Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thousands more passengers could face delays or cancellations after an arson attack on France's train network on Friday.View the full article
    • you never use or give an email  2nd class stamp with free proof of posting from any po counter dx
    • Much appreciated for the ammendment. The snottier the better right!   What I am assuming is that this response is to be posted to Gladstones? However, I am seeing some users sending this as an email instead, which is a little confusing.  If we're happy with this response, what would you suggest is the best way to send it over to them (post/email), and is there anything additional I could include (if necessary)?  Thanks again! 
    • Hi I've read through other threads to better inform me of the process from here onwards. When I put in the MoneyClaim it gave me a claim number and it currently says to wait for the defendant to respond, they have until 7 August.   It seems their most likely action is to extend that a further 14 days to about 21 August - this hasn't happened yet, of course, as it is only 27 July but I'm anticipating that may be the case. when the expected defence action is taken by EVRi I will need to submit DQ with these responses A1 - no mediation B - my contact details C1 - yes to the small claims track D1 - No.  If No please state why.  I believe the defence will provide some rebuttal to the particulars of claim and so I need to include details as to why the claim requires a hearing.  Is there some certain templated text I can include here or will it vary depending on what the defendant comes back with? I see on the form it mentions the following: Relevant reasons include that there are factual disputes which will need the judge to hear from witnesses directly or the issues are so complex they need to be argued orally.  Hoping to reach out to see what may be the most effective statements for D1 reasoning. E1-5 are pretty straightforward. I want to get ahead of things and be ready to take the next step so I appreciate what advice you may have about the DQ.   Thanks!  
    • Rachel Reeves is set to reveal a public finances shortfall of billions on pounds after a snap audit.View the full article
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 162 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

Lloyds to charge a quintillion per cent


Fred_Funk
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6141 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

James Daley: Lloyds to charge a quintillion per cent

 

Published: 15 September 2007

 

Customers of Lloyds TSB can expect to receive nice cheery letters from their bank over the next few weeks – telling them that the charges for busting their overdraft limit are being chopped in two.

 

I haven't yet seen a copy of the letter myself, but I'm willing to bet that it will boast about how the changes are being made in response to customer feedback – because Lloyds TSB is such a friendly, cuddly, caring bank.

 

But if you read on into the small print, you'll discover that – like most letters from your bank – everything is not quite as great as they'd like you to think it is.

 

Although the charges for exceeding your authorised overdraft limit – and the fees for returned items – are indeed being cut, Lloyds is also introducing a range of hefty new daily penalties for every day that you stay in the red.

 

At the moment, Lloyds will charge you £30 if you bust your overdraft limit, as well as interest at the equivalent of about 30 per cent a year on the amount that you are in the red. This works out at a few pence per day.

 

Under its new charging structure, however, which comes into force at the start of November, you'll be charged £15 for busting your limit, and then between £6 and £20 every day that you stay in the red. For example, if you slip just £1 over your limit, you'll be charged £15, plus £6 a day – which, if you convert it into an annual rate of interest, would work out at many trillions of trillions of per cent. If you bust your limit by £100, you'll be charged £15, and then an astronomical £20 a day – which is equivalent to somewhere in the region of a quintillion per cent APR.

 

Lloyds, of course, claims that its new system is much fairer, and says that for anyone who is worried about accidentally slipping into the red, it is launching a new text-message service – which will contact you when you break through your limit. If you put yourself back in the black by 3.30pm the same day, then there will be nothing to pay – except, of course, the £30 a year subscription fee for its text-message service.

 

Given that banks such as Cahoot are already offering similar warning services for free, Lloyds' text-message idea is not quite the act of altruism it claims it is. You can be sure that its new charging structure as a whole will at the very least be cost neutral – and perhaps even profit-enhancing for the bank.

 

Quite apart from the fact that this is yet another example of banks using sleight of hand to earn their income, I can't understand why Lloyds could not have waited until after the forthcoming bank charges court case to overhaul its fees. The test case is due to take place some time next year, and will force banks to prove that their charges are proportional to their costs.

 

Quite how Lloyds is going to prove that interest charged at a quintillion per cent is proportional, I'm not sure – so if you're a Lloyds customer, don't be surprised if there is yet another overhaul of its fees some time after the case concludes.

 

It's a frustrating time for banking customers everywhere at the moment, but if you're thinking of switching, it may be worth waiting for things to settle down – as several other banks are considering changing their charging structures over the coming months.

 

But if you're in a hurry, my advice would be to opt for a building society, such as Nationwide. At least they are not susceptible to the same pressure from shareholders to relentlessly grow the bottom line at the expense of their customers.

NatWest: seeking unlawful charges + interest incurred as a result of those charges of £4,292.82 and contractual interest (compounded) of £4,559.41. Court claim issued 16.01.08; acknowledgement of service filled by Cobbetts on 30.01.08

Link to post
Share on other sites

James Daley: Lloyds to charge a quintillion per cent

 

Published: 15 September 2007

 

Customers of Lloyds TSB can expect to receive nice cheery letters from their bank over the next few weeks – telling them that the charges for busting their overdraft limit are being chopped in two.

 

I haven't yet seen a copy of the letter myself, but I'm willing to bet that it will boast about how the changes are being made in response to customer feedback – because Lloyds TSB is such a friendly, cuddly, caring bank.

 

But if you read on into the small print, you'll discover that – like most letters from your bank – everything is not quite as great as they'd like you to think it is.

 

Although the charges for exceeding your authorised overdraft limit – and the fees for returned items – are indeed being cut, Lloyds is also introducing a range of hefty new daily penalties for every day that you stay in the red.

 

At the moment, Lloyds will charge you £30 if you bust your overdraft limit, as well as interest at the equivalent of about 30 per cent a year on the amount that you are in the red. This works out at a few pence per day.

 

Under its new charging structure, however, which comes into force at the start of November, you'll be charged £15 for busting your limit, and then between £6 and £20 every day that you stay in the red. For example, if you slip just £1 over your limit, you'll be charged £15, plus £6 a day – which, if you convert it into an annual rate of interest, would work out at many trillions of trillions of per cent. If you bust your limit by £100, you'll be charged £15, and then an astronomical £20 a day – which is equivalent to somewhere in the region of a quintillion per cent APR.

 

Lloyds, of course, claims that its new system is much fairer, and says that for anyone who is worried about accidentally slipping into the red, it is launching a new text-message service – which will contact you when you break through your limit. If you put yourself back in the black by 3.30pm the same day, then there will be nothing to pay – except, of course, the £30 a year subscription fee for its text-message service.

 

Given that banks such as Cahoot are already offering similar warning services for free, Lloyds' text-message idea is not quite the act of altruism it claims it is. You can be sure that its new charging structure as a whole will at the very least be cost neutral – and perhaps even profit-enhancing for the bank.

 

Quite apart from the fact that this is yet another example of banks using sleight of hand to earn their income, I can't understand why Lloyds could not have waited until after the forthcoming bank charges court case to overhaul its fees. The test case is due to take place some time next year, and will force banks to prove that their charges are proportional to their costs.

 

Quite how Lloyds is going to prove that interest charged at a quintillion per cent is proportional, I'm not sure – so if you're a Lloyds customer, don't be surprised if there is yet another overhaul of its fees some time after the case concludes.

 

It's a frustrating time for banking customers everywhere at the moment, but if you're thinking of switching, it may be worth waiting for things to settle down – as several other banks are considering changing their charging structures over the coming months.

 

But if you're in a hurry, my advice would be to opt for a building society, such as Nationwide. At least they are not susceptible to the same pressure from shareholders to relentlessly grow the bottom line at the expense of their customers.

NatWest: seeking unlawful charges + interest incurred as a result of those charges of £4,292.82 and contractual interest (compounded) of £4,559.41. Court claim issued 16.01.08; acknowledgement of service filled by Cobbetts on 30.01.08

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Someone here has worked out that the increase is 140% :mad:

If you think this post has been of help, please click on my SCALES on the left - thanks :-) :-x

 

Peter Anderson

Me Vs Morgan Stanley - WON £490

Me V's LTSB - Private & Bus Acc - £18.8k (since Oct1997)

inc: S.69 Interest (and growing daily) -;)

Please remember to DONATE when you have WON

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...