Kevr6384's Parents v Barclays - 6yrs Plus

[kevr6384]

Good Evening CAG,

 

After successfully completing two claims from Co-op and A&L for myself i have now promised to take a look at my parents charges.

 

We have readily available statments back to 1992 and i have completed the basic excel sheet already.

 

We are looking at charges of £925 and interest as per s69 8% at £468.89

 

I have been following the Claiming beyond 6 years thread

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/80486-claiming-beyond-6-yrs.html#post712882

 

Do we have an update on the standard templates for the Prelim letter and latter stages ?

 

Also how far do we go back as we think we may have statements back to the 1970's ?

 

Any advice on the new findings re: limitation act would be appreciated as they did not apply when i claimed for my own personal charges back from Co-op & A&L.

 

Thanks In Advance

[kevr6384]

Anyone ?

[kevr6384]

No-one then ?

 

Any of the mods or the great BF lend their assistance #

 

[noomill060]

For a start, why are you only claiming 8% s.69 judicial interest, when the actual interest stated in the contract will be at least 15%?

[noomill060]

Work out the contractual interest on each charge from the date it was applied to todays date at the % rate stated in the contract.

 

Add all these figures up and that will be the interest you parents will have been decieved into paying and what you want to claim back for them.

 

Use this- you will horrified.

 

Compound interest calculator

 

 

For instance:

 

A £20 charge on 1 January 1992 at 15% compounded is now worth £201.94

[Glenn UK]

Kev

 

A couple of points come to mind, and the first is that the limitations act has applied since 1980 i think it is, so the conditions that give rise to using the various sections that allow claiming charges beyond 6 years old have been around since then.

 

There are various bits of case law, Cave Vs Robinson, Klienwort Benson V Leicester Council, DMG Vs inland revenue and probably others are also available having been found one way or another.

 

The effect of these cases is to unlock the use of Sec 32.1.b and c an tallow claimants to go back effectively as far as they like.

 

If you have the statements going back to the 1970s then in principle there is legal difference between a charge from the 1970s and a charge one day over six years old as far as i can tell.

 

However, claiming charges over six years old is one of the issues that in my view will make the banks sit up and take notice since it unlocks a huge increase in the value of potential claims and of course the issue of interest becomes very important.

Even using Sec 69 interest the sums are likely to be increased quite dramatically.

 

If you decide to investigate CI then you can rest assured the sums involved will be astronomical.

 

I don't see any logical reason why if you decide to use Sec 32 of the limitations act to claim charges older than six years why you shouldn't go back as far as you can.

 

Similarly if you decide that contractual interest is for you that in principle it makes any difference as to the age of the charges, nor to the resulting interest that arises.

 

Now the bad bits, I suspect that the bank will take exception, don't know why, to both elements of such a claim.

 

Doesn't mean you shouldn't go for it,with suitable research by yourself and help from the forum members.

 

Something to think about maybe.

 

HTH

 

Glenn

[TANZARELLI]

I agree. I is also something that your parents would need to understand and be able to argue in a court room if it got there so as much as you need to research these areas, so do your parents.

 

Tanz