Bicester1 vs Nat West **WON**

**Bicester1** · 5th November 2006 11:18

Well joined the forum yesterday am. SAR icon

off to Nat West for Bank Account and CC yesterday pm.

Game on!

Bicester1

Similar Threads:

**Bicester1** · 27th January 2007 13:12

Well won against MBNA icon

so now for the Nat West.

Credit card and bank account.

Got all my statements from my SAR icon

and calculate Baqnk Charges of £1878 with interest icon

of £1211 at their unauthorised OD rate of 29.5%.

On the Credit Card £432 in charges plus £259 in interest at 18%.

So prelim letters sent mid Decenber no sensible reply just the usual drivel so lba icon

went off 7 days ago [yes I know but I did have a good Christmas ] Holding letter from CC this am saying we will write again in two weeks!

I don't think so!

Will spend this weekend drafting POC icon

!

Bicester1

**Bicester1** · 1st February 2007 12:05

Hi

**Bicester1** · 1st February 2007 12:07

Hi,

Letter from Mr Mike Bailey re: Credit Card offering to refund the difference between £12 and their charges but no interest icon

!

Anyone else had this experience?

Bicester1

**Deller** · 1st February 2007 12:14

Not with NW as I don't have a credit card with them, however I did have the same experience with my claim against Capital One icon

. This seems to be pretty normal for credit card firms to offer the difference between the charges applied to your account and £12 maximum charged governed by the OFT ruling.
You should turn down this offer as you are entitled to the full ammount you are claiming. My Cap One claim made this offer to me twice and both times I turned it down, they have now offered the full ammount I am claiming and I just await the cheque through my door, I can't see it being any different in your claim.

**Bicester1** · 4th February 2007 13:52

Hi deller1. Thanks that's what I felt and have written back saying so! One interesting point tho' in that in the letter they talk about their charge as "a fixed penalty notice" no mention of a fee for service! I have therefore written back and thanked them for at least admitting that they are applying penalty charges and not liquidated damages!

Bicester1

**Bicester1** · 10th February 2007 07:49

Hi CAGers

Reading the forum over the last 24 hrs, I think it's now fairly clear that NW are offering to settle claims sooner. In my case letter by return after my lba icon

for my £1800 in charges but no offer of any interest icon

. Others seem to be getting an offer of full refund of charges, but no interest, after prelim

I had claimed their unauthorised rate of 29% but in view of their offer I have counter offered for charges and 8% and am now waiting for a response.

It does seem to me therefore, that they have abandoned their previous strategy of prevarication and if they assess the claim as well prepared, a good one and the claimant as determined, they are now offering charges back, more or less by return. The sticking point is interest. This has some important implications for new claims.

You cannot claim s69 interest till you get to issue a county court icon

claim. Therefore, if you claim only for your charges in your prelim, expecting a sod off letter, but NW offer to settle in response, you are stuck, as I understand that you have to accept their offer. You cannot then go back and ask for charges plus interest, once they have offered to meet your demand for the repayment of the charges alone.

IMHO therefore it seems to me that the tactic must be to write your prelim asking for charges plus contractual and negociate from there!!

NATTIE · 10th February 2007 09:14

I really hate this post but mainly because I was going to say it myself. Personally, the issue is one that is one of the most difficult ones. A lot of people still ask about interest icon

. I think most people should stick to the KISS principal- Keep It Simple Stupid. That means you get your charges back as a bare minimum.

**Bicester1** · 10th February 2007 09:56

Hi Nattie

Yup! Always believed in KISS [no tongues tho'] but seriously this is quite clever by Nat West.

To reiterate; if peeps send in a prelim asking for charges, intending to ask for s69 later, as I did with my MBNA icon

claim, they run the risk of being unable to claim any interest icon

at all once Nat West reply, [as MBNA did in my case] by return, offering their charges back as they now seem to be doing. This means claiming for contractual from scratch.

This is quite a high risk strategy and will be divisive as individual attitudes to interest will vary. Someone did post saying that they thought some people were "optimistic" on their interest charges. Furthermore in general terms I do get a feeling, reading thro' this and other forums and I wouldn't put it anymore strongly than that, that the courts don't like contractual interest. I know that many will regard this as unfair after all that's what they charge us, but that is I think, the reality of the current situation. Furthermore the courts like negotiation and compromise, hanging out for contractual when an offer of a full refund of charges has been made rapidly, might be seen as unreasonable and could result in claimants loosing the lot!

The interesting question [as we all know] is of course, what the real cost to the bank is in bouncing cheques etc. It might be argued that the difference between contractual and s69 represents very roughly what it costs the bank to run your account.

People will need to take a hard headed look at their case and decide if the difference in £ is worth the agro of court and additional time expended. I think that will have to be decided on an individual case by case basis, but people will need to remember, as one of the mods said, this is not a get rich quick scheme! I think it will be more important than ever to make a statement allowing the court the option of s69 in the alternative to contractual in your POC icon

, otherwise claimants will run the risk of defendants attempting to portray them to the judge as opportunistic carpet baggers. There is at least one post here where the judge took just that approach to a claimant.

Interesting times!

**Bicester1** · 10th February 2007 10:23

Hi all,

In the post this morning from Nat West cc "decided to reduce your credit limit blah blah etc."

Puerile retaliation for the fact that I am claiming charges or what!

NATTIE · 10th February 2007 10:43

I think as well, that because of such claims, litigation costs are rising and that maybe claiming a higher rate of interest icon

than 8% could be arguable in casught since interest rates on overdrafts have varied and narrowing it down to the precise pounds and pence would take a mathematical genius. 8% on the other hand does not.

**Josamolly** · 10th February 2007 11:00

Some fair points raised here, always like a bit of debate.

My NW claim was filed on the 25th Jan with 29.5 contractual. But i also left some breathing space arguing 16.99 and 8 as alternatives..

I have recieved an offer today, some £600 short of my claim, which to be honest i am happy about. I can now pursue the ineterst, whichever it may be, in court.

However, if they had offered me the full amount i would have stopped the proceedings first thing Monday morning, on the simple basis that going to court just to squeeze the interest icon

out of them is wrong and precarious..

**Bicester1** · 10th February 2007 11:19

Hi Nattie

Yes I agree. Reasonableness is however vital! [50% lol] If people really do want interest icon

they are going to have to go after it from prelim stage I note that the template prelim letter in the library does not mention interest at all. Does this need modifying? Any mods out there? What do you think Nattie?

I guess NW have finally decided thy have no defence to people reclaiming their charges and so now it becomes a cynical damage limitation exercise in trying to limit the total cost by trying to avoid interest! Given that most solicitors will be charging £200+ per hour I am sure NW will calculate settling is probably cheaper, in most cases, than litigating! I am sure many claimants on this site will settle for the return of their charges without interest. How many will have the stomach for a long drawn out fight and relish the thought of going to court?

My guess is they will settle those claims which are just for charges, if for only a few hundred pounds, continue to defend up to the wire claims which include contractual and who knows what for charges plus s69. We should know in a few days when I get their reply to my counter offer.

It will be interesting to see if the other financial institutions follow the Nat West. What's the betting they do? I think this is a very important turning point in the battle, as Churchill said about El Alemain:

"This is not the end, it is not even the beginning of the end, but it the end of the beginning!"

Probably a good time to go short on NW or other bank shares!!

Onward to Berlin or should that be Bishopsgate!!!

Bicester1

MBNA

WON £623

GM Card Won £580

Barclaycard lba icon

Nat West Bank offer received negotiating

Nat West CC offer received negotiating

Lloyds

PPI

prelim

Any advice is given informally. I am not a lawyer. Consult a trained professional if unsure of your legal position. If my advice is helpful please tip my scales!

**Bicester1** · 10th February 2007 11:28

Josamolly,

Interesting. Does the £600 short mean short of charges, or charges + 29.5% interest icon

?

If the offer equals charges plus s69 you need to get some advice. Whilst I understand that payments into court don't happen in the small claims court if they have made a "reasonable offer" the case might get interesting.

I wonder if their tactic will be to move strike out on the grounds of claimants unreasonableness in rejecting a "fair" offer.

This will get very interesting. Do keep us informed!

Bicester1

**Parkvale** · 10th February 2007 11:43

Bicester1,
Very stirring statement. At least all us CAGGERS can prepare for their new tactics.

.Thanks to the open debates on this wonderful site. Forewarned is forearmed.So
on into battle.

**Josamolly** · 10th February 2007 12:26

No its actually £600 short of the charges, plus i have spent £250 on costs so far.. I am treading carefully on this one, as you say it could get interesting should i continue purely for the interest icon

..

**Bicester1** · 10th February 2007 12:41

Josamolly

Sorry that's me being thick! It's interesting that they have not offered you the full amount of your charges. Can you tell us how much you claimed? I got an offer for my full £1800. I wonder If they have a cut off point? Maybe 2 or 3K.

I think that as long as you give the court the options in the alternative for interest icon

, between s69 or contractual, in your POC there should be no probs.

Do keep us posted.

Bicester1

MBNA

WON £623

GM Card Won £580

Barclaycard lba icon

Nat West Bank offer received negotiating

Nat West CC offer received negotiating

Lloyds

PPI

prelim

Any advice is given informally. I am not a lawyer. Consult a trained professional if unsure of your legal position. If my advice is helpful please tip my scales!

NATTIE · 10th February 2007 13:00

Bicester1- I think we are having an impact and I think from the letter which was on another thread you can now see that the fact that people are clued up means that IMHO that the solicitors may well find that arguing interest icon

ONLY is easier than arguing on the charges itself which is a good feeling for those not pursuing it through NO WIN NO FEE vultures. It also means those people who feel a little intimidated by the whole process will feel easier in their ability to claim back charges without needing a PhD in Maths to argue the interest bit before a judge although 8% should be easier to argue

**Bicester1** · 10th February 2007 13:24

Nattie.

Agree completely! This is just snowballing. The mainstream media are at last picking it up. Even the Daily Telegraph is encouraging its readers to claim back [ Do DT readers get charged!? ]

I guess that's the calculation NW have made. I guess at least 50% of claimants will settle for charges only and no interest icon

. I wonder if there is an upper limit above which they will automatically defend or should I say prevaricate!?

Bicester1

MBNA

WON £623

GM Card Won £580

Barclaycard lba icon

Nat West Bank offer received negotiating

Nat West CC offer received negotiating

Lloyds

PPI

prelim

Any advice is given informally. I am not a lawyer. Consult a trained professional if unsure of your legal position. If my advice is helpful please tip my scales!

NATTIE · 10th February 2007 13:48

I would think they would defend on the interest icon

bit alone, but if it is 8% then I see no problem of a win after the usual of test the water, ie defend claim, nervous sweating, defendants aq icon

and then pay up.

Thread: Bicester1 vs Nat West WON

Thread Tools