Claims Older Than 6 Years - Any Thoughts? **WON**

**Matheos95** · 12th October 2006 12:05

Have read a couple of threads where people are now going to try claiming charges older than 6 years icon

and wondered what peoples thoughts are. Reason for this is I found a file my husband kept for an account we had with Natwest 1988 to 1995 which includes EVERY statement! Having roughly added up the charges I can come to about £2500 just adding the interest they charged at the time but there contractual interest was horrid 17.5% for agreed borrowing (ie overdraft icon

) and 29.5% for unarranged. Not ever doing contractual on other claims, if I go after this one I may try and understand it and go for it.

Just wondered what peoples thoughts are on older than 6 years - I dont mind gambling with the MCOL fee to try...

Similar Threads:

NATTIE · 12th October 2006 19:14

There is a thread in I think the legalities section re the statute of limitations icon

Act, have a read of it first and see whether you believe that you can do this because Natwest icon

solicitors may look to throw the claim out because of it.

Good Luck

**Matheos95** · 14th October 2006 14:58

Hi

Well I have decided to try it been reading other threads where people are also doing it.

Decided not to go for contractual in the end as because of the dates involved the contractual made the figure unbeliveable even the 8% is more than double the actual charges.

Doing it this way also keeps me below the £5k mark (just) so in this way it will stay in small claims so I will therefore only be gambling with the MCOL fee.

No love lost between us and Natwest icon

so the prelim letter has gone, they will have got it on the 14/10/2006 lets see where it goes from here.

**livelylad** · 14th October 2006 15:27

Originally Posted by Matheos95

Hi

Well I have decided to try it been reading other threads where people are also doing it.

Decided not to go for contractual in the end as because of the dates involved the contractual made the figure unbeliveable even the 8% is more than double the actual charges.

Doing it this way also keeps me below the £5k mark (just) so in this way it will stay in small claims so I will therefore only be gambling with the MCOL fee.

No love lost between us and Natwest icon

so the prelim letter has gone, they will have got it on the 14/10/2006 lets see where it goes from here.

Best of luck mate i am still toying with the idea of contractual interest icon

. :grin:

**TINK660** · 25th October 2006 16:54

Any update on this thread? as we too have statements from early 90's to late 90's where Nat West screwed up for a lot and we would really like to claim these back so watching this with great interest icon

! Best of luck, hope we will soon be following in your steps. By the way ours was a business account. ;-)

**Matheos95** · 25th October 2006 17:29

Thank you.
Well im at lba icon

stage and heard nothing from them at all - due to go to MCOL on the 4th November so still waiting I guess till then. I will post as soon as I know more.

**BaldyBaldwin** · 4th November 2006 11:21

best of luck, i am after statements from Natwest icon

for 1984-1996, apparently they have them, but i think they will try and stall me due to the time statute, DPA handed into local branch were i held the account but so far not a peep out of them and cheque not cashed, no surprised there, they have until the 30/11 to reply, but wont be holding breath.
will be watching with interest icon

(slight understatement)
best of luck
regards kevluff
p.s. am about to start a thread

**Matheos95** · 4th November 2006 11:36

Thank you and good luck dunno how you get on for getting the old statements - was just by luck I found these, was going through a box of old paperwork and in there was a folder.

Am due to raise claim today but lack of funds will mean it has to wait - lol waiting for HSBC icon

and Cap ones money to come in after offer so will have to wait till they arrive.

My next problem is the wording of the claim - think it will have to go on an N1 rather than MCOL as I want to include that bit re section 32 of the limitations act - any help from anyone on this part would be greatly appreciated as I dont want to screw it up for anyone claiming after me.

Cheers

**BaldyBaldwin** · 4th November 2006 11:52

i have spoken to someone who works for nw and they explained how there filing system works and apperantly they will still have every thing stored on there old system so it will be no problem for them to supply statement for that period, although they will proberly be reluctant to do this as they know where this is going. so i will probaly have to huff and puff to get them to cough them up, but im in no hurry ,i have waited this long, and the 8% interest icon

makes it one off the best saving schemes on the market

**Matheos95** · 5th November 2006 01:19

LOL certainly is the best saving scheme possible - good luck with trying to get them - let me know how you get on

**Matheos95** · 5th November 2006 01:21

Originally Posted by Matheos95

My next problem is the wording of the claim - think it will have to go on an N1 rather than MCOL as I want to include that bit re section 32 of the limitations act - any help from anyone on this part would be greatly appreciated as I dont want to screw it up for anyone claiming after me.

Cheers

Any mods or anyone care to help with this would be much appreciated

NATTIE · 5th November 2006 01:22

same here, I know that from 1991 it is a definite possiblility but prior to that would be interesting to know how.

**Lula** · 5th November 2006 01:33

The limitation act icon

1980 Section 32 deals with the postponement of a limitation act in cases of fraud, concealment or mistake. I would argue that the bank have deliberately concealed their true charges and have turned what should be liquidated damages into an unlawful penalty charge.

Or you could even state that they have made a mistake in their charging structure and are not charging liquidated damages.

**Bicester1** · 5th November 2006 11:42

That seems like a very good point! Fraud is of course a criminal offence and the prospect of a few CEO's in the dock is a very pleasing one!

I suppose that if it could be shown that there was a deliberate attempt to conceal the nature of the charges and to missrepresent them as actual costs rather than as a the penalty which they so clearly are, then I suppose it might be possible to claim fraud. It is interesting that the Banks are so keen to avoid having to give a detailed costs Breakdown icon

in open court! Conspiracy to defraud and obtaining a pecuniary advantage by deception would be interesting charges! If fraud could be proven, or what about misrepresentation, then I guess we could go back more than 6 years icon

as you point out.

Any of m'learned friends out there care to venture a pro bono opinion! What about a class action or a complaint to the SFO!

**Matheos95** · 13th November 2006 12:13

Hi all - ok Im getting ready to do claim on this could someone look at what I intend to submit on the N1 and let me know what they think

1. The Claimant had an account A/C No: xxxxxxx with the Defendant which was opened on or around 22nd January 1990.

2. During the period in which the Account was operating the Defendant debited numerous charges to the Account in respect of purported breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant and also charged interest on the charges once applied. The Claimant understands that the Defendant contends that the charges were debited in accordance with the terms of the contract between itself and the Claimant.

3. A list of the charges applied is attached to these particulars of claim.

4. The Claimant contends that:
a) The charges debited to the Account are punitive in nature; are not a genuine pre-estimate of cost incurred by the Defendant; exceed any alleged actual loss to the Defendant in respect of any breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant; and are not intended to represent or related to any alleged actual loss, but instead unduly enrich the Defendant which exercises the contractual term in respect of such charges with a view to profit.
b) The contractual provision that permits the Defendant to levy such charges is unenforceable by virtue of the Unfair Contract Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations (1999), the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and the common law.
c) Limitations Act 1980 Section 32.--
(1) Where in the case of any action for which a period of limitation is prescribed by this Act, either-
(a) the action is based upon the fraud of the defendant; or
(b) any fact relevant to the plaintiff's right of action has been deliberately concealed from him by the defendant; or
(c) the action is for relief from the consequences of a mistake;
the period of limitation shall not begin to run until the plaintiff has discovered the fraud, concealment or mistake (as the case may be) or could with reasonable diligence have discovered it. ....
(2) For the purposes of subsection (1) above, deliberate commission of a breach of duty in circumstances in which it is unlikely to be discovered for some time amounts to deliberate concealment of the facts involved in that breach of duty. . . . (5) Sections 14A and 14B of this Act shall not apply to any action to which subsection (1)(b) above applies (and accordingly the period of limitation referred to in that sub-section, in any case to which either of those sections would otherwise apply, is the period applicable under section 2 of this Act).
using this as a basis i believe they have deliberately hidden the true cost of charges from me.

5. Accordingly the Claimant claims:
a) the return of the amounts debited in respect of charges in the sum of £1842.50 and any interest charged thereon;
b) Court costs;
c) Interest pursuant to section 69 County Courts Act as set out on the attached list of charges or at such rate and for such periods as the court deems just.
d) Claimant claims interest under Sec.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% a year from 22nd January 1990 to 15th November 2006 of £2022.36 and also interest at same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of £0.41p.

I believe that the contents of these particulars of claim are true

Is there anything you think I need to add or remove - and the wordinf mainly of the Section 32 bit does that need to be ammended at all?

**TINK660** · 13th November 2006 13:06

Good luck Matheos, I will be following this thread with great interest icon

.
I havent had a chance to add up all the charges yet, but looking at one particularly bad month it was £467.50 in charges (and that doesnt include £3.50 a day excess borrowing (which was £129.00) I take it that you can claim for the excess borrowing fees as well and unpaids etc. I've got an idea I'm going to faint at the total charges!!
Go get 'em mate I'm with you all the way.

**TINK660** · 13th November 2006 13:08

Sorry, cant help on your particulars of claim but certainly looks good, perhaps you should get a mod to look at it and give their opinion

**Matheos95** · 13th November 2006 13:13

Ty Tink660 its abit scary but nothing ventured nothing gained

Yes hoping one of the mods or legal wizkids or both or anyone lol will have time just to cast an eye over it before I have to submit

Battleaxe · 13th November 2006 13:28

Good luck with this, because there more of us out here who want to do the same. i want to go back to 1998 with A & L and will settle for 8% interest icon

back that far.

I am redoing my claim for A & L and only going back to Nov 2000 through to Nov 2006, and then I am going to claim further back.

i know there will be more charges added this month, and that will a Back to the Future claim also.

I do love our little saving scheme. BankFodder and Dave you two guys are my heroes...

bong · 13th November 2006 15:03

hi there - matheos gave me the link to her thread - anyone who is interested in using the wording of my own claim - feel free. It's here http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...tml#post364381

Thread: Claims Older Than 6 Years - Any Thoughts? WON

Thread Tools