Finally got the OH's statements through today (40th day after they recieved Data Protection Act request....), now thrying to pull togeter the prelim letter. Given that previuos responses have been "prickly" about what the specifics of the claim is (see post made below...... I thought it may be prudant to nip that line right in the bud. I was thinking of adding this small part to the standard prelim letter.... "The specifics of the unlawfullness are this: if the charges are a disproportionate penalty they are invalid under the Unfair (Contracts) Terms Act 1977 s.4 and under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. Para.8 and sch.2(1)(e). In the event that the charges are not a penalty then they are unreasonable within the meaning of the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 s.15." This is lifted from the claim particulars, and I'm sure not the first time the bank has seen it, but it answers their criticism of little detail of law. Does this sound reasonable? Any thoughts? I want to get the prelim off tomorrow as they are delaying as much as possible so far, I don't want them to have an inch!

so thats 3 stays out of how many hundreds (or possibly thousands) of claims? Admittadly, a little bit to reflect on, but no burst of the dam as of yet. The only factor that matters is who is "elliot" and how far the TSB lets the claim go. Do they have enough support? What is the detail of the claim?

Could not agree more. If it was going to be a blanket "ban" I think we would have started to hear more. I have a claim pending and nothing to report as yet....

although I agree that this thread relates to an "other institution" I'm not happy with it being moved to this forum as the question was generally related. I feel this may be a tactic that all members need to know about and the more that ppl see this the better.

I agree. This was the puzzling part of the letter. On looking at their enclosed guidance leaflet of charges they are VERY careful to refer to them as a charge for a service provided i.e. that they charge you £30 for PROVIDING YOU with the service of an unauthorised overdraft or bouncing a direct debit. Very strange defence indeed, and untested as yet I think. I guess there is always the option to fall back onto the they are unreasonable with reference to the Supply of Goods and Services act 1982; would that be a fair assumption?

The standard template does make a passing mention of reclaiming charges... "...if I discover that you have levied disproportionate penalties against me, then I shall be reclaiming them...." Northern Rock appear to have jumped onto that. I have a feeling they may be watching this and other sites and have a well prepared stratergy. I will be sticking to the usual timetables and letters

As am I

Very true I think careful handling of this may be needed; not heard of anyone else trying for charges back from Northern Rock so there maybe a higher chance of them pushing this all the way to ward off other potential claims....

I think they will be doing this anyway... "Northern Rock plc will proceed to provide you with the data you request, within the statutory time frame of 40 days; in the format it holds it in, unless you alter your request." But they are really trying hard to bombard with facts and legal jargon and thus use intimidationary tactics (usual disclaimer! "which is merely my opinion") to scare people. I've just not seen such an aggressive first contact letter before.

It does indeed (they must have been typing as I was!); however, we have followed the FAQ and used the standard template for the Data Protection Act alone. I can see what a prelim letter is going to hold by their letter though! Very aggressive stance for a bank to take imho.

We got a letter from Northern Rock today. It's in reply to a standard Data Protection Act request my wife made. "Dear … Re: current account charges. I thank you for your recent Data Protection Act 1998 subject access request relating to your current account. The information you request is, of course, information that has previously been provided to you during the normal operation of your account. You will be aware from Northern Rock plc’s Tariff of Charges (copy enclosed) that a charge of £10 per copy of statement is levied. What you are entitled to, under subject access request, is data in the form that is currently held by Northern Rock plc. If you require the information in a specified format Northern Rock plc are entitled to make a reasonable charge for the work involved in preparing the information in the format requested. As set out above, that charge is currently £10 per copy statement. Northern Rock plc will proceed to provide you with the data you request, within the statutory time frame of 40 days; in the format it holds it in, unless you alter your request. Northern Rock plc refutes any suggestion that the charges applied to your current account are in any way unfair or represent a penalty. Under the Terms and Conditions of your Current Account, a copy of which I enclose, Northern Rock plc provides Current Account services to you and applies charges and interest in return for those services at the rates set out in its charges leaflet that forms part of the Terms and Conditions. When you applied for your Current Account, you signed to say that you had read, understood and agreed to be bound by these Terms and Conditions. The Terms and Conditions envisage that your account may be in one of three states: in credit, an authorised overdraft position; or in an unauthorised overdraft position. The charges and interest rates for providing your Current Account services vary depending on which of the three states your account is in. In moving to a position of unauthorised overdraft your account is still within a position envisaged by the Terms and Conditions. Accordingly, you are not in breach of contract and therefore the issue of damages for breach does not arise. As a matter of law, the courts will only find that a contract term represents a penalty where, on breach of contract, that term provides for a measure of damages that is not considered to represent a genuine pre-estimate of loss. Should you be in any doubt as to the meaning of any of the above, it is strongly recommended that you seek independent legal advice. I hope I have resolved matters fully for you. I have enclosed details of our internal complaints procedure, which explains what you should do if your complaint has not been resolved satisfactorily and identifies the timescales for dealing with complaints. If you remain unhappy please contact me as soon as possible with any queries or concerns. Alternatively, if I do not hear from you within eight weeks from the date of my letter, I will close your complaint for you. Yours sincerely,......" Firstly, they are trying to be very slippery with reference to getting the statements out to us; it should be interesting to see what they do actually send as it is "in the form that they currently hold". Any idea what they may be sends? Got a feeling it's gonna take a bit of decoding! The second part definitely shows they are going down the route of denying it’s a penalty/breach of contract. Bit concerning I thought as it’s a very assertive letter to try and nip a claim in the bud before it even starts! Is this a new route for the banks?

thats the address i used and I got a acknowledgment

moneyclaim filed

Northumbrian water knocked on my door last week and said they needed to do some tests soon. Yesterday they turned up at 9am and dug the pavement up outside our house then knocked on the door and said that their is a leak just under the enrty point to our house and that we are liable to get it fixed; "here's a 28 day notice". its gonna cost hundreds! Is this right? its all of two foot of pipe that is "leaking". What the hell am I paying £20 a month for water rates if they turn up and put a bill onto me for? Phoned the insurance company and they took the usual line that if its wear and tear its tough sh*t. are we really at the mercy of these ppl? They can turn up and f**k us over so royally?

thx m8; about to dpa them on behalf of the wife- got a feeling it may be more than £60- but remember that that is your money!

I couldn't possibly comment

Donation sent

Done a search and found very little with regards to Northern Rock. Has anyone had any success with Northern Rock? Surely someone has tried!

Well Halifax have upped their offer to £350 in writing yesterday. I not sure I have time to formally reject this offer as my LBA's 14 days is due to run out by Tuesday. Would it be worth it replying to this letter as this will just slow the timetable up; or as I stated in my LBA that I rejected the £118 offer and would be only satisfied with a full refund, am I entitled to just ignore the letter and go straight to moneyclaim on Wednesday? Any help would be appreciated!

thx

After a loooong wait; finally got through the DPA request from Cap1. After sifting through the statements my total of charges reaches £900 :O The prelim letter will be heading off tomorrow; I can't believe how a £200 credit card could end up like that! It's outrageous that watchdogs such as the OFT, FSA and the Ombudsman just sit back and let these types of parasites prey on people who get into financial difficulty. If they don't play ball and it reaches moneyclaim; that'll be £250+ on top by the spreadsheet.... and that will be their choice edit: found my original thread- http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=3751 apologies as couldn't earlier! would appreciate a mod merging the threads (sorry! won't happen again!!)

moneyclaim filed

Recieved standard reply from Mr. Beaumont..."terms and conditions... this letter will not provide the response you hoped for...." Not even an offer of any kind! 14 days are up on tuesday from the LBA so the MCOL will go in on tuesday where the amount increases by nearly £400 + costs.

Got a response today from Halifax offerring £118 as "final and full settlement...". Needless to say, the LBA which is due to be popsted will be sent with a rejection of this derisory offer.

And of course we will all come round to help wash their car at the weekend aswell and any other jobs/bills that the "I'm alright jack" wants us to finance.....