Hi All,

I am kinda new to this board and read through most of the posts and FAQ's. I was just wondering if anyone was suing the Airdrie Savings Bank? Thats the bank im suing but because its a small independent bank and only has around 7 branches, might it be more difficult for me to sue?

Dont see why, should well be easier

Smaller banks have more to fear.

Hi All,

I sent a preliminary approach for payment, and the bank replied saying they would like to meet me to discuss. Should i meet them, and what do they want to meet me for???

Any help is appreciated.

Regards

No, refuse to meet them. Tell them all response must be in written form and remind them that the clock is ticking, before you take further action.

they will try to talk you round, and we can't have that now can we?!?!?

Hi

Can you tell us which bank it is so that it can be put in the appropriate forum please.

I think this is a delay tactic, I would just continue with the next letter when the 14 days is up, meet them if you want to , but dont expect anything other than them trying to put you off.

Natalie

I'm with Gordon here. Get the response back to them immediately informing them that you do not want to meet with them at this time. You just want your money back.

Feel free to consider meeting them once you have your charges back as they may (Ha!) be trying to help you out for some reason !

Tell them you are busy.................but prepared to consider their request as long as they are prepared to pay your charges.................

And I am not talking about bank charges here.........................

Hi All,

Thank You for your replies. I was just looking for your opinions as i kinda guessed they were either going to fob me off or try and delay time or worse, talk me out of suing them.

Sorry if i posted in the wrong place but i really dont have a clue as i dont use forums (only started using this one). I will right a nice letter explaining, as i work 9 to 5, i cant meet them unless they pay my lost wages Ha ha, as if.

Regards,

Laura.

Ps i am with the Airdrie Savings Bank, they are a small Scottish bank.

You dont seem to be doing so bad up to now.

I would be wary about telling them you have a regular 9 to 5 job tho....................They may think you can afford to pay their charges lol

I'd be wary of this - if you refuse to meet with them and then the case goes to court could they argue that you didn't give them reasonable chance to negotiate/refund the money? This is after all the main reason we send several letters rather than starting court action straight away.

Or I'm reading too much into it and they just want to talk you out of it. As you'd be litigating in person if it did go to court you can get away with a few things as you're not expected to know as much about the legal system as a lawyer, so I don't see it seriously damaging your case.

Personally I would meet them anyway just to see what they said (under condition they allowed me to record the meeting). If you're confident they can't talk you out of it I don't see what you've got to lose.

Theres arguements both ways,but its Lauras choice as to whether she wants to negotiate face to face or by other means.

If its shown to be a point on which they could have an advantage on later,then obviously she needs to think about that.

The general consensus here is that she should not go down this route.

Theres nothing to stop her from declining their offer due to the large number of commitments she has got which does not afford her the time .......?

MOD: Moved to "Scotland" Forum.

.

It would not be seen as unreasonable to refuse the meeting.

OP is planning legal action,and has every right to demand that any communication between herself and defendant be made in writing. She does not have to offer any other explanations or excuse, and should not.

In fact, my feel is that if she does that, that may well convince the bank to take her more seriously.

Can I point out something I see a lot in the forum? As opposed to a compensation case, for example, there is no duty to mitigate, meet half-way if you will. You are claiming a certain amount as due, 100% refund closes it. Your duty to mitigate goes as far as trying to keep out of court (hence the letters), NOT to negotiate a lower payment.

If you're not sure, think about it: Would your local council accept 1/2 your council tax to settle your bill if you fell behind? Would your creditor accept less than 100% repayments when you default ? (forget exceptional circumstances for a sec)

So no. If they want to meet, if they offer 50%, it is not "bad form" to refuse. Your claim, your rules.

.off soapbox.

Good points and I'm not recommending her to meet with them as such. Just pointing out something we may not have thought of that may need to be taken into account.

The having other commitments excuse is a good one. And it sounds like they haven't specifically said it is to discuss this matter anyway in which case I would possibly recommend going.

EDIT: Just read Bookworm's post - Good point in that you only have give them reasonable TIME in which to pay the full amount claimed which doesn't require meeting in person. I now agree more so that you shouldn't attend a meeting with them. Thanks BW for clarifying.

Hi All,

I have sent them a letter saying :

''I refer to your letter dated 2nd June regarding repayment of bank charges.

Unfortunately, as I work full time, and have other commitments after work, I am unable to meet in person.

Furthermore, I would prefer all correspondence to be on paper so I have a physical record of all communication for legal reasons.

I have also been advised to remind you that the deadline to accept my request is on the 12th June.

(‘I will give you 14 days to reply to me accepting, unconditionally, my request in principle and letting me know a date by which I will receive payment’.)''

What do you all think???

Regards,

Laura

Personally? Honestly? I think you're being too gentle. You are apologising for asserting your rights.

I would have no "unfortunately", no "I would prefer". Don't give them a choice, they'll pounce on it. In my experience, short and not sweet works best:

Dear Sir/Madam,

Following your request I should arrange a meeting with yourselves, I would like to point out that I find this highly inappropriate, considering that I have started legal action against you.

Please note that I request any communication between you and me to be in writing until the said legal action is resolved.

I remind you that the deadline.... etc... that's good.

Hi All,

I thought i was being too nice in my letter but reasoned maybe if im nice to them they will be nice to me. Lol, as if. I will let you all know how they reply, as the deadlines getting closer (12th).

Thank you all for your help, you have been very helpful.

Regards,

Laura

Hi All,

This morning i received a reply from the bank saying:

' As you are aware, on 5 April, the OFT issued a statement advising that, in their opinion, the default charges for credit cards were unfair and requested that credit card companies review their charges against the OFTs suggested threshold limit of £12. In May the OFT announced that they would be investigating the market relating to bank charges and made it clear that the £12 limit on credit cards will not be applied automatically to bank charges.'

THey then basically go on to say they wont refund my charges, that they are fair and lower than their competitors.

Should i reply to this letter or go ahead and send them the letter before action???

Any help greatly appreciated.

Regards

They're just stalling, don't be sidetracked by thier tactics, keep to your timetable, not theirs.

Even if these new charges were fair (and they aren't) how many of your charges are at this rate?

Forget it. Stick to your schedule.

PLEASE DO NOT START A NEW THREAD EVERY TIME YOU HAVE A QUESTION/UPDATE!!!

sorry:confused:

Just on the subject of charges...........my bank (Halifax charges 39.00) for a failed cheque whilst the missus bank Hsbc only a tenner.

I think they were ready for the oft rulings and have been charging less.

The Halifax also slap you with an automatic 28.00 unauthorised overdraft charge at the end of the month meaning if you have no overdraft a failed cheque will cost 67 quid.

This topic was closed on 11 March 2019.

If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there.

If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened.

- Consumer Action Group