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.
I have just gone through all my old Woolwich statements from 91-97 and calculated that they unlawfully charged me £2045 in Administration fees, unpaid DD and standing orders. Is there a reason people don't go beyond 6 years legally, or is it because statements aren't available that far back?
I am an in a similar position. I am owed 600+ for charges from 1997 to 2001. I successfully claimed a similar amount for charges 2001 to date, and have started a separate claim. I am at the stage where I am about to issue proceedings, having received an offer for £300.
Although the Limitations Act would appear to prevent you from claiming charges over 6 years old, there are exceptions written into the Act that cover deliberate concealment, and errors. In other words they must have known that the charges were unlawful at the time they started to apply them to our accounts. I cannot believe that their legal people would not have been involved at an early stage, and they would have known all about the case law and consumer law that existed at the time, so it is a reasonable assumption to make that they have in fact concealed this information, and therefore the Limitations Act does not apply.
However, making that assumption and actually proving the facts are 2 different things, especially where courts are concerned.
But on balance, I am prepared to issue proceedings, even though the ground is a little thinner, because I still do not believe that they will defend their position in court, and if by some miracle they do put in an appearance and successfully defend, all I will lose is the £80 court fee
Preliminary Letter sent to Woolwich 05/06
LBA sent 19/06
Court claim filed 04/07 : Total £824.75
Acknowledgement of Service 27/07
Defence received 08/08
AQ filed 11/08
Barclays AQ filed 05/09
Hearing date 20/12 SETTLED IN FULL £840.49: 14/12/06
Well I sent my Preliminary with Breakdown of charges, I will follow it up tomorrow, with a letter delivered recorded. With same letter, breakdown and copies of all my statements for the period of 90-97. With charges and interest charged totalling £2275.82. Now I am nervous all of a sudden
Got a strange letter back today from Woolwich, well letter was standard, but attached to it was a list of transactions, which looked like charges that totalled £2800+ and it was for one year!!!!!:o
Right. this feels strange I appear to be talking to myself.
Anyway, when I get this money back I need to get new glasses, as the list of charges I got, was for the final year of my account with the Woolwich. Apparently they can't go back further than 6 years.
But what I find strange is that I am claiming for totally different years, so exactly what are they looking into and what am I meant to do?
Should I now put in another claim for the new set of charges which total £2,877.50 in one year (which also got me a CCJ) or should I wait to see what offer Barclays come up with(Customer Relations words during TC today).
Must say I am worried that they are going off in 1 direction and I am going the other way, is this stalling tactics?
Can anyone give me advice about the extra year of charges that I have just found out about.
Should I do that as a seperate claim, or should I just add it to my post 6 years claim?
I am really stuck on this
Hello 100% I have to say you do appear to be chatting to yourself However having looked into this site and seen the general thoughts of reclaiming back further than 6 years, it is said by many to do the claim as one court action / claim.
Some CAG members state that when they tried to do 2 court cases on the same account, that the judge through out the case.
I myself am waiting for pre 6 years statements and when I receive those I will add the costs to my current 6 year charges. I will advise the bank of my new figure and give them opportunity to pay. and when they refuse I will commence legal action.
Right just got off the phone to Barclays as my case has now been passed to them. I have been told that Barclays will not consider charges going back beyong 6 years as it is only our right to claim back a debt owed to us for 6 years. I asked him what it will look like in court if I am claiming for 91-97 charges and they are looking at 01-02 charges. He didn't have an answer. So I am none the wiser now. And they are stalling big time they might still be looking at this beyond the end of April (Yeah Right. I dictate a time scale not you) So I now have a letters from me about 91-97 and letters from Barclays/Woolwich for 01-02.
So I am now gonna send in a lba for 01-02 and pursue that as well. Don't know if this the right thing. But I have to make a decision soon and nobody seems to be able to advise me on this
Charges from 91-97, should I go for it?
legally, or is it because statements aren't available that far back?
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Kimmy01
However having looked into this site and seen the general thoughts of reclaiming back further than 
