Alphageek Vs Littlewoods

[Alphageek]

Totalled up the charges and they come to just over £100. Not much but I guess it's my money.

 

I have never paid any interest to this company so I was going to complete my SOC spreadsheet at 0% in the interest section. But, can I claim the interest rate it would have cost me to borrow the money, from my bank for example, they have taken?

 

It only makes ~£20 difference either way.

[Alphageek]

I have included interest at 18.9%.

 

Prelim printed and away in the mail tomorrow via RM RD.

[slick132]

TeeHee !!

 

Now why ain't I surprised at that.

 

Good luck

[Hopeful1]

But, can I claim the interest rate it would have cost me to borrow the money, from my bank for example, they have taken?

 

I have included interest at 18.9%.

 

Prelim printed and away in the mail tomorrow via RM RD.

 

Good move

[Alphageek]

Prelim delivered and signed for on 10/07/08.

[IdaInFife]

subbing

[Alphageek]

Received a letter [dated 15/7/08] from their Complaints Management Team which includes this - "We note your comment regarding your request not to treat this as a complaint. However the responsibility for the issues raised fall within the Complaints Management Team"

 

So at least they can read.

 

Another couple of days and I'll send them an LBA to give them something else to read

[Alphageek]

LBA away tomorrow:

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

LETTER BEFORE ACTION

 

I am very disappointed that you have failed to respond positively to my letter of the 9th July 2008.

 

This letter constitutes a formal request for you to repay £116.01 in late payment charges as listed in the attached schedule, plus interest of £15.50 based on my bank’s authorised borrowing rate of 18.9% compounded, which is what it would have cost me to replace this money, making a total of £131.51.

 

I am enclosing an up to date copy of the schedule of the charges which I am claiming. I have already sent you a copy of this in my original letter of the 9th July 2008 which you received on the 10th July 2009.

 

I require repayment in full of this money. If you do not comply fully within 14 days then I shall begin a claim against you for the full amount plus interest plus my costs and without further notice.

 

Should the action go to allocation, I will be seeking an order from the court for Littlewoods Finance Company Limited to disclose the actual costs to them due to breaches of contract. Knowledge of the actual cost base will allow the court to determine if the charges levied are in excess of actual costs. The law on penalties in contracts is well established and this simple arithmetic comparison will settle the issue.

 

Once Court proceedings are issued, they will be seen through to their conclusion.

 

Yours faithfully,

Alphageek

 

Enc/ Schedule of charges

[Hopeful1]

Nice letter...

 

.....*the Hopeful1 quickly copy and pastes letter into her littlewoods folder*

[Alphageek]

Your item with reference xxx was delivered from our LIVERPOOL Delivery Office on 07/08/08 .

[Alphageek]

I received a letter from them a while back, dated 20th Aug 2008.

 

Further to our letter of 15th July 2008 concerning your complaint in relation to administration charges applied to your account, we are proceeding with the investigation of your complaint and will aim to provide you with a final response by 4th September 2008.

 

In the meantime should you wish to discuss your complaint futher, please do not hesitate to call us on 0844 811 8515.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

UNSIGNED

 

Complaints Management Team

Contact Number: 0844 811 8515

 

Nothing since.

 

Has anyone else had this set of circumstances with Littlewoods? I know it well past the date for issuing an N1 but I don't want to spend time on it tonight, file at Court with the fee only for them to write to me this week saying "here is a refund!"

[OLIVE.FAMILY]

Hi there Alphageek.

 

i am at the same place as yuy. Sent LBA a month not heard a dicky bird

 

olives xx

[Alphageek]

Hi Olives. Did they tell you they could not find a CCA as well?

[OLIVE.FAMILY]

No I seemed to be the only person n the world that signed one of these bloomin things with Littlewoods. I have gone for charges and extra care advantage as it will clear my debt and give me some extra. They seem to think that they are invincible because they were not part of a complaints bureau at the time so they say i cant go to the FOS. Nevermind said I, I will take it to court instead. I am stuck on the POC though

 

olives xx

[Alphageek]

Received this from them:

 

Further to our letter of 20th Auugust 2008 concerning your complaint in relation to administration charges applied to your account. Please accept our apologies that you have found it necessary to complain.

 

I would like to apologise for the length of time taken to resolve this matter and fully understand the frustration this delay may have caused. The service you have received (in terms of a timely response) was not of the standard our company strives to offer and we must emphasise that it is not our policy for responses to customer complaints to be delayed in this way. We aim for the highest standard possible from our advisors and we apologise for any distress this delay may have caused to you.

 

In the interests of improving the service we offer to our customers, all complaints received are taken very seriously and a full investigation is always carried out.

 

Our understanding of your complaint is as follows:

 

You dispute the administration charges applied to your account and you are requesting a full refund including interest charged on the administration.

 

We have made a full investigation, assessed your concerns and can confirm our findings as follows:

 

Please find enclosed a list of all administration charges applied to your account.

 

It is made clear in the "Your account" section at the back of your book that a charge is applied should you fail to make a payment, and as such I am satisfied that the charges applied to your account are fair and reasonable.

 

We are aware of the statement of the Office of Fair Trading's (OFT) position regarding fair charges. For the reasons given above, we are satisfied that the charges applied to your account are justifiable in accordance with the views of the OFT and are fair within the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations.

 

It is important to make your payments in accordance with your statement dates and amounts every 28 days. You should make your payment at least 4 days prior to the requested statement date. This is explained along with various payment methods on the reverse of your monthly statement.

 

Under the circumstances the company is not prepared to remove any administration charges from your account.

 

I can confirm that this letter concludes our investigations into your complaint. I hope our explanation meets with your satisfaction however, if this is not the case, you can refer the matter to the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS). Please note that this service requires you to refer your complaint to them within 6 months from the date of this letter. They will require you to confirm that we have issued a final response and to that end you may consider this letter as ow final response. Enclosed is a leaflet

which explains the FOS in more detail.

Their enclosed list of all administration charges applied to the account differs slightly to what I calculated from the data sent to me in the S.A.R - (Subject Access Request).

 

Time for an N1 then.

[slick132]

Hi Alpha,

 

Clearly, they don't understand who they're dealing with !

 

[Alphageek]

Clearly not. They'll soon get the message!

[OLIVE.FAMILY]

Oh goodie somebody else going to court for charges. They are going to have a shock. After no reply from my LBA I am getting my N1 ready for them as well.

 

olives xx

[Alphageek]

I will be ready to issue against Littlewoods next week. Would anyone like to share their POC with me?

[Alphageek]

No-one wants to share?

 

Oh, ok then, let's see if this makes sense:

 

IN THE HUSTON, TEXAS COUNTY COURT

 

BETWEEN

 

ALPHAGEEK

Claimant

 

and

 

LITTLEWOODS FINANCE COMPANY LTD

 

Defendant

 

 

PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

 

1.The Claimant entered into an agreement (“The Agreement”) with the Defendant on or around 21/02/1921, whereby the Defendant was to supply goods to the Claimant under a running credit account, Account no 000000001 ("The Account").

 

2.The Agreement essentially consisted of the Defendant providing the Claimant with a mail order catalogue which would allow the Claimant to make purchases. In return the Defendant was entitled to charge the price of the goods supplied.

 

3.The Agreement was a Regulated Agreement for the purposes of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

4.At all material times the contract was subject to the Defendant’s standard terms and conditions which could be varied from time to time.

SUMMARY

 

5.Throughout the course of the Agreement, the Defendant has added numerous default charges to the Account for the Claimant’s failure to make the minimum payment on the due date and or for exceeding the credit limit and or if a payment is returned. (Full particulars are set out in schedule 2).

 

6.The default charges were applied in accordance with the standard terms of The Agreement which were:

a. A penalty payable on breach of contract and thus unenforceable:

 

and

 

b. An unfair term under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (“The Regulations”) and therefore not binding on the Claimant.

 

7.On 19 Julvembre 1923, I requested a copy of the contract under which the Defendant was asserting its rights to levy default charges. (Exhibit xxxxxxxx 01)

 

8.On 27 Julvembre 1923, the Defendant admitted it held no such contract. (Exhibit xxxxxxx 02)

 

9.The Claimant is accordingly entitled to repayment of the sums wrongly added to the Account.

THE CHARGES

 

10.(a) The Claimant was to pay the minimum payment by the due date as notified in the monthly statements.

 

(b) In addition the Defendant was entitled to charge default fees (“the Charges”) where the Claimant exceeded the Limit, did not pay on the due date or had a payment returned. The Charges are currently £12 for each transgression.

CONTRACT PENALTIES

 

11.The Charges were payable on breach of contract by the Claimant.

 

12.The amount of the Charges exceeded any genuine pre-estimate of the damage which would have been suffered by the Defendant in relation to the Claimant’s transgressions.

 

13. In the premises the Charges were punitive and a penalty and thus unenforceable at common law.

THE REGULATIONS

 

14.At all material times the Claimant was a consumer within the Regulations.

 

15.At all material times the terms of the Agreement providing for the Charges were unfair within regulation 5 of the Regulations in that contrary to the requirement of good faith they caused a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations to the detriment of the Claimant.

 

16.Without prejudice to the burden of proof, the Claimant will refer to the following matters in support of the contention that the terms are to be assessed as unfair as at the time of the conclusion of the Agreement, and of each revision to the Standard Terms.

 

a.The terms relating to Charges were standard terms; they would not be individually negotiated.

 

b.The Charges were a penalty for breach of contract.

 

c.The Charges exceeded the costs which the Bank could have expected to incur in dealing with the exceeding of the credit limit, late payment or returned payment.

 

d.Accordingly the Charges were a disproportionate charge incurred by the Claimant for their failure to meet their contractual obligation and thus within the ambit of Schedule 2 (1) (e) of the Regulations and indicative of an unfair term.

 

e.As the Defendant knew, the Charges were of subsidiary importance to the customer in the context of the Agreement as a whole and would not influence the making of the Agreement.

 

f.As the Defendant knew, the Claimant had no means of assessing the fairness of the Charges.

 

g. In the premises, the effect of the Charges would be prejudicial to the customer who incurred them, and cause an imbalance in the relations of the parties to the Agreement by subordinating the customer’s interests to those of the Defendant in a way which was inequitable.

 

17.Without prejudice to the burden of proof, the Claimant will contend that the terms imposing the Charges are not core terms under regulation 6 of the Regulations and relies on the following matters.

 

a.The assessment of fairness does not relate to terms which define the main or core subject matter of the Agreement.

 

b.The assessment of fairness does not relate to the adequacy of the price or remuneration as against the goods or services supplied in exchange (in other words, whether or not the relevant services were value for money).

 

c.The Charges are correctly described as default charges by the Defendant in the key information provided to new customers.

 

18.By reason of the said matters the terms were not binding under regulation 8 of the Regulations.

 

19.The Defendant wrongly applied Charges to the Account totalling some 6 shillings and 4d between 26-Maypril-1923 and 21-Jan-1925. Particulars appear from Schedule 2.

 

20.On 19 December 2007 the Claimant demanded repayment of the sums wrongly applied.

 

21.The Defendant has not repaid them or any of them.

Compound Interest

 

22. The Claimant submits that the Defendant would be unjustly enriched if the Claimant’s entitlement was limited to the statutory rate of simple interest. The Defendant, a powerful financial institution, has had use of the sums wrongfully and unlawfully gained by way of penalty charges levied to the Claimants account, over a period of up to 90 years. The fundamental core of the business of the Defendant is to acquire funds and profit from those funds in the form of interest by lending at commercial compounded interest rates. Therefore, it is the Claimants submission that the sums wrongfully and unlawfully acquired from the Claimant by way of penalty charges would over the considerable time they have been in the Defendants wrongful possession have earned considerable profit by virtue of commercial rates of compounded interest charged by the Defendant.

 

23.Therefore for complete restitution to occur the Claimant seeks an award of compound interest at my bank’s authorised borrowing rate of 18.9% per annum compounded. The Claimant submits that it is unconscionable that the Defendant may be allowed to profit in any way from unlawful, wrongful and unauthorised use of the Claimants funds, and that compound interest at the rate claimed is necessary to provide an equitable remedy.

And the Claimant claims

 

24.A declaration that the sums totalling 6 shillings and 4d have wrongly been applied to the Account.

 

25.Payment of the said sum of 6 shillings and 4d and interest of threepenny.

 

26.Interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of payment of the Charge to date in the sum of £200,765.12, and at the daily rate of £6.03 until judgment or sooner payment.

 

27.Court costs of £30.

 

I believe that the facts stated in these particulars, comprising of 371 pages, are true. (apart from the bits I have obviously made up)

 

Dated

 

 

 

Signed

 

[OLIVE.FAMILY]

This looks great,although saying that, I have no knowledge of this sort of thing and in ALL honestly was kind of hoping that somebody would post a POC so I could get some sort of idea of what to do myself. So well done Alphageek and keep us posted

 

olives xx

[version302003]

here is a link to some poc's that dpick used for another catalogue compamy if it helps

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/104426-dpick-oh-reliable-collections-2.html#post1120432

[Alphageek]

Thanks Version, I'll check that link out.

[Alphageek]

Having read dpick's case and a few more threads, I am going to re-write the POC over the weekend.

 

OLIVE.FAMILY: Have they admitted to you that they don't hold a CCA?

Edited February 21, 2009 by Alphageek
spolling!

[slick132]

Haha, no surprises here then !!

 

Way to go, Alpha...........