Lloyds claim - **WON _ Amazing win based on UTCCR's**

[orfoster]

They did two lots because I appealed to them following their reply, some interest and charges and then they did more charges and interest too during the period.

[orfoster]

Here is a copy of my credit file as of date, it still registers an '8' and the default marker was actually placed way after my account fell over the overdraft limit, we are talking 12 months +.

 

Despite being in a payment arrangement with them.

 

The ICO tell me that my complaint is being dealt with but hasn't been allocated yet, they've given me a reference number but have said it could be another week before its allocated and another 8 weeks before its dealt with.

 

My complaint with them is on the basis of the letter I sent to Lloyds - its all in line with their technical guidance.

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]45355[/ATTACH]

[matttye]

Seems like they should have placed 6 months' worth of arrangement to pay markers and then defaulted you (if you didn't return to the contractual payments), which is pretty similar to what they have done.

 

Have you read the guidance on arrangements to pay? http://www.ico.org.uk/for_organisations/sector_guides/~/media/documents/library/Data_Protection/Detailed_specialist_guides/default_tgn_version_v3%20%20doc.ashx

[orfoster]

Here is the basis which I've lodged my complaint with the ICO -

 

1. ICO Guidance states (17) “Lenders should not file a default where there is a genuine and agreed variation in the payment schedule” I have had a payment arrangement in place since April 2009 – at no time has the bank advised me that this arrangement is unacceptable, as such I regard this as a genuine and agreed variation in the payment schedule.

 

2. ICO Guidance states (17) “In all cases it is important that lenders and debt advisers explain to borrowers how their credit reference files will reflect the changed situation. This is necessary to avoid misunderstandings and disputes about what a customer has agreed to and what will be reported to a credit reference agency as a result of variations in payment schedules”. At no time has Lloyds TSB or its external agents advised me that my arrangement will impact on my Credit File as though no payment was being made.

 

3. ICO Guidance states (19) “Where a rescheduling of this type breaks down, a default may be filed when the total value of the arrears is equivalent to three monthly payments under the original terms. However, this should not result in the customer being placed in a worse position than someone who has made no effort to pay whatsoever.” Despite the fact that our arrangement has not broken down, Lloyds TSB have put me in a worse position than someone who has made no effort to pay whatsoever.

 

4. ICO Guidance (22) clarifies the position relating to customers who enter into Debt Management Plans. I note that despite my effort to pay there is no reflection of this on my Credit Report.

 

There was no default lodged within 6 months from when I went over my overdraft so am I right in saying as Brig says above its unfair?

[orfoster]

bump

[orfoster]

ah

 

poss not, unless they have continued to treat you unfairly since

and these are the 'cause of action' .

 

dx

 

Hi dx,

 

Sorry what does this mean?

 

They did apply charges after BCOBs came in (not much) but still did and charged interest despite complaining over the years they only refunded the charges after entering the DMP in April 13.

 

Does this give me grounds for a BCOBs complaint?

 

Oli

[dx100uk]

yes

 

they've continued to treat you unfairly

 

so give it a go

 

dx

[orfoster]

Ok, I did send something along the lines of a BCOBs complaint a while ago and they just ignored it because they sent their final response.

 

The complaints in with the FOS now and is going up to an Ombudsman.

 

If it doesn't go forward what options for court action do I have? I've heard and didn't quite understand about BCOBs that you can't take court action around them directly?

[orfoster]

Do we have any BCOBs POC's for charges anywhere?

[citizenB]

I don't think we do, orfoster

 

If you want to draft something, I will ask some of the guys on Site team to have a look for you.

[orfoster]

I shall have a stab at it later on. Cheers

[orfoster]

Here is what I have drafted so far (any good?)

 

My issue is that the charges I am claiming for are pre-BCOB but some charges they have only recently refunded in April 13 have caused me to bring the claim for the lot, how can I get this in?

 

1. The Claimant has a Lloyds TSB Current Account: edited Sort Code: edited "the Account") with the Defendant. Which was opened on or around April 2006

2. The Accounts are governed by the Defendant’s Personal Banking Terms and Conditions (“the contract”)

3. During the period in which the Account has been operating the Defendant debited numerous charges to the Account in respect of purported breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant and also charged interest on the charges once applied.

4. The Claimant understands that the Defendant contends that the charges were debited in accordance with the terms of the contract between itself and the Claimant.

5. A list of the charges applied is attached to these particulars of claim “the Schedule”.

 

6. The defendant is statutorily bound by Financial Conduct Authority regulations – Banking Conduct of Business rules (BCOB) contained in the FCA Handbook, implemented under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 “the regulations”.

7. The Claimant thus contends that:

a) During the period of 1 April 2008 – 1 August 2008 the Defendant levied £586+, the Claimant claims that these charges are excessive and unfair in accordance with BCOB 5.1.1 “A firm must provide a service in relation to a retail banking service which is prompt, efficient and fair to a banking customer”.

b) The Claimant claims that the Defendant significantly added to a period of financial difficulty.

c) The Claimant advised the Defendant in April 2007 that these charges were unfair, the Defendant subsequently marked its records showing the Claimant as “hardship”.

d) BCOB 5.1.4 further states “Principle 6 requires a firm to pay due regard to the interests of its customers and to treat them fairly. In particular, a firm should deal fairly with a banking customer whom it has reason to believe is in financial difficulty”.

e) The Claimant claims that the Defendant had reason to believe the Claimant was in financial difficulty by the excessive charges levied during (a) and prior banking records marked as ©.

8. The Claimant entered a Debt Management Plan in August 2009 in order to manage the financial difficulties the Claimant was facing.

9. During this period the Defendant continued to levy charges and apply interest.

10. In April 2013 the Claimant complained to the Defendant about the fairness of the charges applied during difficulties.

11. The Defendant agreed to refund charges applied from the period of August 2009 to present date.

[citizenB]

orfoster, I will flag your post for site team to comment on.

[orfoster]

orfoster, I will flag your post for site team to comment on.

 

Thanks, no one has been in yet but I'm sure they will be.

 

Its just a first draft to see if I'm on the right track.

[citizenB]

 

Too much CB...all his hand is dealt....brief synopsis and the reasoning (breach of BCOBs and or unfair relationship)...total amount claimed + Sec69 interest.

 

Here you go orfoster.. apparently less is more, so you need to pare it down

[orfoster]

Here you go orfoster.. apparently less is more, so you need to pare it down

 

Thanks both.

 

I am rewriting now (I have also found a template on the site here too http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?833-BCOBS-particulars-of-claim-template).

 

You mention unfair relationship, how is that claimed? Under BCOBs?

[orfoster]

Breach of Statutory Duty

The defendant is a firm regulated by the FSA under the Financial Service and Markets Act 2000 and as such is subject to the Banking:Conduct of Business Regulations (BCOB) 2009 which requires inter alia that firms treat their customers fairly (R.5.1.1).

 

The claimant is a consumer as defined in the FSA Sourcebook

 

From the [XXXDATE] to [XXXdate] the defendant supplied current account services to the claimant - account reference number [XXXXXXXXX]

 

In breach of their statutory duty to the claimant, the defendant acted unfairly in that they throughout a period of financial difficulty continued to levy excessive charges and interest from the Claimant with no regard to the Claimants financial difficulty.

 

Description of Unfairness

 

The defendant's treatment of the claimant was unfair, not least because:-

 

The claimant has held an account with the defendant for XX years

The charges and interest levied from the account added substantially to a period of financial difficulty

The charges levied from the account total £838 and were levied throughout a short period of time during which the Claimant faced financial difficulty.

The Defendant marked the Claimants credit file in default on 24 December 2010 despite the Defendant alleging that a breach occurred a significant amount of time before, making the default marker inaccurate and unfair due to the added amount of time it will be present on the Claimants credit file.

 

And the claimant claims £838 compensation for actual loss plus interest pursuant to s.69 County Courts Act 1984. Total £1249.59

 

 

I believe that the fact laid out in this particulars of claim are true

 

Here are the amended version, most of the detail I hope is stripped out.

 

Where do I add about unfair relationship?

 

Cheers

[orfoster]

NB: All of the charges being claimed are before BCOB came in but I'd want to argue that they continued to levy charges and interest after 1 Nov 2009 and that's the cause of action. Does that make sense?

[citizenB]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?826-Re-Fairness-work-in-progress

 

There are some instances of unfairness in the comments under the above article.

 

I will bring the amended version to the attention of andyorch for comments.

 

He might also be able to advise on where to insert the unfair relationship

[citizenB]

Here you go, orfoster

 

 

 

 

That's a lot better CB...if he is using BCOBs as the basis of his claim he better not to use Sec 140a Unfair Relation as well ..I merely suggested it as an either or.

[orfoster]

Thanks both,

 

What about this? Then I think I'm day to issue.

 

 

NB: All of the charges being claimed are before BCOB came in but I'd want to argue that they continued to levy charges and interest after 1 Nov 2009 and that's the cause of action. Does that make sense?

[citizenB]

Ah right.. missed that.. will ask for you.

[orfoster]

Thanks. There is more in the rest of the thread about it

[citizenB]

S140a only came in in October 08 which replaced extortionate credit bargain regime of the old CCA1974.The transition will cover all agreements.....unless the debt was repaid or settled before 6th April 2008

 

 

If all the charges were before BCOBs then it may be prudent to use S140a along side BCOBs.

 

I have asked andyorch to look in and answer any further questions. I wont be around for much longer today and will be having a few days off from tomorrow.

[orfoster]

Ok thanks both.

 

How would I write that in to the POCs? Can Andy help me do a short paragraph for it?

 

Cheers