Write to them again and complain - calmly - about their pressurising. Tell them you will only deal with them in writing, henceforth. Put in writing what your offer is. Attach a statement of earnings. Tell them you cannot afford any more. Advise them to take you to court if they cannot accept your offer. If they call again, get in touch with BT or your phone provider about 'choose to refuse' or other way of dealing with nuisance calls. They CANNOT force you to pay, make an attachment of earnings or do anything else without a Court Order - a CCJ. Don't worry too much about a CCJ, it isn't the end of the world. OK, so you maybe won't get a credit card - but you weren't going to get another one anyway, were you? So, no loss. Make sure your offer is something you genuinely can afford. Best wishes Natty

Hi If they've offered you a full refund (and, I hope, refund of charges) I have to ask: what else are you seeking? Best wishes Natty

A very brief flying visit just long enough to say CONGRATULATIONS Looks like it's been an even longer road than when I last dropped in. Well done for staying the course. Enjoy the moment (and the booty!)

I agree entirely with Parkvale. Just as a matter of interest, I just had the round of my life on the golf course, with my new Callaway irons. thanks, NatWest - it was the money I got from you paid for them and the time I took to visit Callaway's European HQ, with its million-dollar equipment, to get custom-fitted. Shaft length - standard. Shaft flex - regular. Lie angle - standard. Loft angle -standard. I could have bought the bl**dy things off eBay!! W

Subscribing because it's interesting. Westy

Nothing happened yet..... hanks, Mr Bump, for that reminder about Barclays being...ahem...'clarified' about what constitutes a structured filing system under the Act...

And i have your thread open, Trish, while I try to plough through their defence, in between making calls to America...

Well, Sally, the vibes didn't work coz my golf was rubbish! Luckily, the guy I was playing with was even worse, so at least I didn't have to pay for the consoling drinks afterwards. But what a miserable old s*d he turned out to be.

SAR sent today. The wheels slowly grind into motion.

Just checking in. I have another claim to pursue and thought I'd start doing it now. My golf has been crap (though I won something a couple of weeks ago, by 7 shots - coz I didn't realise I was leading and therefore didn't have my customary collapse over the last three holes!) the last few days so I might as well find something else to do with my days.... W

"I think this whole argument about deprival of benefit from funds perhaps carries a bit more weight when it is applied to Business accounts ?" It doesn't matter if the injured party is an individual, owner-operated business or body corporate. The bank's behaviour is no different towards any of the three categories - the injury is exactly the same, so the remedy is exactly the same. Statutory interest is at 8% (or whatever the court decides) regardless of prevailing interest rates, whether they're lower than 8%, as now, or higher, as in the early 1990s.

CONGRATULATIONS LORI!! Well done.

Bong - Many, many CONGRATULATIONS!!!! I'm truly, genuinely, totally and honestly delighted for you. You have nerves of steel and the endurance of one of those bullfrogs that mates for about three days at a time! :D:D Your story and your contributions have been a huge help to many, many people. Great stuff - well done. Enjoy it!! And make sure you keep some back for that holiday. You richly deserve it.

Hi, Dwarren CONGRATULATIONS!! A bit tardy, I know but I've been busy.... Playing golf and consuming real ale. Very well done - you deserve every penny!

Absolutely smashing - great stuff!!

Hi, Bobandsuzi I've extracted this from your original post of Cobbetts' offer: "Any charges that properly accrue in the future will be applied to your account in line with our published tariff and in accordance with your agreement with the bank. Should you be unwilling to accept any such charges then we may need to consider if we are prepared to continue to provide you with your existing banking facilities. Instead we may offer you a simple account that does not offer borrowing facilities or other services that can result in charges." I had exactly the same in my settlement letter (I'd already told them I wouldn't accept the gagging order or any other unreasonable condition. This was a new one). Anyway, the reply I sent them reads as follows: Natwesttookmymoney Westy Towers Cobbetts Ship Canal House Manchester Your ref: xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Dear Sirs Re: Your client: National Westminster Bank plc Thank you for your letter dated 20 February and subsequent e-mails and telephone correspondence. I confirm that this matter is now settled and enclose a copy of my Notice of Discontinuance. A copy has also been forwarded to the Court. I note the conditions in the fourth paragraph of your letter dated 20 February. I confirm that I will be happy to continue to bank with your client in accordance with its Terms & Conditions. On page 5 of those conditions, in section 1a, under the heading of ‘General’, it states “If your address is in Scotland, Scottish law applies to the contract between you and us. If you live elsewhere, English law applies to the contract between you and us.” I live in England and will accept any charges that are applied to my account in accordance and compliance with English law. If your client does not intend to comply with the law, please let me know so that I can make alternative arrangements." Does that help? If they ask me to go, they're saying they won't comply with the law. Tee-hee!

JustJon It would appear that you have a point. Having re-read Newbody's post very carefully, it can appear that he is referring to charges and interest debited as 'bank charges' - bringing the two elements together under one heading. If he is, then I have indeed misunderstood. As far as I'm concerned, charges are charges; interest (in whatever form) is interest. I don't conflate the two. For the sake of clarity, as my signature says and my thread makes clear, I claimed and won charges, plus debited interest, plus statutory interest at 8%. Plus court costs, of course.

JustJon I really don't understand what you're on about, I'm afraid. I quoted point 2 from Newbody's post in its entirety.

Hope that's all clear. Wouldn't want people scratching their heads with puzzlement as they look at my post and subsequent discussion!

Goodness me, I didn't think a minor jest would generate this much confusion!! :lol:

:D:D

I'm not here.

Hi, Newbody No, I wasn't referring to your case - I wouldn't be so presumptuous to do so without making it very clear! I was referring to my own case. The link to it is in my signature. I generally agree with you, BTW, that 'added CI' is an unproven route. I didn't go added CI - I went for my losses, which were made up of charges and interest debited on then, plus statutory interest to compensate for denial of benefit. NB - I'm Westy - Nattie (aka Natweststaffmember) gets most upset when I'm given his name!!

Hi, Parkvale You're very kind - thankyou. Just one teensie-weensie thing: 'beyond reasonable doubt' is the burden of proof for criminal cases. the requirement in civil cases is lower, normally expressed as 'on the balance of probabilities'. Now retiring to the golf course.

The first case JustJon refers to was lost on the ground of interest - and, strangely enough, the argument was that, as the account was still in overdraft, the interest had not been paid and therefore could not be reclaimed! What?? Eh??? That's off the top of me 'ead. As for others, Taylormandy just had a claim refused but the principle reason for it was Statute of Limitations - they successfully peeled the charges issue away from the core of the argument. There have been very few actual losses at court. There have been referrals from a preliminary hearing to a full hearing at court, with the suggestion that the claimant should reconsider the interest level being claimed. There have been indications from the court at directions stage that added CI is too high. There have been people who have accepted less than added CI. And there have been people who have gone to court for added CI and wee have never heard from them again, so we don't know what happened bu fear the worst. Nothing is certain but the more you prepare your case the more likely you are to get a good settlement before it ever comes to court. Have a look at the successes thread. W