Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • quite honestly id email shiply CEO with that crime ref number and state you will be taking this to court, for the full sum of your losses, if it is not resolved ASAP. should that be necessary then i WILL be naming Shiply as the defendant. this can be avoided should the information upon whom the courier was and their current new company contact details, as the present is simply LONDON VIRTUAL OFFICES  is a company registered there and there's a bunch of other invisible companies so clearly just a mail address   
    • If it doesn’t sell easily : what they can get at an auction becomes fair market price, which may not realise what you are hoping.
    • Thank you. The receiver issue is a rabbit hole I don't think I'm going to enjoy going down. These people seem so protected. And I don't understand how or why?  Fair market value seems to be ever shifting and contentious.
    • Hungary is attempting to be a world power in manufacturing electric vehicle batteries, despite locals' reservations.View the full article
    • You can't, but you can (and really should) bring up the point that the lender isn't meeting their legal obligations in selling the property for fair market value. You'll have to do this in court, though. A receiver is bought in by the lender, not you. If they're a registered insolvency practitioner, you may be able to raise a complaint to the insolvency service but there are no guarantees here. Many receivers are also registered with the RICS and self-regulate so if you know the name of the receiver you can check there, again no guarantees. https://www.rics.org/surveyor-careers/career-development/accreditations/registered-property-receivership-scheme
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

My Mum Vs RBS


reka
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6148 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

I thought i should start a new thread on here. My mum has asked if i can help her to reclaim her charges. She has provided me with an almost full list of statements going back to 1990. (she used to be a teacher and is organised...a gene i missed).

 

Looking through her statements in the early days, i notice very few charges for DD's etc. But there are charges that say eg

 

"chg to 29 Nov" and "Int to 23 Dec"... and therein lies my problem/confusion.

 

I am assuming that "Chg to" is for unauthorised interest....but i don't want to assume. "Int to" i assume is interest (i think you call it contractual interest.

 

If i am correct in my above assumptions, am i able to claim for the unauthorised interest? The reason i ask is that these charges were taken out every month at varying amounts and will mount up to alot of money that will help her out alot.

 

If she can claim the unauthorised interest back, will that be at the 8% (if it goes to N1 stage) or can she claim at a higher rate (equal to the rate they charged)

 

Any help/pointers will be massively appreciated! (i feel lost on this one totally)

[FONT=Tahoma][SIZE=4][COLOR=blue]Reka [/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Tahoma][SIZE=4][COLOR=blue][URL]http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/abbey-bank/93120-reka-abbey-court.html[/URL][/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [URL]http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/abbey-bank/101308-t-cs-nov-1998-a.html[/URL] [FONT=Tahoma][SIZE=4]Abbey *WON IN COURT* £2775[/SIZE][SIZE=1](awaiting payment) [/SIZE][/FONT] [B][FONT=Tahoma]Warrant of Execution filed 22/06/07[/FONT][/B] [B][FONT=Tahoma]***Warrant Issued 22nd June 2007***[/FONT][/B] [B][FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=red]PAID IN FULL [/COLOR][/FONT][/B] [URL]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcAaoRr8H5c[/URL]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Royalties accounts? It was a personal account, sorry if i am being thick just i have never heard of them. As there were 2 interest payments taken each month, i asumed one was for unauthorised OD, and thought you can claim that back?

 

Arrgghhhh, i was expecting to get it confirmed that they are for unauthorised OD and was going to ask how i claim them, and at what rate...hmmmmmmm. Thnx for helping anyway

[FONT=Tahoma][SIZE=4][COLOR=blue]Reka [/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Tahoma][SIZE=4][COLOR=blue][URL]http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/abbey-bank/93120-reka-abbey-court.html[/URL][/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [URL]http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/abbey-bank/101308-t-cs-nov-1998-a.html[/URL] [FONT=Tahoma][SIZE=4]Abbey *WON IN COURT* £2775[/SIZE][SIZE=1](awaiting payment) [/SIZE][/FONT] [B][FONT=Tahoma]Warrant of Execution filed 22/06/07[/FONT][/B] [B][FONT=Tahoma]***Warrant Issued 22nd June 2007***[/FONT][/B] [B][FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=red]PAID IN FULL [/COLOR][/FONT][/B] [URL]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcAaoRr8H5c[/URL]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Royalties (and Royalties Gold) are personal current accounts whereby you pay £10 (the sum has varied over time) per month for all sorts of extras like commission free currency exchange etc.

 

Normally when RBoS charge for things like unauthorised overdrafts they use a blanket title like "maintenance charge".

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the top left of the statement under the account holder's name it should state what kind of account it is - "INTEREST PAYING CURRENT ACCOUNT" or ROYALTIES GOLD ACCOUNT" or whatever.

 

Currently the monthly charges or "monthly membership fees" as they are known as, paid on Royalties accounts are :-

 

Royalties Premier = £15

Royalties Gold = £12

Royalties = £6

 

these appear on the statement as "CHG" - these are not claimable to be returned as "penalty" charges as they are a fee for the service of commission free currency excahnge etc.

“It's not personal, Sonny. It's strictly business.”

Link to post
Share on other sites

The "Chgs to" bit I think applies to all charges applied during a particular month e.g. exceeding overdraft limit.

I claimed these back on my schedule of charges and got reimbursed no problem.

Good luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The "Chgs to" bit I think applies to all charges applied during a particular month e.g. exceeding overdraft limit.

I claimed these back on my schedule of charges and got reimbursed no problem.

Good luck.

 

Yea lots of things come under "CHG" but service fees are not normally reclaimable - this was the reason I believe that the Berwick v Lloyds case failed as he tried to claim service fees as well as "penalty" charges - if you got them back you were lucky I'd say:)

“It's not personal, Sonny. It's strictly business.”

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for helping all, i have my mums statements in front of me. All the statements state "Current Account" and one print out states "Personal Current". So am i to take it that it is not a "Royalties" Account?

 

Sorry about this, i am just very confussed as to why it shows 2 interest charges every month, and never for the same amount. And if they are claimable.

[FONT=Tahoma][SIZE=4][COLOR=blue]Reka [/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Tahoma][SIZE=4][COLOR=blue][URL]http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/abbey-bank/93120-reka-abbey-court.html[/URL][/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [URL]http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/abbey-bank/101308-t-cs-nov-1998-a.html[/URL] [FONT=Tahoma][SIZE=4]Abbey *WON IN COURT* £2775[/SIZE][SIZE=1](awaiting payment) [/SIZE][/FONT] [B][FONT=Tahoma]Warrant of Execution filed 22/06/07[/FONT][/B] [B][FONT=Tahoma]***Warrant Issued 22nd June 2007***[/FONT][/B] [B][FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=red]PAID IN FULL [/COLOR][/FONT][/B] [URL]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcAaoRr8H5c[/URL]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Reka,

 

I am in the middle of claiming from the RBS for my son, he had an R21 account when the RBS changed it to a Royalties account, they charged £6 a month for this account, plus the interest every month which was never the same.

So I would advise you check that they have not changed her account.

 

rae may

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have statements from 1984 (William & Glyns) right up to last month, nothing says any different than Current Account.

 

It's not a royalties account, but she changed it to an interest bearing current account last year

[FONT=Tahoma][SIZE=4][COLOR=blue]Reka [/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Tahoma][SIZE=4][COLOR=blue][URL]http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/abbey-bank/93120-reka-abbey-court.html[/URL][/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [URL]http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/abbey-bank/101308-t-cs-nov-1998-a.html[/URL] [FONT=Tahoma][SIZE=4]Abbey *WON IN COURT* £2775[/SIZE][SIZE=1](awaiting payment) [/SIZE][/FONT] [B][FONT=Tahoma]Warrant of Execution filed 22/06/07[/FONT][/B] [B][FONT=Tahoma]***Warrant Issued 22nd June 2007***[/FONT][/B] [B][FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=red]PAID IN FULL [/COLOR][/FONT][/B] [URL]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcAaoRr8H5c[/URL]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for helping all, i have my mums statements in front of me. All the statements state "Current Account" and one print out states "Personal Current". So am i to take it that it is not a "Royalties" Account?

 

Sorry about this, i am just very confussed as to why it shows 2 interest charges every month, and never for the same amount. And if they are claimable.

 

May I suggest Reka, that you go into your Mum's branch with her and ask what the interest charges are for.

“It's not personal, Sonny. It's strictly business.”

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...