Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


Annoyed from Caerphilly

Success at A and L via hardship case route

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 4140 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi,

 

Have recently settled with A and L for £6483.5, which was total amount of charges claimed in relation to 3 accounts.

 

Given that the Court due to hear my case (Cardiff) applied stays, rather than wait for the outcome of the High Court case I decided to determine whether they was another pathway I could take.

 

Following advice from the FOS I reapproached the bank and asked for each claim to be reconsidered as a hardship case, arguing that their own literature (standard letter re stays) and that of the FOS indicated that banks had a duty to identify those cases where the claimant was suffering genuine financial hardship. (The FOS advised that I was able to follow such a pathway even though my case had been submitted to Court).

 

After much debate and being bumped around various departments the bank accepted the evidence put forward (ill health had led to long term sickness absence and reliance upon state benefits, the amount of charges being deducted causing further financial hardship, leaving me unable to meet existing financial commitments).

 

However, though I was successful in the end the main sticking point that delayed matters for a no. of weeks appeared to be the stance of the Credit Control dept. who oddly are the dept. at A and L tasked with dealing with bank charges cases. Initially their stance was that they could not consider matters and, given my legal action sought to refer me to Wragge and Co., despite my arguing that Wragge were merely legal advisers to the bank and would not be able to reach settlement.

 

Headway was only made when I sought the support of the Chief Executives dept., being passed through to a PA from switchboard, who referred me on to the Customer Care Team, who seemed to have the authority or standing to persuade the credit control dept. to drop their stance, leading to consideration of my submission by the manager of credit control dept. (Alision Riley) and eventual offer of settlement.

 

I was happy to settle on the basis of repayment of charges, foregoing interest and court costs, which though in total amounted to just over £1,300 , given the total value of the settlement seemed a reasonable course of action to take - give a bit to get a lot !

 

Advice re following this course of action - ensure there is genuine evidence, medical and financial to support your hardship case, and that you submit a detailed fax or email listing each, continue to the seek support of customer care team, and importantly, be wary of a supervisor in the credit control dept. called Mr.Garnett, who you may be referred to first of all - not only does he act as though any refund will come out of his own pocket, but in my opinion would gladly argue black is white, not only will he aim to lead you up the garden path, he may also infuriate you with a whole range of underhand tactics, the best of which is returning your call and more or less immediately stating he has to terminate the call (which he made !) to go into a meeting. Progress only seems to occur when the customer care dept. deal directly with Alison Riley, manager of Credit Control.

 

If like me illness has robbed you of part of your life and through reduction in income caused enormous financial problems, worsened by onerous bank charges, then clearly you are a hardship case. Dig in, follow the above pathway and though it may take you a number of months, you should be successful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fantastic - well done - The fact that you did not get the interest is neither here nor there as technically it can only be awarded by the courts anyway- so the fact that some claimants have recieved it is really more luck than anything else.

 

I am so pleased you have suceeded as right from the begining I have been posting the full agreement stating that it was part of the original agreement / a condition, of the court case that harship cases should have been filtered through - and I have not been able to understand why more people have not been more sucessful in lifting stays on this basis in the courts. The only thing I can think of was that the wording was not specific enough and I suppose "hardship" in some cases can be difficult to define/prove in a court situation.

 

I would just like to say well done for your perseverance and thanks for posting how you have achieved your claim. I hope your post gets picked up and the information passed on to those it applies to.

 

It just goes to show perseverance and contacting the right person does sometimes pay off

 

 

CONGRATULATIONS again:D :D :D

 

jan


Please note I am not an expert - I am not offering opinions or legal help - Please use all the information provided on the site in FAQ- step by step instructions and library- thanks Jansus:)

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif

offer from A&L 24/8/07 - after case stayed

 

"What makes the desert beautiful is that somewhere it hides a well." - Antione de Saint Exupery

 

 

PROUD TO BE AN ORANGE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just bumping you back up to the top as I think your post is important

 

Jan:)


Please note I am not an expert - I am not offering opinions or legal help - Please use all the information provided on the site in FAQ- step by step instructions and library- thanks Jansus:)

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif

offer from A&L 24/8/07 - after case stayed

 

"What makes the desert beautiful is that somewhere it hides a well." - Antione de Saint Exupery

 

 

PROUD TO BE AN ORANGE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fantastic result! :D

 

Well done to you. Its interesting to know that the FOS will now hear claims where a court claim has been issued. This is the second time I've heard of this happening. It was the position that FOS would not get involved where a claim has been made in the courts.

 

Thank your for sharing your experience I'm sure many others may benefit.

 

Enjoy your payout! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to let you all know- my daughter has recently attended a hearing for stay removal against Barclays- This is a benefit claim and her argument was that of "hardship" - Barclays counsel was not at all interested in this and stated that the social security administration act section 187 was not at all relevant to her case. The judge was quite agitated with Barclays and consequently ordered the following:

 

It is ordered that:

 

(1) The claimants application be deemed to be also a application for a Interim Injunction under CPR 25.1

 

(2) The claimant is to file and serve any additional evidence by 4pm on 10th October.

 

(3) The defendant do file and serve any evidence in reply by 4pm on 24th October.

 

(4) This matter be re-listed for further hearing on ****** at 10.00am at **** County Court- with an estimated length of hearing of 3 hours.

 

In response to this we have filed further evidence of financial "hardship" i.e copies of court orders from utility companys, demanding letters from other sources, threat of possesion of home, copy of BBC news report where judge Abrahams applied clauses to a stay preventing any futher charges, - we also enclosed letters from a counsellor who confirmed that my daughter was suffering with anxiety and depression due to her financial situation, in all we have attached 18 documents to her case.

 

The day after the hearing Barclays litigation telephoned my daughter stating that she would not be treated any differently to anybody else regardless of being on a benefit. We have quoted this with the above evidence too!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice one, not only have you succeeded in rattling Barclays, in the process making it plain that you will not fall for their bully boy tactics (daft how they think they can intimidate claimants via unpleasant phonecalls) but you have also clearly succeeded in persuading the Judge of the unreasonableness of their position.

 

Keep at em ! I know it isn't pleasant as I have been there myself, but like me I am sure that you can see that determination usually wins the day.

 

(Don't forget to claim for costs at the hearing - there is info. on this issue on the site, regretably though I am not sure where it is located. Sure one of the moderators, etc, can assist).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Jan - it was hard to keep motivating myself, but if nothing else I was determined that the slippery characters were not going to riggle out of the basis of the agreement (re examining hardship cases) agreed between the OFT, banks and FSA.

 

Obviously I am not clear if my experience is true across the board, but I get the feeling that other banks may have adopted the initial stance of the A and L - i.e., refuse to even pay lip service to the basis of the agreement, failing in the process to identify which claimants could be deemed to be genuine hardship cases, and even worse, (also) aim to fob off claimants who contact the bank and identify themselves as suffering from hardship.

 

It took me weeks of arguing my case, but with perseverence (and refusing to be drawn into the game playing) it is possible to succeed.

 

Thanks for your support, all the best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks,

Have been advised by the FOS that they will become involved in claims where they believe there is genuine hardship.

Though I had not taken this route with the bank first of all, fortunately I received excellent advice from a no. of FOS advisors, namely:-

recontact the bank, indicate that the deduction of charges had caused me financial hardship (as per the banking act), and importantly, rather than waste 8 weeks submitting a letter to the bank to that effect and recontacting the FOS if after 8 weeks the bank would not address my concerns, I was advised to ask the bank to consider matters on such a basis, i.e., without the need for submission of letter, and if they would not address my concerns on such a basis, or did so producing a result I was not happy with, to ask the bank to submit to myself a final statement of their position. This would then be examined by a specialist team set up within the FOS, and if the team felt it was a hardship case the FOS would become involved. Fortunately, although the Credit control dept. (handling all claims) initially refused to send me a final statement, a member of the Customer Care Team persuaded the dept. to consider my submission re hardship, and to give an undertaking that either I would receive some offer of payout or a final statement of their position.

 

Surprisingly, no statement was forthcoming, my case was deemed genuine hardship and an offer for full repayment was made.

It seems that even at this stage (with High Court case pending) the banks do not wish to place themselves in a position where the FOS became involved.

In essence therefore I put forward the arguments given to me by FOS, persuading the bank that it would not be necessary and a waste of both parties time (for me) to submit a letter claiming hardship under the banking act - removing the need to wait 8 weeks before being eligible to seek FOS involvement. That either an offer was made or a final statement of position was sent to me, allowing me to seek FOS support. Once the bank accepted my evidence of hardship (reliance on benefits, inability to meet commitments, likelihood of continued ill health for some time) an offer in full was made.

Would advise anyone contemplating this route to first of all seek FOS advice. (There is a particular term for final statement of position which I regrettably cannot recall, FOS can advise, rest of advice is correct as taken from notes).

Thanks for your support and that of CAG generally. Have made a small donation earlier in week, larger one will be following in due course. Have also posted off some T and C to address given.

On now to harass credit card Companies !!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HI guys, congrats on a fab result.

Did you use a template letter as your first request due to hardship if so where did you find it & if not where did you start.

I am teertering really close to the edge & in real danger of falling off, I could get the 3k A&L owe me that would go a long way to sorting myself out.

thanks


I HAVE ALL THE MONEY I'LL EVER NEED - IF I DIE BY 4 O'CLOCK THIS AFTERNOON!!:-|

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

I didn't use a template letter, just sought to argue my case as per advice from FOS.

 

Follow the detailed information I gave in yesterdays response (posted at 23.09) and earlier responses.

 

Namely, if you cannot get any support from Credit control dept. or other respective dept. handling your bank charge claim, seek support of customer care team, accessed if needs be via a PA to chief exec.

 

Argue that you have spoken to FOS, who have advised that you indicate to A and L that you are suffering hardship due to .... (put forward your own reasons), that there is a duty on bank (as per agreement between banks, FOS and OFT at time agreement reached to jointly submit a test case to High Court) to identify those claimants that are genuine hardship cases, i.e, the imposition of charges having casued genuine financial hardship. You are identifying yourself as such, and rather than submitting a letter under the Banking act indicating the charges applied have caused you hardship and thereafter waiting upto 8 weeks for a reply before (if reply unsatisfactory) seeking support of FOS, you want bank to consider your claim as one of genuine hardship straight away, either from your verbal request or subsequent to you outlining your position in writing. If bank are unwilling to consider your request, advise them that they have an obligation to supply you with a final written response indicating that they do not consider your case one of hardship, or having considered it, that any offer they make to you (if you find it unsatisfactory) is their final position.

 

Push for Customer Care team to take up case on your behalf in line with above. (Quickest route to this team - ring main A and L HQ no. ask for team, insist put through, alternatively, ask to speak to PA to Chief Exec., briefly outline case, ask PA to arrange for team to recall you)

 

Find out who you can send a fax to in Customer Care team outlining your position, i.e., hardship, basis of hardship, reduced income, etc, how charges made financial situation worse and loss of sum of money involved continues to impact upon your position.

 

State that in first instance you want your claim reconsidered, statement re final written response is used as a bargaining tool or tactic, i.e., you have to consider my case OR provide a letter.

 

Do not be fobbed off with claim that as matter is with Wragge and Co. it cannot be considered, re-emphasise that in letter from bank post stay and Wragge and Co. it outlines duty of bank to consider genuine hardship cases, the fact that you have instigated legal action is neither here nor there, agreement re ability of bank to request stays was made with proviso that banks would continue to consider hardship cases.

 

In case it is of benefit to you, have copied below the text of the letter I submitted to Credit Control dept. and thereafter to customer care team arguing my case:

 

Manager

Credit Control Department

Alliance and Leicester

3rd September, 2007

Dear Sir / Madam,

Re: Account numbers 12345678

Mr.**********, request for refund of charges on basis of hardship

Note – adapt this letter in line with your own set of circumstances, beef up your position with detailed info. re how (ill health, one off financial burden, etc) you began to suffer difficulties, alternatively, indicate, for example, that your monthly income and expenditure is so tight, that any reduction in income, e.g., charges, led to an imbalance and inability to meet usual monthly expenses. You need to try and show that you are unable to meet obligations and that situation is compounding and getting worse, e.g., as in my case, charges are creating and increasing an overdrawn balance.

Letter was originally sent to Credit Control Dept. and subsequently, when they agreed to seek to resolve matters on my behalf (credit control dept. would not move from position of could not assist as matters now with Wragge and Co,) by the Customer Care Team

 

 

Further to our initial and recent telephone calls, my referral back to yourself via the Chief Executives Office, and your request that I place in writing the basis of the financial hardship I am experiencing along with an indication of the amount of charges applied to the above two accounts.

Please excuse the delay in getting this information to you, I have only been able to collate the necessary information with the assistance of a member of my family and at a time of mental clarity. I hope the following suffices, if not please do not hesitate to ask for further information.

The basis of the financial hardship I am experiencing is:-

· First of all outlined ill health that led to drop in income and eventually position where only income was state benefits

· Secondly that my ill health is likely to continue for a time (add to both of these points as per your predicament)

 

Further points:-

 

· the illness was accompanied by financial difficulties – initially I lost track of my financial affairs and failing to transfer funds between accounts to cover expenses or direct debits began to incur charges

· thereafter, my sick pay ran out and charges began to occur as I did not have the funds to cover my outgoings or increased living costs caused by my illness leading to the worsening of my financial position

· I now rely upon Disability Living Allowance (Higher rate mobility, middle rate care) and Incapacity Benefit resulting in my inability to meet many of my current financial commitments and I find myself unable to make a number of loan or credit card repayments, pay telephone bills (a vital link when you are incapacitated), or sustain many of the commitments we all have (car tax and insurance, home insurance , etc)

· matters were made worse by charges continuing to be applied, and most recently, charges taking an account overdrawn, which in itself resulted in further charges

· I recently therefore took the decision to close down both of the specified accounts, realising that in effect this was the only option open to me - if I failed to do so charges would continue to mount, principally as I was not in a position to bring the 123456789 account back into credit or the 123456789 account below its agreed overdraft limit

· presently my state of health is not that good, I suffered a significant relapse in February of this year ….. outlined current medical condition

In total £****** in charges have been deducted from the specified accounts, £**** from (account numbered) 123456789 and £****** from 123456789

Clearly the deduction of such a large overall sum of money has done nothing other that worsen the financial difficulties and hardship experienced.

I feel there is nothing to be gained at this point from questioning the level of charges applied; my position (confirmed via contact with the FOS and OFT) is merely that the agreement reached between the banks, FSA, FOS and OFT prior to the OFT v banks case being submitted to the High Court at the end of July clearly states that responsibility for determining and resolving a ‘hardship case’ lies with the bank, that the waiver granted to banks, allowing complaints re charges to be held pending the outcome of the High Court case does not apply to ‘hardship’ cases, and banks should therefore seek to identify and resolve such cases; further that where agreement cannot be reached between a customer and a bank the bank must issue a final response letter as a precursor to the FOS seeking to resolve matters.

My further position is that I firmly believe it will be possible for you to address my concerns such that I deem the matter settled negating any need for involvement of the FOS or closer to home the continued involvement of the Chief Executives office.

As indicated during one of our recent telephone conversations:-

· £****** has been deducted in charges

· £***** from account numbered 123456789

· £****** from account numbered 123456789

· were my legal action against A and L (to recover the charges levied) have proceeded to Court I would have been entitled to claim statutory interest at the rate of 8% and Court fees of £120

· respectively:- £**** in interest plus fees of £120 for account numbered 123456789 and £***** plus £120 for account numbered 123456789

This information and a full list of the charges applied to each account can be found in the attached spreadsheets

You will note that the overwhelming majority of the charges were applied post the deterioration of my health and financial circumstances.

I am willing to forego the amount I sought to claim for statutory interest and Court charges – in total £****

I therefore look to you agreeing to repay in full all of the charges levied and deducted from the specified accounts, namely, the sum of £*******

As indicated, I do not, with respect, wish to revisit the question of the fairness of the charges, or of whether some element of each charge was fair.

I fully believe that my difficulties meet any definition or criteria of hardship.

Many thanks for agreeing to examine matters. I look forward to your reply.

Kind regards,

********

Attached / to follow:-

Spreadsheets for account numbers 123456789 and 123456789

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brilliant, thank you so much. Will get the letter off today & make the phonecalls.

Thank you xx


I HAVE ALL THE MONEY I'LL EVER NEED - IF I DIE BY 4 O'CLOCK THIS AFTERNOON!!:-|

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:D I hope you have had a lot of views on your thread as I have been posting it a lot.

 

court stay lifted, new court date - must file a skeleton argument

 

The last post in this thread is quite interesting as the judge says that the claimant must prove the bank charges caused the hardship? Not made it worse- but that does not seem to be your experience does it?

 

I am at the moment trying to help CRFX250 draft a letter stating that most of the banks are ignoring this part of the agreement - but the wording they signed up to seems to be up to interpretation! - but not giving up yet as there are some really heartbreaking cases out there.

 

Jan


Please note I am not an expert - I am not offering opinions or legal help - Please use all the information provided on the site in FAQ- step by step instructions and library- thanks Jansus:)

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif

offer from A&L 24/8/07 - after case stayed

 

"What makes the desert beautiful is that somewhere it hides a well." - Antione de Saint Exupery

 

 

PROUD TO BE AN ORANGE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

I hope you dont mind if I pinch some of your wording - trying to get a draft letter for others to attach to their own financial statement and send copies to FSA to show that a lot of the banks are flouting the agreement . And your example seems very good.

 

Jan


Please note I am not an expert - I am not offering opinions or legal help - Please use all the information provided on the site in FAQ- step by step instructions and library- thanks Jansus:)

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif

offer from A&L 24/8/07 - after case stayed

 

"What makes the desert beautiful is that somewhere it hides a well." - Antione de Saint Exupery

 

 

PROUD TO BE AN ORANGE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

I was pointed on the direction of your thread by Jansus. I am now going to try and move my case forward if I can, I wonder if maybe you could offer me any advice on the best way forward for me.

 

My case has been stayed pending result of the test case. I would say I am suffering immense hardship at the moment due to my continuing spiral into debt with the Abbey and the fact I have to support my family on £90 a week income support.

 

Like you, I am unable to work and have been incapacitated by the DWP. I am fighting to get DLA after being turned down earlier this year, proving hardship and medical status will not really be an issue I don't think. Knowing which way to jump next is.

 

Do I apply through the N244 process firstly, contact the FOS, or write to the bank? I am just unsure what is the best way to approach this.

 

I have read your thread with interest and whilst parts of it take some digesting, I found it quite enlightening. All I really need is a starting point and I am sure I can handle the rest.

 

If you go to read my thread, take a flask, two days supplies and a sleeping bag!

 

Any help or advice would be appreciated

 

Thanks

Simon:)


:)IF YOU ARE BORED WITH LITTLE TO DO:)

My Story - Simon -V- The (SH)Abbey - :!:WON / 19 November 2007:!:

 

SKY TV and the penalty charge - how far will it go?

 

Me V Its4me and Close Premium Finance:!:WON / 28 November 2007:!:

 

IF I CAN HELP, I WILL, IF I DO, THEN PLEASE CLICK ON THE SCALES ON THE LEFT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

………..Do I apply through the N244 process firstly, contact the FOS, or write to the bank? I am just unsure what is the best way to approach this.

Hi,

In reply:-

My approach was to contact the bank by telephone first of all and argue that they had a duty to examine cases of genuine financial hardship.

Take a look at my entry dated 12th October 2007, posted at 13:19

The crux of my argument was to argue, initially during telephone calls, and subsequently in writing that.......

……….my position (confirmed via contact with the FOS and OFT) is merely that the agreement reached between the banks, FSA, FOS and OFT prior to the OFT v banks case being submitted to the High Court at the end of July clearly states that responsibility for determining and resolving a ‘hardship case’ lies with the bank, that the waiver granted to banks, allowing complaints re charges to be held pending the outcome of the High Court case does not apply to ‘hardship’ cases, and banks should therefore seek to identify and resolve such cases; further that where agreement cannot be reached between a customer and a bank the bank must issue a final response letter as a precursor to the FOS seeking to resolve matters.

I argued this point on a no. of occasions, first of all with the dept. that handled bank charges claims (in the case of A and L the Credit control dept., you need to find out who this will be with your bank) and thereafter with the Customer Care Team (likewise re determining the correct dept. in your bank) that took up my case, eventually successfully winning the day on my behalf.

It was necessary to ensure that the latter dept. accepted my arguments (during a telephone call) and once they had done so I faxed them a copy of the letter originally sent to the initial dept, (I have copied this letter into the aforementioned entry, namely the entry dated 12th October 2007, posted at 13:19)

As indicated, if you cannot determine which dept. you need to contact, seek the support of a PA in the Chief Exec.'s office.

 

Whilst you could go down the N244 route ( and to check I believe this would be an application to set the stay aside) it is only worth doing so if you are sure that the Court dealing with your claim is one of the Courts that is proceeding as normal, if it is a Court that is maintaining the stays until the outcome of the High Court case then obviously there is little benefit in pursuing this route. Alternatively, contacting the bank may be a quicker route, as you will not be delayed waiting for your N244 application to be considered.

Re the other option you mentioned, the advice I had from the FOS is that in the present climate you can only seek to gain their support once you have a final written response letter from the bank, and as indicated in several of my submissions, I seemed to succeed by using the request for the aforementioned letter as a bargaining tool with the bank, i.e., consider my case or you MUST provide me with a final written response which I will take to the FOS. Even at this stage (my experience) was that the banks do not wish to involve the FOS, and lo and behold they came up with an offer !

Hope this helps.

All the best, and keep at the buggers !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Following on from this thread I was wondering if some kind soul would have a look at the letter I have prepared and tell me what they think. I have lifted parts from other letters here and adapted it to suit my circumstances but I'm not very happy with my bit- I think it sounds a bit amatuer . I would welcome any changes anyone thinks I should make.

Thanks in anticipation

 

Request for refund of charges on basis of hardship

Further to my initial and recent telephone calls,

I am writing to ask you to consider my claim for a refund of bank charges on the basis of financial hardship.

The financial hardship I am experiencing is: -

I am currently self-employed & my business is suffering serious financial hardship. Unfortunately my business relies on confident public spending and as such has suffered a drop in sales as the ‘credit crunch’ tightens its grip

Matters were made worse by charges continuing to be applied, and most recently, charges taking an account overdrawn, which in itself resulted in further charges.

As you can see form my account, my salary payments have become somewhat sporadic with my business being unable to sustain payments. As a result of this I am unable to keep up with my monthly financial commitments such as bills & loan repayments. Both my husband & I are both employed by my business and therefore he cannot afford to come to my assistance as he is also only being paid sporadically.

 

In total £1088.00 in charges have been deducted from the specified account since 05/10/2007.

Clearly the deduction of such a large overall sum of money has done nothing other that worsen the financial difficulties and hardship experienced.

 

I feel there is nothing to be gained at this point from questioning the level of charges applied; my position is merely that the agreement reached between the banks, FSA, FOS and OFT prior to the OFT v banks case being submitted to the High Court at the end of July clearly states that responsibility for determining and resolving a ‘hardship case’ lies with the bank, that the waiver granted to banks, allowing complaints re charges to be held pending the outcome of the High Court case does not apply to ‘hardship’ cases, and banks should therefore seek to identify and resolve such cases; further that where agreement cannot be reached between a customer and a bank the bank must issue a final response letter as a precursor to the FOS seeking to resolve matters.

 

My further position is that I firmly believe it will be possible for you to address my concerns such that I deem the matter settled negating any need for involvement of the FOS .

· were my legal action against A and L (to recover the charges levied) proceeded to Court I would have been entitled to claim statutory interest at the rate of 8% and Court fees of £120

· respectively£87.04 in interest plus fees of £120.

 

This information and a full list of the charges applied to each account can be found in the attached spreadsheets

 

I therefore look to you agreeing to repay in full all of the charges levied and deducted from the specified accounts, namely, the sum of £1088.00

 

As indicated, I do not, with respect, wish to revisit the question of the fairness of the charges, or of whether some element of each charge was fair.

 

I fully believe that my difficulties meet any definition or criteria of hardship.

 

Many thanks for agreeing to examine matters. I look forward to your reply. I undestand you can consider my case or you MUST provide me with a final written response which I could take to the FOS.

 


I HAVE ALL THE MONEY I'LL EVER NEED - IF I DIE BY 4 O'CLOCK THIS AFTERNOON!!:-|

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok so you are saying you don't need to give the bank specifics of your hardship but actually that they caused the hardship, i am self imployed and have recently lost my income due to changes in the EU, Barclays have started to demand payment of the charges they imposed which has taken me into my overdraft?????

 

 

Thanks for looking

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad to hear that some one has managed to soften the hearts at the former A&l.

 

In my case all my pleadings fell on stony ground both with the A&l and a judge that I had a second hearing with. All the judge said was that I had learnt a lesson well, the lesson being of course to manage one's finances better. And as for pleading on the grounds of money being taken from benefits, this would have to await the outcome of the main hearing as to whether bank charges were illegal or not.

 

So I, like many others, find myself sitting on a fence waiting to see if I/we get anything back, especially now that the A&L has been taken over by another bank.

 

As for hardship, it still exists as without an overdraft it's quite hard to keep all one's balls in the air.

 

Squarebob (another very frustrated client of the (former) A&l).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Glad to hear that some one has managed to soften the hearts at the former A&l.

 

In my case all my pleadings fell on stony ground both with the A&l and a judge that I had a second hearing with. All the judge said was that I had learnt a lesson well, the lesson being of course to manage one's finances better. And as for pleading on the grounds of money being taken from benefits, this would have to await the outcome of the main hearing as to whether bank charges were illegal or not.

 

So I, like many others, find myself sitting on a fence waiting to see if I/we get anything back, especially now that the A&L has been taken over by another bank.

 

As for hardship, it still exists as without an overdraft it's quite hard to keep all one's balls in the air.

 

Squarebob (another very frustrated client of the (former) A&l).

 

 

 

 

Just to let you know on another website (sorry not allowed to link) we have had three successes just this week on hardship claims re- entered by a letter using the new waiver terms. Each were about 65% of the total claim as goodwill gestures. one was for £3000 plus.

 

Keep on tryng!


Please note I am not an expert - I am not offering opinions or legal help - Please use all the information provided on the site in FAQ- step by step instructions and library- thanks Jansus:)

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif

offer from A&L 24/8/07 - after case stayed

 

"What makes the desert beautiful is that somewhere it hides a well." - Antione de Saint Exupery

 

 

PROUD TO BE AN ORANGE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no questions on my post then ?


Please note I am not an expert - I am not offering opinions or legal help - Please use all the information provided on the site in FAQ- step by step instructions and library- thanks Jansus:)

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif

offer from A&L 24/8/07 - after case stayed

 

"What makes the desert beautiful is that somewhere it hides a well." - Antione de Saint Exupery

 

 

PROUD TO BE AN ORANGE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a question although not on Jansus's post.

 

I was successful with a claim against Clydesdale Bank and moved to A+L. A long story short but I only moved because I had dealt with a branch in Scotland (I live in Kent) and they weren't even allowed to give me my balance over the phone. The internet banking service is not only completely over the top in terms of their attempts at security but they insist you provide all your critical security information into a single page at once so if your transmission is intercepted you have just provided a fraudster with your entire life. I wrote to CB about this and they maintained their system was faultless, ignorant pillocks.

 

Sorry, just an asides. My question is, how can the A+L benefit from a court case they are not involved in? They contribute nothing to the process but stand to gain everything should the banks claims be upheld.

 

Can I steal a car and be immune from being caught again until another case of my choice is concluded? In which case I'll nominate the biggest car exporting [problem] I can find that's so complicated it will take years to reach a conclusion. In the meantime i'll drive a succession of very expensive, stolen cars past the Cop shop on the way to the continent where I'll flog them for vast fortunes. Well...........the banks seem to get away with it.


Been screwed by banks all my life, it's payback time!!!!

 

OK as I seem to be handing out advice here I guess I had better add a disclaimer to my signature, Caro, hope you don't mind but I nicked yours.

 

Advice & opinions given by Dread are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After having my claim stayed at CCC I tried the hardship route with the FOS late last year, they contacted the bank and I had a promt reply from A&L saying they were looking into it then on the 8th Jan 09 I received another letter announcing that they "believe our charges are fair and reasonable and are satisfied they have been applied correctly to your account..." "Although we appreciate your comments, we understand that the Social Security Act 1992 does not prevent financial institutions from applying charges to accounts where a customer may be in receipt of benefits." yada yada not their fault "Having reviewed your account, our records confirm that account facilities were withdrawn in April 2007 and the final debt balance of £192.01 was settled by a refund of fees to enable the final closure of the account. We are satisfied that these actions were appropriate at that time although we do fully sympathise with your current situation, we hope you understand we are unable to consider a refund of remaining fees until the outcome of the test case is known." Does anyone think it's worth me getting in touch with the FOS again or should I just wait out my stay at court? I'm rubbish at all the legal stuff surrounding this and with my 'fibrofog' it feels like I'm banging my head against a brick wall and that admitting defeat is my only option. Any advice received gratefully!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...