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.
What a fantastic site. If it was not for this site I would not of tried to get backs my charges.
I was lured into A & L with the promise of long interest free overdrafts but have been charged £100 in three months for unpaid direct debits which meant I went over my overdraft which never happened with the last bank. Their internet banking is appalling - so I wrote my preliminery letter on 2 May which I sent off recorded.
After the usual time buying letter I received the following today:
"Thank you for your letter dated 2 May regarding charges to your account, which I am sorry to learn have been the cause of some sissatisfaction.
Firstly there has been no consultation between the banking industry and the OFT about current accounts. If there is any industry wide consultation on this matter, Alliance & Leicester will participate as appropriate.
All the charges on your account have been raised correctly in line with our charging policy and our Terms & Conditions. Our charges are clearly shown on the back of your statement and on our Website and are fully competitive with other banks.
I have reviewed the situation and am pleased to tell you that I have made a refund of £50 to your account. This is a gesture of goodwill and I must inform you that any chrges raised correctly to your account in future will have to stand.
I hope wewill now be able to draw this matter to a close and if I do not hear from you within the next 8 weeks, will assume that this is the case. However in accordance with regulatory requirements, I am enclosing our leaflet which explains the steps you would need to take if you wish to persue this matter further, including the ultimate availability of the Financial Ombudsman Service.
I trust our service will meet your requirements in the future. However, should you need further assistance in the future please do not hesitate to contact me.
Yours sincerely
Marie Williams Customer Services"
My response
I just wondered if anyone had any comments/advice about my response as I obviously want the other £50. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. I found this site www.bankcharges.info which is where I took bits of the letter from. I hope this is ok with the moderators.
I write in response to your letter of 16th March explaining that you have refunded me £50 worth of charges relating to unpaid direct debits and overdraft. However this is only half the full amount that I require payment back for as stated in my letter of 2nd May 2006. I note your position is that I am not entitled to a full refund because the terms and conditions of my account allow you to impose charges where I have insufficient funds in my account.
I also note your suggestion that I can complain to the Financial Services Ombudsman if dissatisfied with this decision. However, please be advised that it would be inappropriate to complain to the Financial Services Ombudsman where the only forum which can determine a dispute on the legality of charges is my local court. I would ask you to note the following.
Your bank insists it can impose charges in accordance with its terms and conditions of contract. However, those terms and conditions are subject to the common law and the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations 1999 (UTCCR). Indeed, the UTCCR takes precedence over any contractual term where the court finds a term to be 'unfair'. The court can then treat that term of contract as having no legal effect.
The question that arises is this: are your charges unfair in terms of the UTCCR? 0n 26 July 2005 the OFT stated that 'a charge is likely to be disproportionately high if it is more than a court would be likely to award if the lender sued the cardholder for breach of contract'. 0n 5 April 2006 the OFT stated that default charges which are set at more than £12 will be presumed to be unfair and unenforceable in terms of the UTCCR. Charges above this sum will be subject to legal action by the OFT (press release 68/06 - online here: http://www.oft.gov.uk/News/Press+rel...2006/68-06.htm).
So what would the court award your bank for my minor breach of contract? As you will be aware, the court will only award (in a non-negotiated consumer contract) a sum to reimburse actual loss. Your charges do not reflect actual loss. Rather, they include a massive profit margin or penalty. Alternatively, they subsidise the bank's global debt recovery costs and lending losses. There is parliamentary evidence for this assertion.
When the UK banks gave evidence to the House of Commons Treasury Committee on how bank charges were calculated they said: "[bank charges] are going to pay for all the people we have who pursue debt, collect debt, speak to customers and chase payments. The way these charges are arrived at is by taking these total costs and making some assumptions about the volume that is going to come through to arrive at the individual charges" (House of Commons, 2nd report, 25 January 2005, paragraph 50 - online here: http://www.parliament.the-stationery.../274/27405.htm).
Accordingly, your charges do not reflect the actual loss in my case. They are an illegal penalty charge designed to recover money unconnected with the conduct of my account. Please advise whether you have an appeals procedure, and if so, please treat this letter as a request for an appeal against your decision not to refund all my charges.
I require repayment of the rest of the charges in full, which amounts to a total of £50. If you do not comply fully within 14 days, I will raise an action of payment at my local court. In that eventuality, I would require you to lodge in court financial vouching for the actual loss sustained in my case, together with your full financial accounts revealing how much income is generated from your bank charges, as against the cost of administering dishonoured transactions.
Furthermore, I shall submit a Consumer Credit Act 1974 complaint to the OFT upon the basis that you have failed to comply with the OFT's direction of 5 April 2006 and are therefore not a 'fit and proper person' to hold a consumer credit licence under the 1974 Act. If you do not understand what this means then seek advice from your legal department.
I looks forward to your urgent response.
Perfect. What you're really saying is:
' I know what I'm talking about and I'm not going away till I get my money. So stop messing about and just give to me now.'
New claim half refunded - LBA!
which never happened with the last bank. Their internet banking is appalling - so I wrote my preliminery letter on 2 May which I sent off recorded.
Reply With Quote
