Hi,

I sent some evidence of PBA, which is on the thread. Someone kindly merged the docs for me.

Barclays are supposed to reply about this about now.

I phoned Ombudsman and they said I could email them and they would send me a complaint summary.

I'm attaching the original 'letter' (2014) when the daily fees started.

I didn't read this properly until after the fees had already been applied because it looked like spam from Barclaycard.

It's not a standard letter and the introduction of daily fees is hidden in the advertising.

Also, attached is the fees detailed on the annual statement 2014 - 2015.

It also mentions that my overdraft limit was effectively being increased.

I did not agree to this and there was not opt out offered.

To be honest, this was a massive increase in annual fees (in comparison to any period before)

- and for being generally within overdraft limit.

docs3.pdf

why cant you use the pdf merging software in this upload link please

Hi,

Thanks for that.

I will try to do that next time, but will stick to 1 scan per post now.

It doesn't seem compatible with my version of firefox browser so I can use explorer if I really need to send multiple pages.

Cheers.

ah1234

Hi,

I've sent and email to the investigator at the ombudsman.

They've said on the phone that they are prepared to send a complaint summary but it feels like they are avoiding it until the investigator returns from holiday.

I've looked at BCOBS and the lending code and may have to go that way. T

hey have certainly increased an overdraft without my agreement and not helped me when I have tried to make regular repayments.

I posted some of the evidence you suggest in posts 20,22 and 27.

27 gives part of the main reason I am complaining.

Is this imposition of daily fees not unfair 'under the terms of the Consumer Credit Act'?

If Barclays are making a notification of changes to terms and conditions by imposing daily fees and, at the same time, increasing my overdraft limit in 2014 without my express agreement, because the term 'daily fees' is not 'prominent' (relatively hidden on front page in comparison to other elements which are in bold, blue type and bulleted in an advertising format - see post 27) and I thus, was not aware of their imposition in advance (I only realised I was paying them after I saw the statements) and immediately complained.

In the 'letter' it says 'this could cost you less'.

However, I was in arrears at the time and thus was not able to close the account.

There was no opt-out this time (as there supposedly had been when the reserve was imposed) and there was no reason for Barclays to think this 'could' cost me less. In fact it doubled the cost of the account and this was foreseeable.

This point of view is repeated in the reply to my complaint, where it is stated that Barclays decided that it could cost me less on the basis of the way in which I had previously operated the account. However, this was less than likely since I was actually in arrears at the time.

This was a substantial and major alteration of an account I had had with Barclays for many years, but the only information sent to me about it was this flyer on Barclaycard advertising style paper. On the front page the word 'daily fees' is NOT prominent.

Any perspective on this would be appreciated.

Then follow the above and start a claim.

Hi, just had a reply from Barclays regarding Additions account fees.

No joy there then.

They say I'm over their 6 year limit overall and 3 year limits for awareness of problem.

Fee free account 1996-2000, Additions 2000-2004, Addtions Plus 2004 to October 2012.

I thought they would have measured the 6 years from 2012.

Funnily they have sent me the same annual statement from 2012, I posted here.

They say I used breakdown cover once in December 2003, but I don't remember this. I didn't have a car when Additions started in 2000.

I was in Poland from Nov 2001 until Dec 2003.

They refused to send my statements to Poland.

Breakdown cover was no use to me there.

I had AA insurance and membership for years, 2004/2005/2006.

I still have the card from 2011.

The breakdown cover (when it was Green Flag) was not operational in Scotland.

I have lived in Scotland since April 2006.

I have an RAC member welcome letter from September 2012.

It came with RAC insurance (not Barclays so this is evidence of duplicate cover) and this payment is on one of my statements.

I'm worried about this time limit now because even if I go back with the arguments about having duplicate cover and not being properly covered by them, they'll still say it is beyond time limit.

Does it mean no one can claim who didn't have a package bank account after 2011??, and if so why do they have a package account claims team?

There's quite a few fibs;

such as, they say I downgraded the account in 2012,

thanks for your visit in branch on 9th Feb 2018.

I haven't been in a Barclay's branch for a least 2 years and haven't been in my own branch (in Hull) for a least 10 years.

usual lies

it runs from when you became aware

or three years from the date they write and tell you you can claim [RE CLI rules]

Hi,

I was not aware that the 'fee' was for the added features.

Initially I don't remember ever choosing this type of account and did not realise the fee was debited whether my account had been in credit or debit.

Then, because I was living and working in Poland it was not possible for me to just 'pop into a branch' and I was angry about the fee which I hadn't noticed before when I was in credit, but I then thought it was something to do with having an overdraft facility.

I remember believing that the features were incidental and free.

I was naive, I'd had free bank accounts up to that point and thought they were just a way in which Barclays was trying to attract customers;

but I didn't think much of the features.

I didn't even have a car.

I first became aware that these features were not free very recently.

Otherwise I would have claimed a refund of fees earlier.

For example when the PPI scandal started.

What is the legal situation regarding misselling.

I am certain that this type of account was not something I ever wanted or even expected to have.

Hi,

 

What is the legal situation regarding misselling. I am certain that this type of account was not something I ever wanted or even expected to have.

All explained in the link at post # 22

Hi,

I am not very happy with this. Barclays have sent me a reply but say it is 'out of time'.

They argue that I became aware of the problem more than 3 years ago, so they don't have to consider it.

They say:

"I have used the following complaint points to establish the 3 year limit"

They use a series of statements I made in the complaint, most of which are in the negative.

such as, "you were not made aware of any alternative options such as a free bank account"

"You did not know about the cost associated with the account"

etc.

In the letter they 'thank' me for my 'visit' to the branch. (???!!!)

I quote: "I have made my decision after reviewing the information provided in the letter we received from you on 28th February 2018, reviewing your visit to the branch on 9th February 2018 together with our internal evidence set out below"

However, I phoned them on the 9th of February from the Scottish Highlands (where I have lived for 4 years). The nearest branch is 2 hours away (in Inverness). I have not used the account since 2016 and certainly not been to a branch. I informed them that I had not been 'in branch' as stated in an earlier letter of acknowledgement of my complaint. Why do they insist on pretending that I went (physically) to a branch when they know it is a lie.

My own branch of Barclays is still in Hull as far as I am aware; where I used to live. I have not visited Hull since 2003. Not that there's anything wrong with Hull.

If this commission is a mistake it shows total incompetence.

It is the first falsehood - WHY do they not say 'over the telephone'??

Regarding the 'internal evidence':

" I can see from our records that we sent you a personalised annual summary on 30 August 2012, 30 August 2013 for your Additions Plus account."

"The statement included information about the benefits.." etc.

and

"made you aware of the packaged bank account, its associated costs and would have highlighted concern regarding consent at that point"

-So they are agreeing there was a problem, but saying I was made aware in 2012 (which is longer than 3 years and therefore out of time).

Can this be correct because, if so, it means no one with a package bank account (who also received a statement) can reclaim any longer because it is, now, more that 3 years after these particular accounts were provided - making Barclays packaged bank reclaims team without a raison d'etre since 2015.

and

"The statement made you aware of the key features and benefits of the account, enabling you to assess whether it was suitable for your needs. Within the statement we also invited you to contact us should you have any questions relating to the account"

Next is a bit about 'benefits usage', where they claim I used one of the features in December 2003 once. I do not remember using this and may not have actually received any service. In 2000 when Additions started I did not have a car and did not want or need breakdown assistance. From 2001 to 2003 I was resident in Poland, which was not covered by Barclays breakdown cover and after 2006, I was resident in Scotland (at this time Scotland was also not covered by Green Flag)

This so called 'usage' was not in the period 2004-2012 which is the Additions Plus period and does not make this feature appropriate at all. I can prove that I was a member of the AA for most of the period and I can prove that I had RAC membership (independently of Barclays and included with my RAC insurance annual fee and starting in August 2012). I have the RAC membership welcome letter and insurance certificate for 2012. The payment for this is on a Barclays statement from 2012. I have direct debits for AA membership on my other current accounts for the period I had Barclays Additions and Additions Plus.

If (and I still don't know!!!!) I was paying for breakdown cover, this should be refunded for the period in which I was not resident in a country in which the breakdown cover would have been potentially of use. This would exclude 2001 - 2003 (in Poland); and 2006 to whenever Barclays switched from using Green Flag to RAC.

Since I already had breakdown cover with AA and RAC membership I do not think Barclays breakdown cover can be regarded as being appropriate for me.

No other feature could have been, or was, of any use to me.

Barclays have extracted more that £2000 from me (by stealth) for features that were inappropriate and I had no access to.

Asking if I was 'aware' of these features is like asking me if I am aware of Walmart. I don't use Walmart, I've never been there, I am not aware that I am paying for it in any way.

I was not aware (Barclays did not make me aware) that I was paying for these features. "Account fee" is "Account fee" not Walmart fee.

Hi,

The other falsehoods in the letter Barclays have sent me about Additions and Additions Plus relate to agency (or who made the change to the account). I have underlined the parts that are misprepresentations.

The letter states under the heading: "Significant Account Changes": "Our records show you changed your account to a non-fee paying one on 5th October 2012. Changing your account to a non-fee paying account ought to have reasonably made you aware that it wasn't a requirement to pay for a current account and other fee-free options existed. At this point you ought to reasonably have been aware of the cost associated with the account through the changes you made. The changes you made to your account would have highlighted a concern regarding your consent to the account at that point. After you changed your account to a non-fee paying one you obtained an overdraft. At that time you ought to have been reasonably aware that it wasn't a requirement to pay for a current account to obtain other financial services and that other fee-free options existed."

I did not make these changes. Barclays made these changes.

This account simply stopped being an Additions account. I regularly complained about this account, but at the point in time referred to (October 2012), my account was downgraded by Barclays. Barclays had also converted my account to Additions Plus in 2004. The part "you obtained an overdraft" means Barclays increased my overdraft of £700 into one of £1,700 by converting a pre-existing 'Personal Reserve' of £1000 (which had previously been added by Barclays without my consent in 2008) into extra overdraft facility in 2014. In fact I can prove that no change to the overdraft facility was made in 2012 when Additions Plus ended.

The final part of this section in the letter states:

"Whilst I have not addressed all the points you have raised, my investigation places your complaint outside the time period where we are required to carry out a full investigation. I am satisfied that you would have been reasonably aware of your reason to complain much earlier."

I don't understand this but it seems to be based on the false premise that it was not one of Barclays staff (or a computer) that downgraded my account or 'obtained' an overdraft, but me.

What can I do now if they are prepared to misrepresent the facts to this extent? I can prove that much of what they are saying is false.

usual lies

 

it runs from whrn you became aware

or three years from the data they write and tell you you can claim [RE CLI rules]

Hi,

Thanks for the info. I need to contact Barclays (not again!) regarding their fact checks.

The copy of 2012 annual summary they sent me is the same as the one I posted. It is the one describing the features.

They use one example for why they think the features were of use - car breakdown cover. BUT, the breakdown cover described on this statement was already being provided by RAC, because I had paid (independently) for RAC membership, and insurance for the same period. I have the insurance certificate and RAC membership card and welcome letter (with breakdown cover). This means that their example is spurious.

How can I now make this argument to them. Should I go to the ombudsman about this or will that just confuse things further?

I am fairly certain that for at least 90% of the time I had additions I had separate breakdown cover through my AA and RAC membership. The only years in which I could have had breakdown cover with Barclays were Dec. 2003 (when I moved back to UK and bought a car) until May 2006 when I moved to Scotland (Green Flag company did not operate there at the time).

I don't know what percentage of the fee was taken for breakdown cover and until very recently I had no idea that I was paying for breakdown cover.

Who do I respond to with these 'completed investigation' letters if I am unhappy with their representation of the facts.

Rgds

ah1234

Hi,

In the case of Additions accounts were Barclays providing current account customer data to third parties?

I thought customer infomation was supposed to be confidential.

Also, if not, what sort of contract was between the customer and the third party and what proportion of the 'account fee' was being provided to the third party?

immaterial to a reclaim

Hi dx100uk,

But it could be material to whether a customer knew that they were paying for a third party service provider via Barclays.

In which case, if the customer didn't know that they were paying for a third party provider's service then there is no reason to assume that there is a problem with the account. - Because then the additional 'features' would be free of charge.

As long as that is the situation, the customer cannot be deemed to have been 'aware that there was a problem', even if they were aware of 'features'.

3 year rule - 'when you first became aware that there was a problem'

Hi,

Sorry, I should've posted this in the last message.

What are CLI rules?

CCL mistype

its where this 3yrs originated from and has since been expanded

off to the FOS me thinks

Hi again,

I have finally after nearly 40 days received the statements for my SAR request back to 1998.

At that time I was paying a monthly fee of £5.00 for overdraft protection.

This seems very much like PPI because it was to cover Barclays to honour cheques and direct debits within an overdraft limit.

I only paid this in a month in which I was overdrawn.

However, this morphed into a £6.50 'account fee' in 2000, which I thought was a continuation of the 'overdraft fee'.

The statements after this are headed additions.

This was certainly a miss-sell because either I was still paying for the overdraft protection OR it was for the packaged features.

In any case there was no reason for me to assume it was for featueres because I believed that I was being charged the fee only while overdrawn.

The change in 2000 occurred while I was overdrawn and it was not until later (when living in Poland) that I was in credit for long enough to realise that I was now paying the monthly fee whether in credit or overdrawn.

Does anyone have any knowledge of this kind of monthly overdraft fee account?

Alex

This is pretty amazing. You are saying that Barclays provided you with an overdraft limit but then you had to pay an "overdraft protection" fee otherwise they would have bounced the cheques? Is this what we are hearing?

I suppose that they will try to say that this is simply an overdraft usage fee. However if it is described as an overdraft protection fee – then as far as I'm concerned, that is good enough to bring a claim on.

Have you got an idea of how many of these charges you paid?

Barclays stopped selling package accounts between 2008 and 2012, although existing customers could continue paying the fee to use the extra benefits. The package accounts Barclays sold (alongside the fee) are as follows:

Premier Life (£17.50/month)

Additions Plus (£16/month)

Additions Active (£15/month)

Additions (£13.50/month)

First Additions (£6.50/month)

Current Account Plus (£6.50/month)

This is pretty amazing. You are saying that Barclays provided you with an overdraft limit but then you had to pay an "overdraft protection" fee otherwise they would have bounced the cheques? Is this what we are hearing?

 

I suppose that they will try to say that this is simply an overdraft usage fee. However if it is described as an overdraft protection fee – then as far as I'm concerned, that is good enough to bring a claim on.

 

Have you got an idea of how many of these charges you paid?

Well it was a monthly fee (while overdrawn) and is called 'overdraft fee'.

which was probably from 1996 a least until additions appeared (the 'overdraft fee' disappeared when additions appeared in 2000 except for the first month in which there was both an 'account fee' on 3/7/2000 and overdraft fee on 17/7/2000).

I would have to count them up and estimate between 96 and 98 because they didn't send these statements, so I guess about 30 or so (some of £5 and some of £20)

I believe the account was changed to a packaged fee account without my knowledge and certainly without me realising that anything much had changed. 'overdraft fees' appear to be charged within a limit but there are also 'unauthorised fees' of £20 which are also monthly.

At this time I was not charged any fee for individual transactions, only for being overdrawn - transactions were effectively protected within the limit through the payment of a monthly fixed fee (if I was overdrawn during that period).

This was one current account I had with Barclays.

However there appears to be 'pots and pooling' with a different numbers flagged for PPI with an I, rather than an N for everything else.

However I think the overdraft was protected though they say that account wasn't because within authorised 'overdraft' there were no transaction fees at all.

When I first had 'first' additions it was initially £6.00 fee in 2000 and went up to £7.50 in 2003 and finally £11.50 in 2004. Additions plus was £12.00 initially in 2004 and Additions I

After my account became 'additions' in 2000 the "overdraft fee" (for up to $400 limit) disappeared but the limit remained. I was still (at this time) - for example, in Nov 2000 charged the 'unauthorised fee' of £20 for going over limit within that month.

The fees appear on the statements with begin/end date of that charging month. There is no reason not to assume that the £6.00 fee was payment protection for debits within the overdraft facility - after 2000 this was paid whether in credit or debit. Interest and transaction fees were not paid within the limit (at first).

No one who had a bank account with Barclays would ever have chosen to 'buy' a packaged bank account with so called benefits that were 'added' back in 2000 or before.

The 'features' were purposefully ridiculous - these were automatically provided with changes to many bank accounts and presented as 'benefits' which came with the account. Otherwise there was no obvious difference until you saw the statements.

lots of threads here already about PAF additions fees on these accounts

Hi,

Before 2008 when a 'personal reserve' facility of £1,000 was (automatically) added to an existing 'overdraft' facility of £700,

there were periods in which Barclays would allow payments from my account whilst I was over the £700 'authorised' limit, often for quite large sums.

This was in 2006,2007 and early 2008.

Barclays thus had stopped bounicing cheques and preventing cash machine withdrawals from my account. T

his was being done without any apparent arranged facility.

From the statements it seems Barclays were also charging an 'unauthorised overdraft' monthly fee as well as transaction fees in 1998 and 1999 whilst allowing payments.

Should they have been doing this?

Regards,

AH

Hi Ah,

No surprises there.

B's would allow you to go o/d but charge you a fee to "review" this before allowing the pay't to go through and then charge you for having an unauthorised o/d ( if it took you into unauth'd o/d territory).

I had an Additions account for from the beginning

The fee covered a few things, I had a £1000 overdraft limit, But the first £300 was fee free, You only paid anything above the account fee if you went over the £300

It was always clear what came with the account, I received a huge pack that that covered everything, It provided Mobile phone insurance, Travel insurance and breakdown cover, The breakdown cover was personal so would cover you in any car you was in, Whether the driver or passenger

There were other benefits too, Card protection and even a will writing service

I was always happy with what i was getting for my fee

There was no fee to review anything

Hi,

You must be a rare case of being happy to pay for something, that wasn't at all clear.

1) My overdraft fee was £5 per month when I was within my limit until 2000

2) I was overdrawn when Barclays started charging £6

3) I moved to Poland and realised I was being charged when in credit.

4) I questioned if the fee was not for the overdraft.

5) I never received any adequate answer

6) I always took out separate breakdown cover.

7) I paid thousands over the years in fees for what?

8) It was never made clear.

Hi,

Just to update:

I have sent a CCA request (registered recorded) regarding the overdraft, but have not received any response to this request within the statutory time period.

They sent me a letter saying that they were putting a hold on the account then immediately (within a few days) sent me another saying that it was available for use, but did not provide me with a copy of any "agreement" !!!!

Back in April I sent a SAR and did receive some of my records.

However there was no copy of any original agreement and no statements for the first two years of the account 1996-1998.

I have no idea what kind of agreement I originally had with this bank.

They keep referring to "Your agreement with us" in correspondence but have not provided me with any copy of that, if it exists, for years.

CCA requests are not applicable to current accounts.

Hi,

I was under the impression that 'overdrafts' are a form of credit and this overdraft has been referred to as 'credit' by the FOS investigator. If overdrafts are specified in the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and there has been no enacted legislation to overturn that since, then the 'overdraft' should be covered by the terms of the Act.

The 'overdraft' would be a form of running account credit and a CCA request should be valid.

Barclays constantly refer to the 'agreement' and its terms and conditions without fully specifying what this 'agreement' constitutes.

If it is not a 'credit agreement' how can they then put negative information about me on a credit reference agencies file?

The implication is that this 'overdraft' is a form of 'running-line credit' and this is covered by the 1974 act.

It is clear that they have varied the terms and conditions of the 'overdraft' on different occasions.

I believe they use credit reference information in determing the level of facility.

The overdraft has existed for years and is clearly a form of 'credit'.

It is also unreasonable to use the 'our agreement with you' and 'as set out in the terms and conditions of our agreement with you' without specifying what these are or proving that there is an agreement if requested.

I challenge you to tell me that overdrafts are not a form of credit and why.

CCA requests are not applicable to current accounts.