Thread: Egg ignored charges claim

There is no time limit laid down by regulators for the refund of penalty charges which claimants allege to be unlawful for being exhorbitant and profit-making instead of lawfully just compensating for loss.

The drill is that the claimant asks by template letter for refund of Overlimit and Late Payment charges in full, based on an accurate itemised list of past charges. Egg to either pay or confront the claimant in Small Claims Court.

Quick refund depends on pressing the right levers. Egg managers know the CAG template letter by heart, and after giving in 111 times is not going to stop now. They do not want to face you in court, not when you know what to say. The thread page below shows how-to, the most recent few entries will do, plus the moc1982 template letter dated 30APR2007, a letter delivering as effectively today as on the day it was first sent to Egg 2.5 years ago.

Good luck.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...ry-over-5.html

Update: I telephoned Egg yesterday and today I've had a letter in the post, dated 5th.

I think it's their standard reply


..We would like to draw your attention to some of the points made by the OFT in the statement issued on 6th April 2006, at the conclusion of its investigation into default charges on credit cards. The OFT stated that default fees should not be equivalent to the threshold. The OFT stated that the presumption of unfairness in relation to the charges over £12.00 would apply where there are exceptional business factors. They therefore acknowledged that in those circumstances, a card issuer may be able to set a fair default charge above the £12 threshold.

The OFT, as an example, Specially referred to Egg’s practices of requiring all customers to pay the minimum monthly payment by direct debit.

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 £20.00 to £16.00. Accordingly, without any admission of liability as to the previous level of charges. Egg reduced its default charges to £16.00. The OFT has taken no further action against Egg.

Our investigation found that any charges applied t your account were at the rate of £16.00. For the reasons outlined above we are satisfied that our charges are fair and enforceable. As a result, we can not uphold your request to refund the charges in question and confirm that your complaint has now been closed.

If you have any concern relating to the information held about you by a Credit Reference Agency, you should contact the agency directly ( never stated any concern in my letter).


I know people have had their refunds in full even if it was the £16.00 Egg refers to. Does anyone know how I should respond?

This is the computer-generated Egg letter to bamboozle the uninitiated, previously posted here verbatim many times by many CAGgers. Whatever anybody writes to Egg, they will try their luck and go through sending their set sequence of 2 or 3 template letters. They have nothing to lose by trotting out their busted argument, not known to be busted by newcomers. If you sent them a copy of the Magna Carta they would still respond with the same template letters, two or three times.

You can respond in kind, completely ignoring their letter, and to reiterate your readiness to confront their £1000-per-day barrister in court. Once they realise bamboozle does not work this time they will pay up in full. Their past form is to voluntarily add 8% per annum on top of the full refund to match Statutory (compensatory) interest. If you want more interest than 8% it is up to you, but going on past form it looks inadvisable unless you are hot barrister class.