Yes, I like what your saying, but barclays weren't prepared to defend the actual charges, Most probably for the very reasons you mentioned - However, they are prepared to go all the way on the statue of limitations, and especially contractual interest - so to pursue further I need to find an approach that inextricably links their mendacious charging regime with my claim for contractual interest. i.e. in order to prove the validity of claiming interest at this rate, I also need to show the charges, are in the first instance unlawful, unfair and indeed unduely enrich the defendant - they would be more likely to cave in then I think.

cheers, and yes I was trying to give the impression of them being overly large.. and yes, there will be a next time as I'm taking barclays to court for my sister, mother and also have a few credit card ones on the go for a friend.. have a good one yourself mate!

absolutely, and was partially why I went for the contractual interest!

Yes, and you. always nice to see other CAG members I think. well, I've tried to post everything I remember in this thread, so hopefully thats helpful to you. Link away! You'll get your money, never fear!

I wouldn't have let them off so lightly if your asssertion was correct don't you worry!

no, 27.5% is their unauthorised overdraft rate. it has nothing to do with penalty charges. The argument goes that as their current account terms and conditions refer to this unauthorised lending rate, there is an implied contract under the principal of reciprocity and therefore I can claim that same rate for funds I consider borrowed "without authorisation" from me. Have a read of some of the threads talking about contractual interest. there's links are the start of my thread.

No, I'm talking about the rate I'm allowed to charge the banks, not vice versa. 8% is allowed for in these cases, I was arguing for a higher, implied contractual rate of 27.5%. The legality/enforcablity of penalty charges are immaterial in this argument.

cheers les, fun wasn't it?, yes I'm going to PM some Mods here too for advice and suggestions.

Right then, the directions hearing on the 21st (yest). Supposedly a 10 min affair, it would more accurately be called an arbitration hearing, in that I argued my entire case with a Barrister from Barclays and was in there for 2 and a half hours. There was probably about 18 or so litigants in person, with a barrister observing from NatWest and for Barclays, Adrian St John and his legal rep, Colin Passmore, head of litigation at Simmons & Simmons. He started by trying to stop my amendment being accepted. (I changed the interest calculation from simple to compound taking my claim from 15K - 37K) The Circuit Judge His Honour Hickinbottom was unwilling to determine the relevance of allwoing the amendment at this stage and suggested a further hearing. Passmore then vehemently contested contractual interest, my 12 year claim and my request for damages relating to their DP breach. (he seems shocked when I informed the court of their recent DP breach by the Information Commissioners Office) I had a chance to speak then, and porceeded to explain my reasons for a estimated claim, (a DP breach) why the primary limitation period should start in May of this year (based on s32 (b) or © of the LA act 1980 and why I thought using the banks own method of calculating interest by compounding it daily was just and fair if applied on the basis of mutuality The judge gave us leave to try to agree settlement outside, at which point an amusing "good cop, bad cop" approach was tried, the barrister threatening me with costs etc and saying I had no chance of being granted contractual interest, with the guy from Barclays offering 6K to settle. I refused. At this point he was prepared to allow my estimated claim (and hence my older than six year portion of my claim) to count towards this settlement figure, which I took as a success. So back in we headed. I was given further chance to to explain my reasoning for contractual interest (the main sticking point) which went along the lines of Considering I thought it was a 10 min hearing I didn't bring any further supporting evidence/arguments for applying con. interest. which I regret, and the judge was unwilling to rule because he hadn't seen the terms and conditions of the account. However, he did say the following. Regardless of my extenuating financial circumstances, costs associated with a substantive hearing (to discuss amnedments), and further hearing to determine the ruling on contractual interest would be in the thousands, and if I lost (which he thought was likely) I would be liable. At this point Passmore indicated the ramifications for the banking industry and told the court the issue of contractual interest is of sufficient importance to the banking industry that a QC would be defending and they would pursue it all the way to the Lords if necessary. Specifically, the judge said I had an interesting argument for contractual interest, but "Not to hold out too much hope". Well, that initiated some scrotal tightening on my part, and the judge gave us further time to settle. Barclays offered me 8K based on my full 12 year claim plus 8% and said I needed time to think and PAssmore ordered a stay until the 12th of Jan, 4pm. my claim runs to £8734 at 8% so I'm considering settling at 9-10k if I can.

its fine, although you didn't have to add the bits about 8% if taken to court etc as barclays know this already. Its usually best to stick to the templates provided, but what you've written is ok. BTW, expect a full update tomorrow everyone on my directions hearing I had today. too tired to post it now..

if thats statutory interest @ 8% just send them an amended letter and schedule of charges. They only flick through these documents anyway and send out a standardised response as they're getting so many, and their tactic is just to delay and hope you fall by the wayside. My point is they won't notice, but to be thorough and accurate and to give them ample opportunity to setlle before court then re-send amended prelim.

glad ur enjoying it mate, lets hope it doesn't all end in tears eh!

I didn't use MCOL, I used the pdf N1 form, but I think I'm right in saying just the charges if your claiming the statutory 8%, or the whole amount if your going down the contractual interest route. Not sure on court fee. I'm exempt.

I was also told I didn't have to bnring anything, but I've prepared a court bundle nonetheless and will be taking that. A Directions Hearing is just that - it gives directions regarding the final hearing to both parties and presumably assigns the track, be it small/fast or multi. depending on complexity and value of the claim. I'll have more info after thurs, where I'm attending one myself. So yes, its a preliminary hearing.

Yes, thats the standard defence for claims older than six years. here's my thread, have a read and see if it was indeed my thread. could have been..

Good work, keep us posted!

MAybe they're struggling with bad debt, and therefore they're trying to predict the defaulters, maybe they no like you no more due to your claim..

barclays are setlling before this date, however its a directions hearing in front of a district judge, not the case proper therefore you can't apply for a judgement. Phone Rebecca Connolly and ask her if she's willing to settle. I bet she is. Her number is on another thread somewhere, use the search facility. I'm turning up on thurs at 10:30am so we could meet up if you like.

don't fret. barclays only tactic is to delay until a few days before the hearing before calling u up and offering to pay in full. especially with non-contentious claims such as yours. (within 6 years).

I put this in my prelim letter. Basically make it a pre-requisite of settling the case that any default notices are removed.

If you do decide to pursue for more than 6 years you can always use the available statements as a basis for an estimated claim. Keep an eye on threads that are challenging the statute of limitations (where this six year cut-off comes from) and base your decision on the success or otherwise of these cases.

Thats what a put in my prelim. Don't forget to change the figures!

Have a read of this concerning letters of authority if you need to represent someone else and claims their charges back.

You could apply for a remission of the fees by filling in an exemption form at the court. You fill in an income/expenditure section and the clerk/manager decides whether to waive the fees or not. At least that what happens at cardiff county court.

Barclays will call you up between before the hearing and offer a full settlement (eventually). I doubt they'd quibble over a month, but if they do, you can still accept their partial settlement for everything but that month and inform the courts you have settled, or pursue on court. Prob not worth the hassle for a month is it? your call though.