Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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

The "Right of Set Off"


yourbank
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4799 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

  • 6 months later...

Has anyone had their bank take money from a savings account under the banks 'right to set off' - to pay off credit card debt. I want to take some action against RBS to recover the money. I was holding it in trust for someone else and the bank has taken it pay off my debt. Is there anything I can do? Any help or advice will be greatly appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Was the money in your name?

 

This was featured in Watchdog a few weeks back, one major point to emerge from it is DO NOT have your credit card and bank account with the same company as they can legally dip into your bank account to recover any money owing on your credit card.

Link to post
Share on other sites

gizmo111. Yes the money was in an account in my name only.

 

 

andydd. I now realise that you should never hold credit card account with the bank you have a current account or savings with. It may be too late for my situation though I think. Any advise ? I need to act quickly

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Hi, I have a case pending regarding a current account overdraft and a successful reclaim for PPI. Apparently, the Bank is not entitled to "set off" against sums owed to me under the reclaimed PPI. This didn't stop them trying to "Force" me into accepting the repayment to set off the current account balance. Unfortunately for them, their own solicitors confirmed that there is no connection between the current account and the reclaimed PPI.

I have now told them I want my PPI refund paid directly to me, as their representatives correspondence infers, but they have gone quiet again ( but I haven't).

I assume that the Bank only has the right to set off, when the set off is from a "clean source". ie current/savings account.

 

Bill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, I have a case pending regarding a current account overdraft and a successful reclaim for PPI. Apparently, the Bank is not entitled to "set off" against sums owed to me under the reclaimed PPI. This didn't stop them trying to "Force" me into accepting the repayment to set off the current account balance. Unfortunately for them, their own solicitors confirmed that there is no connection between the current account and the reclaimed PPI.

I have now told them I want my PPI refund paid directly to me, as their representatives correspondence infers, but they have gone quiet again ( but I haven't).

I assume that the Bank only has the right to set off, when the set off is from a "clean source". ie current/savings account.

 

Bill

 

Not sure about the forcing bit. Was the case taken to court? Or is this through the FOS?

.

FSA Waiver on Bank Charges:http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Doing/Regulated/Notify/Waiver/pdf/dir_quart_0709.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Yourbank,

I used the word "force" because Nastywest would only refund the PPI against the outstanding balance of the current account. The regulatory risk department in association with the Kendal court operation had linked the two separate sums, and were not interested in any other payment destination/method.

Until they claimed the current account balance (in full) through the courts, this was deadlocked.

I pointed out (in my defence) that with my counterclaims for charges and the PPI, plus interest, they owed me more than I owed them. Their solicitors then said that the PPI was not linked in any way to the current account, and I should take it up with the bank. So, the bank thought they were entitled to set off, in total contrast to their own legal representatives' statement.

I have now written to the regulatory risk department with a copy of their solicitors letter. They are deafeningly silent. It doesn't bother me though, because it adds more gravity to my defence/counterclaims and unjust enrichment to boot. The Judge has stayed the claim 3 times already, because the claimant can't get their story/act together.

It is apparent to me, that the bank has been economical with the truth regarding their "right to set off". Despite the fact that I told them of my "first right of appropriation" 8 months ago. This was to inform them I needed the refund to keep my mortgage.

 

Bill

Edited by Bill Shidding
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

FROA on what? wages?

We are confusing two issues. Have the bank refunded the PPI already and then offset it on a court claim? Apologies but I am confused. Will take a look tomorrow again with a slightly less frazzled brain(non alchoholic reason).

.

FSA Waiver on Bank Charges:http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Doing/Regulated/Notify/Waiver/pdf/dir_quart_0709.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

FROA on the PPI refund, which was a direct reclaim from me.

Bank accepted the PPI was mis-sold.

Bank stated the refund would only be credited to the closed current account.

Bank would not refund directly to me by cheque, as I requested.

I did not sign the F&F offer, because of this "term"

This "term" has been nullified because of the Banks' legal representatives' statement that there is "no connection between the current account and the PPI refund".

What the sols are saying is "You cannot use this PPI refund as a counterclaim against the current account claim, because the sums are not linked"

What the Bank is saying is "You cannot have the PPI refund, unless it repays the current account because the sums are linked"

 

Bill

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

hi sorry to intrude, can some one help ref this set off , if for instance you have a current account and a credit card with the same bank and your accounts in overdraft to the max and your card s almost the same ok still with me , you have put a claim in for your charges that far exceed your debt and also reclaiming your ppi from your card ehich amounts to almost two thirds of the debt :cool: now obviously they are going to set off as soon as either is settled, so in order to control this assuming you have a parachute account, can you not freeze your current account so nothings allowed in or out by any one(not sure if the banks can or cannot )and therefore you receive a cheque and then you control who gets paid first and subject to any default removal you do pay them .

it would give you more control and is a tool to help your cause.

is control or information control all they strive for,

(so freeze your account , cheques get issued and you control the payment )i most prob am wrong on this perhaps some one could answer this cheers:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

My bank has cancelled my Business overdraft [ in my name only ]because the turnover is minimal . The business has failed .It isnt a ltd. co.

 

My house is mortgaged [ joint a/c ] with the same bank and its an all in one type of account with a cheque book so all our SOs and DDs go out of that account. This account is in credit [ just] and mortgage up to date.

 

I am worried that as OHs salary goes into this account ... can they grab that money when it comes in and apply it to the business OD ? That is the only money we have to live on and to help support 2 kids at Uni .

 

Although I had been warned that my OD wouldnt be renewed I havnt had any letter to say that it was withdrawn and I was just under the OD limit but my OD limit now shows as zero online and I have a large negative balance.

 

I do have a parachute ac but definitely dont want to get behind with the mortgage and its very hard to work out the mortgage payment as its made up of a dual thing where the combined a/c limit is reduced each month to cover capital repayment and then there is a debit of interest each month also.

 

Any advice gratefully received.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i was 200 hundred pounds over my overdraft limit a couple of years ago. i had 250 pounds in a savings account for a holiday and i explained (by phone) the fact that i would be paying the money back in when i returend from holiday. everything seemed fine until the night before i was meant too leave when i tried to take my holiday cash out.

 

turns out that my the person i spoke to on the phone didnt have the authority to do anything to stop my money being removed.

 

it is an absolute disgrace. i have been stranded 400 hundred miles away from home before because the bank have taken money out of my account.

 

it should be illegal!

Link to post
Share on other sites

i was 200 hundred pounds over my overdraft limit a couple of years ago. i had 250 pounds in a savings account for a holiday and i explained (by phone) the fact that i would be paying the money back in when i returend from holiday. everything seemed fine until the night before i was meant too leave when i tried to take my holiday cash out.

 

turns out that my the person i spoke to on the phone didnt have the authority to do anything to stop my money being removed.

 

it is an absolute disgrace. i have been stranded 400 hundred miles away from home before because the bank have taken money out of my account.

 

it should be illegal!

 

Part of the article states this: "We would not usually expect a firm to warn customers before it exercises its right of ‘set off’. A warning might prompt customers to move their money to an account with a different firm. But we think that it is usually good practice for a firm to tell a customer as soon as possible after it has made a transfer."

 

However it also says

 

"We would not generally expect a firm to use ‘set off’ before giving the customer a reasonable opportunity to pay the debt. However, what is ‘reasonable’ might depend on the customer and the history of the account."

.

FSA Waiver on Bank Charges:http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Doing/Regulated/Notify/Waiver/pdf/dir_quart_0709.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

what if someone was over their current account overdraft limit and they also had a loan with the same bank and they increased the overdraft limit on the current account to pay the balance of the loan off and then defaulted and terminated both the loan and the overdraft?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi I was looking into this question a couple of weeks ago for my own account with First Direct -- O/D and Loan---- I found the original T&C's with this in s 5.2

 

Set Off

If any accounts you hold with us or HSBC bank are in credit, we may use them to repay or reduce any amounts you owe us including but not limited to sums due on any other accounts you hold with us in the same name including any card accounts and any joint accounts with us or HSBC bank if we decide to do this, we will tell you why and when it was done.

 

 

So they have you by the short & curlies if they give you notice (and they clearly should) then you have by virtue of opening an account agreed to let them them "set off" in this way. As it happens in my case it is irrelevant but I can see that there are certainly instances where this may happen. So if a bank does this without notice (after checking the principle T&C's) you have strong grounds for a complaint and possible compensation.

 

Beau

Please note: I am not a lawyer and as such any advice I give is purely from a laymans point of view;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
would this also apply within banking groups? eg you had an o/d with LTSB but in credit at the Halifax?

 

perhaps, but unless they are looking for a pretty high amount is unlikely. Its important to remember that each individual business within a group its a seperate legal entity. Whilst information can be shared, its not their piggy bank to dip into.

 

if you ensure that you keep you credit card up to date, and maintain your current account you have nothing to worry about ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

I have had a similar situation, where HSBC have set off another account holders debt using a joint account in my name without notifying me. I have complained, as I am now responsible for his debt (they have made the joint account overdrawn) and was not made aware that this could happen when I opened the account (2003). I am being chased by them and they are threatening to take me to court. They don't seem to bother with him as they are obviously aware that he wont pay up. I am expecting a baby in nine weeks and really unsure what to do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...
This was featured in Watchdog a few weeks back, one major point to emerge from it is DO NOT have your credit card and bank account with the same company as they can legally dip into your bank account to recover any money owing on your credit card.

 

well that some good information I never knew the banks can be so slimey woah!!!!!!!!! this happened to my isa account only had six pounds in it never thought much of it till now

Never ask for statements, specifically request a list of transactions

If you do ask for statements you may be charged £10 a time, and over six years that’s £720, yet asking for a list of charges should be fine.

40 Days to comply or seek remedy fronm the information comissioner!!

Don't have it

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...