Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder

tnook

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    338
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by tnook

  1. Hi all, Hope everyone survived Christmas and the New Year. I've been digging around the site and found this for a POC. Just investigating the POC at this stage. Are they still good to be used or has anything changed since they were last used? I haven't kicked off the process of sending request letters yet. I am to break up the claims into smaller 'small claims track' chunks. Is there a way of avoiding them saying "full and final settlement of ALL charges" and get them to just be a "full and final settlement of the LISTED charges? Thanks for all your help. Here is the POC I found: New POC Barclays (N1) Claim No [ ] IN THE [xxxxx] county court BETWEEN [Mr xxxx xxxx] Claimant and -Barclays Defendant PARTICULARS OF CLAIM 1. The Claimant entered into an agreement (“The Agreement”) with the Defendant on or around xx/xx/xxxx, whereby the Defendant was to advance credit facilities to the Claimant under a running credit account, Account no xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx ("The Account"). 2. The Agreement essentially consisted of the Defendant providing the Claimant with a credit card (“The Card”) which would allow the Claimant to make purchases and receive cash advances on credit. In return the Defendant was entitled to charge interest at the published rate. 3. The Agreement was a Regulated Agreement for the purposes of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. 4. At all material times the contract was subject to the Defendant’s standard terms and conditions which could be varied from time to time. Summary 5. Throughout the course of the Agreement, the Defendant has added numerous default charges to the Account for the Claimant’s failure to make the minimum payment on the due date and or for exceeding the credit limit and or if a payment is returned. (Full particulars are set out in schedule 2). 6. The default charges were applied in accordance with the standard terms of The Agreement which were: a) A penalty payable on breach of contract and thus unenforceable: and b) An unfair term under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (“The Regulations”) and therefore not binding on the Claimant. 7. The Claimant is accordingly entitled to repayment of the sums wrongly added to the Account. The Charges 8. The standard Terms of the Agreement in substance provided as follows: (a) The Defendant would provide the Claimant with the Card. The Claimant was entitled to use the Card to make purchases and receive cash advances up to a credit limit (“the Limit”) set by the Defendant. The Defendant could unilaterally change the Limit by giving the Claimant notice in writing. (b) The Defendant was entitled to charge interest on the purchases and cash advances at the published rate. © The Claimant was to pay the minimum payment of 3% of the amount owed or £5 (whichever was the greatest) by the due date as notified in the monthly statements. (d) The default charges Apr xxxx – Jun xxxx were £xx.xx, Aug xxxx – Nov xxxx was £xx.xx & Jun xxxx was £xx.xx. Penalty 9.The amount of the Charges exceeded any genuine pre-estimate of the damage which would have been suffered by the Bank in relation to the Claimant’s transgressions. 10. In the premises the Charges were punitive and a penalty and thus unenforceable at common law. The Regulations 11.At all material times the Claimant was a consumer within the Regulations. 13. At all material times the terms of the Agreement providing for the Charges were unfair within regulation 5 of the Regulations in that contrary to the requirement of good faith they caused a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations to the detriment of the Claimant. 14. Without prejudice to the burden of proof, the Claimant will refer to the following matters in support of the contention that the terms are to be assessed as unfair as at the time of the conclusion of the Agreement, and of each revision to the Standard Terms. (1)The terms relating to Charges were standard terms; they would not be individually negotiated. (2)The Charges were a penalty for breach of contract. (3)The Charges exceeded the costs which the Bank could have expected to incur in dealing with the exceeding of the credit limit, late payment or returned payment. (4) Accordingly the Charges were a disproportionate charge incurred by the Claimant for their failure to meet their contractual obligation and thus within the ambit of Schedule 2 (1) (e) of the Regulations and indicative of an unfair term. (5) As the Bank knew, the Charges were of subsidiary importance to the customer in the context of the Agreement as a whole and would not influence the making of the Agreement. (6) As the Defendant knew, the Claimant had no means of assessing the fairness of the Charges. (7) In the premises, the effect of the Charges would be prejudicial to the customer who incurred them, and cause an imbalance in the relations of the parties to the Agreement by subordinating the customer’s interests to those of the Defendant in a way which was inequitable. 15. Without prejudice to the burden of proof, the Claimant will contend that the terms’ imposing the Charges are not core terms under regulation 6 of the Regulations and relies on the following matters. (1) The assessment of fairness does not relate to terms which define the main or core subject matter of the Agreement. (2) The assessment of fairness does not relate to the adequacy of the price or remuneration as against the goods or services supplied in exchange (in other words, whether or not the relevant services were value for money). (3) The Charges are correctly described as default charges by the Defendant in the key information provided to new customers. 16. By reason of the said matters the terms were not binding under regulation 8 of the Regulations. 17. The Defendant wrongly applied Charges to the Account totalling some £xxx.xx between xx/xx/xxxx and xx/xx/xxxx. Particulars appear from Schedule 2. 18. On xx/xx/xxxx the Claimant demanded repayment of the sums wrongly applied. 19. The Defendant has not repaid them or any of them. And the Claimant claims; (1) These charges are older than the normal 6 years but are claimed by virtue of s32 (1) c Limitations Act 1980 as per Kleinwort Benson v Lincoln City Council. (2) Payment of the said sum of £xxx.xx and interest in restitution of £xxxx.xx as per Sempra Metals v Inland Revenue Commissioners. (3) Interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 29.9% per annum on the amount claimed (daily rate of £x.xx) until judgment or sooner payment. (4) Court costs of [ xxxx]. I believe that the facts stated in these particulars, comprising of x pages, are true. Dated Signed Schedule 1 From Cahoot Conditions in force (as of Dec xxxx). 3. Credit limit From time to time we will work out your credit limit and tell you what it is. 5. Repayments each month you must make a minimum payment. This will be; (a)3% of the statement balance for Initial Visa, First Classic and Classic and 2% of the statement balance for Gold Barclaycard and Barclaycard Platinum or £5 whichever is more; or if the statement balance is less, the statement balance; or (b)If a special promotion allows you to put off making repayments for a period, the amount worked out under (a) but with the relevant promotional balance taken away from the statement balance. The minimum payment must be received by us and paid into your account on or before the payment date. Schedule 2 Attach your schedule of charges and head it schedule 2 be sure to include the date that charge was applied to the account, the date you paid the charge, the type of charge eg over limit, late payment etc
  2. i understand. Just be aware I am prepared to take some risks
  3. Guys just to let you know. Chasing these claims is more out of the principle for me. Truly value the help CAG give and provide. Admire the reassurance and advice you give, especially to those in desperate need. Will be looking to donate a significant portion of the final claim.
  4. I see. Good point. Will wait before sending first round of letters.
  5. Sorry question out of curiosity. Is there a problem with splitting a single credit card into multiple claims?
  6. Thanks Slick. Will send out the letters tonight. I started a Cahoot claim but didn’t complete. Not claimed BC before.
  7. Fascinating how sensitive the percent rate is on compounded interest. I was just trying the spreadsheet with the following values: 24.9% -> £17k interest (as above) 29.9% -> £32k interest 34.9% -> £61k interest (currently highest interest rate BC charge customers) Don’t worry I’m not planning the impossible
  8. Thanks Slick. There are 4 credit cards in the statements. Using the CI spreadsheet at 24.9% I get: Credit card 1: Charges = £150 (8 charges) Comp Interest = £6,681 Credit card 2: Charges = £60 (3 charges) Comp Interest = £2,191 Credit card 3: Charges = £130 (7 charges) Comp Interest = £5,949 Credit card 4: Charges = £60 (3 charges) Comp Interest = £2,192 Total charges = £400 Total comp interest = £17,014 I guess I could run these as separate claims.
  9. Marvellous, I was getting worried. Slick, why 24.9%. Not disputing it, just curious when they charge all the way up to 34.9%
  10. Yep I read the thread, is that 24.9% for the duration I had the cards of for the time from then till now?
  11. Hi Slick, I tried a few 24.9%, 29.9% then went to BC's website and found they charge up to 34.9% on some of their cards.
  12. I'm learning So contractual is different from restitutional then? Can I claim restitutional for the elapsed time from the charge till the claim date? Thanks for your help!
  13. No they are no longer active. Why is there a limit to only charging CI during their active span? I would have thought BC would have carried on making money on the charges I paid from the date of the charge onward.
  14. Ok I plugged in the charges to the spreadsheet and I am getting some very big numbers out. I could split it into separate claims for the different credit cards. However even then the amounts are over the small claims threshold. Should I split it further? That would probably annoy the courts. Is there a claim amount where BC start to put up a proper fight?
  15. Hi all. Starting a new thread on the journey to reclaim my very old charges. The story so far. After chasing Barclays for almost 18 months and with days to go before a court hearing they handed over my credit card statements from 2001-2004. Many thanks to everyone who helped along the way. I’ve had a quick look through the statements there are approximately 20 charges there. £15-20 pounds each. I’ll sort them by credit card account and add them to the compound interest spreadsheet. Then update here.
  16. Thanks Andy and Slick. Completed settlement today. Will carry on the battle in a fresh thread.
  17. Sorry to tag you @Andyorch. Settlement is not complete and the hearing is on Tuesday. Is the following paragraph in their settlement offer going to interfere with my next claim on charges? 4 In consideration for the Settlement Sum, the Claimant hereby releases and discharges the Defendant, its employees, successors and assigns from any and all damages, liabilities, interest, costs and obligations, past, present and future, howsoever and whensoever arising, whether known or unknown that the Claimant had, have or may have at any time and in the future against the Defendant, arising out of or connected to the subject matter of the Claim.
  18. Yeah I said I didn't want confidentiality, she asked why not. Also rejected clause 4 as it potentially limited my options. Court hearing is still Tuesday. I have my statements. They'd better hurry up or I'll inform the judge they are making it hard to settle by imposing unreasonable clauses.
  19. They continue to be stubborn: Dear xx, Our position is that paragraph 4 is specific to the subject matter of this claim. If you are dissatisfied with the wording of the Tomlin Order, please provide us with the alternative wording you propose and we shall take instructions. As this matter concerns a request for disclosure of data relating only to your personal accounts we do not understand why you consider that the terms of settlement should not remain confidential between the parties. In the meantime, we can confirm that we have received confirmation from the Bank that the settlement sum can be paid into your current account today but can take up to 3 days to show in your account. Once the Tomlin Order has been signed we shall arrange payment. As previously confirmed, we will send you a version for signature via DocuSign once you have confirmed that it is agreed.
  20. Here is the settlement offer. Which includes the NDA. Also a clause (5) saying I won’t pursue a further claim based on the subject matter if this claim. Would that preclude my next phase of claiming the charges? ————— 3 The parties acknowledge that this Agreement is entered into in connection with the compromise of disputed matters and in light of other considerations. It is not, and shall not be represented or construed as an admission of liability or wrongdoing by any of the parties to this Agreement or any other person or entity. 4 In consideration for the Settlement Sum, the Claimant hereby releases and discharges the Defendant, its employees, successors and assigns from any and all damages, liabilities, interest, costs and obligations, past, present and future, howsoever and whensoever arising, whether known or unknown that the Claimant had, have or may have at any time and in the future against the Defendant, arising out of or connected to the subject matter of the Claim. 5 The Claimant agrees that all circumstances surrounding the Claim and the terms of this agreement and/or any negotiations surrounding it are to remain confidential and that the Claimant (and/or her legal advisor(s)) shall not disclose the same to any third party, except with the prior written consent of the Defendant, or except to the extent required by law or for the purposes of enforcing the terms of this agreement. 6 For the avoidance of doubt, the Defendant shall be entitled to disclose the terms of this agreement to its regulators, subsidiaries, affiliates, auditors, officers and employees. 7 Nothing in this Schedule shall affect any indebtedness the Claimant has and/or may have to the Defendant. 8 The validity, construction, enforcement and all other matters arising in connection with this agreement shall be governed and construed in accordance with English Law and the Courts of England and Wales shall have exclusive jurisdiction in relation to all disputes in connection with this agreement.
  21. Replied to the solicitor that I would be delighted to settle as soon as the funds (£150) are in my account. No doubt they will slip in the non-disclosure clause in the settlement.
  22. Looking at the notes they sent. It looks like BC regenerated the missing reference number. They included a page with hand written notes breaking the account numbers into new numbers. I think my last email to the solicitor did the trick. Asking how the reference numbers are generated and why they can’t be regenerated. I was preparing to cross examine their hearsay witness about it.
  23. I most certainly will. I am pragmatic, there is enough here now to mount phase 2. See you all in the new compounded contractual interest thread.
  24. Ok. I may have celebrated too soon. They gave me my statements from 2001-2004. Which is great! They are sticking to the line “we don’t have statements pre 2001” This was their solicitor: Dear xX As confirmed on our email of yesterday, the Bank is unable to conduct a reasonable and proportionate search for documents in circumstances where the reference number is no longer available, with any attempt to locate documents needing to be conducted on a purely manual basis. In advance of the hearing, and in order to assist you and the Court to the fullest extent possible, the Bank has spent a considerable amount of time and resource over the last few days in conducting a further manual search of microfiche in order to determine whether any of the documents that you have requested can be located. The search has recovered the attached statements for card numbers and from January 2001 to May 2004; and card numbers and from July 2003 to May 2004 (copies attached). Our client is now able to confirm that no further data in respect of all four if the above accounts is held for you in microfiche. As previously discussed microfiche does not hold any statements dated before January 2001. Notwithstanding the above, the Bank’s position remains that it carried out reasonable and proportionate searches when it received your initial request and has exceeded its GDPR obligations in carrying out the manual microfiche search. As you have now been provided with the requested documents, we should be grateful if you could confirm if you accept the Bank’s offer of £150 in full and final settlement of your claim. We look forward to receiving your confirmation by no later than 12.00pm on 29 November 2019.
×
×
  • Create New...