. Repeatedly the OFT said the legality of charge level is to be determined by the law court.
Ignore Egg's template letter and reclaim the entire charge -- 105 cardholders did. In particular reply along the lines of CAG template letter by moc1982 dated 30 APR 2007. There will be a ritulised exchange of 2 or 3 letters. After which Egg are under instructions to refund -- or face impossible questions before a judge in court. Good luck.
final review and decision.
we have completed a final review blah blah....
we included an offer to refund £4 in Full and final settlement of your complaint. Please be aware that this is our final settlement offer....
Basically saying £4 is all we are offering.
Does anybody have any advice on what to reply? I did know that there would be 2/3 letters going between us after the letter sent above, but I am a bit stuck on what to reply to this one.
Egg have 2 million cards, and everythiing goes through automated routine from which junior staff dare not deviate.
If you ignore their automated computer-generated template reply, and re-send your letter, adding that you will see them in court and additionally claim legal charges. Nothing new here, just repetiation of known patterns to discourage the uninitiated.
Ok, recieved a reply from them, its exactly the same letter recieved for the past 2 times.
Would I be right in just sending them the same letter I did last time? Or do I need to add something?
Thanks
C
Egg are known to have a drill of sending out 2 or 3 letters blindfold, it is not particularly aimed at you. They probably do not even realise they are repeating themselves. On past form they will not repeat indefinitely.
If you reiterate you position in a crisp sharp actionpoint, i.e.
unless you receive a refund you will file the N1 within one week. They can pay you now, or pay you later and pay their barrister 20 times as much to lose to you in court. You may not have stomach for court, but they don't know that. They fancy a court appearance even less than you.
Reply from Egg...
on the basis that Egg reduced its charges from £20 to £16. Accordingly without any admission of liability as to the previous level of charges, Egg reduced its charges to £16. The OFT has taken no further action against Egg.'
Reply With Quote
