Thread: Claiming beyond 6 yrs - important new information!!!

We think that claimants should consider claiming beyond 6 yrs.

Firstly, the charges campaign has been in full swing now for a good year. The banks were well aware of it a year ago and also the OFT report highlighted the law and the bank's obligations - just in case any of them were at all in doubt.

To my mind this is good evidence that any bank which continued its charges regime after the date of the first OFT report has been concealing its charges regime and therefore has lost the protection of the Limitation Act.

I do not believe that the Limitation Act offers any long-stop mechanism so that if you concealed the facts one year ago then you do not merely accrue an additional year of liability. I think that a single instance of concealment invokes s.32 and the limitation barrier falls away completely.

Concealment amounts to a question of the morality of the defendant's action. Once this is established then I do not believe that the courts will strive to give them any help.
I understand from Zootscoot that this view is also confirmed by case-law.

In fact it seems even if a concealment has occurred even after the breach in question has occurred, the limitation period still falls away.

If the banks want to challenge this then it is up to the claimant to respond at least with the arguments above and then if the bank want to rebut this, they can rebut it with a statement of truth.
I doubt whether any of them would dare. They are already getting in too deep as it is.
A statement of truth which is made knowing that it is false or reckless as to its truth is a contempt of court. I do not believe that the banks would go this far

We would urge all claimants to claim as far back as they can.
In the case of the Yorkshire and Clydesdale banks we would suggest that even where claimants have accepted Full and final settlements or have accepted compromise settlements that they should now go back for anything outstanding on the basis that the Whistleblower disclosures show that there has been concealment and that any full and final agreements are now vitiated by that concealment.

We expect to be giving the same advice in respect of other banks as more information surfaces - as it surely will.

However, we consider that beyond 6 years is now just a basic claim.

We will be amending templates and so forth in the coming days

Similar Threads:

• Some Important Information
• Important Tax Information
• Ex-Abbey Employee: IMPORTANT INFORMATION
• some important information regarding banks

So, if I have sent off a SAR recently, and they have replied with stating that they only hold information, in the format of bank statements for a period of 6 years. I should now contact them asking for any and all information held in any format defined under the DPA, giving the reasons as per bankfodders OP

Barclays do keep 12 years of statements; though I suspect they may start warming up the furnaces soon.

Here's a caveat:
Do not think that your repayment will be automatic. The banks are likely to dig their heels in even more. However, you should dig your heels in too. If they want to argue it in court then that's fine. We are all ready.
However, they are most unlikely to go into court and by claiming pre-6yrs, the stakes for them are raised even higher and now there is a good argument to dislodge the limitation barrier.

Of course there is the problem of getting statements but I would say that all banks keep their records for a very considerable period of time.

The Abbey, for instance keep their records back to 1926.

We have seen the tricks which the banks have used in the past to prevent access to personal data.

Both Barclays and Abbey have been found to be in breach of their statutory obligation.
The BBC showed the culture of dishonesty which exists within Barclays.
Watch out for dirty tricks generally in any bank.


However, our advantage is that we receive and share so much information from our Users and also helpful information from bank staff who are sickened by the attitude of their employers that I am sure that we will always have access to the truth.

Great news, I'll be sending some letters to Barclays for "old" credit card accounts after the Easter Break - they'll no doubt owe my OH more than he owes them!!!!

Over 6 years???? That's fascinating. Both hubby and I ended up with CCJ's in about 1993 via Barclays Bank. Both were for around £500 I recall, all purely bank charges. In a nutshell, I wasn't working, had three tiny children and hubby got made redundant (at a time when everyone around us was, the recession I beleive they called it.........Nigel Lawson "Unemployment is a small price to pay to keep inflation down" ...

If I was to send SARS to Barclays without knowing any account numbers for around 1990-3 Would I realistically have any chance of receiving the statements?

Originally Posted by TRACYFLYY

Would anyone know how long the royal Bank of Scotland and halifax keep our account records for? If this all works out then like a previous member to this thread my life would change considerably. They have taken that much money from me in the past whilst bringing up a family.

I recieved 15 years of Statements from RBS

Following a conversation with a friend who's currently reclaiming charges, we have come to the cross roads regarding getting the information from over 6 years ago. We both have closed accounts with HSBC who have written as per my post above, to advise they do not keep details over 6 years old.

I have been asked to verify if then in this situation, should you put in a claim for a 'set fee' i.e. £500/£1000, and then make the bank verify that this amount does not reflect the charges i.e. by producing the actual details of the charges on the account?