Natwest Business Account question

[jax1964]

I am trying to claim charges incurred on my Limited Company Business account, they are in excess of £10,000. The letter I received from Natwest says:

 

'We are concerned that the OFT has publicly called into question the setting of charges applied to other products, including current accounts. The OFT has restricted its investigation to credit cards & made no attempt to consult with RBS or the industry in relation to other, entirely different products. In addition, the OFT has expressly stated the business accounts fall outwith the scope of its review, as they operate under different terms & conditions from personal accounts.'

 

Can anyone advise me - does this affect me trying to claim back my charges from a business account.

 

Many thanks

[jax1964]

Can anyone help me with this?

[cumbria123]

Usual reply, I wouldn`t think this would prevent you from going for it. Are you a sole trader.....?, ( better if you are), then it might be treated as a personal account.

Penalty charges are penalty charges whether you are a business or not. The basis for challenging is the same.

 

Sorry missed the LTD Co. bit

[jax1964]

Thank you cumbria123. I will go for it then.

[Shelty]

how have you got on with this claim ? I've started a claim for a bus' a/c aswell, having won for the personal a/c & cc's already.

[jax1964]

Hi Shelty, I haven't had the money to put to court yet but have been corresponding with Natwest throughout. Am going to try to claim contractual interest which I am in the process of working out before I send a final ltr to Natwest. Then I am hoping to put it to Court very soon.

 

Good luck with your claim.

[Shelty]

In any of your letters to them thus far have you told them you'll claim Contractual? I haven't in either my prelim or LBA & hope I havent missed a trick !

[jax1964]

I have mentioned interest in both letters but so far I have only estimated the amount. So I am going to use a different spreadsheet to work it out properly.

I don't think you have missed the boat, if you want to try and claim the contractual interest, just mention it in your next letter that along with the unlawful charges you will also be claiming the contractual interest of £xxxx, so long as you do it before you put the claim into Court, I can't see there should be a problem.

[Deller]

Your claim amount can be ammended right up until the point of actually submitting your claim through the court process, so if you havn't included the contractual interest yet but still wish to do so then you can update your schedule before filing your claim.

[coolchilli]

Hi, I had a very similar response from HSBC:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/hsbc-bank/49814-radclyffe-hsbc.html

 

Everything I've seen so far is that penalty charges are penalty charges, the principle is one of English Contract Law and not of whether the bank treats you as a business or personal customer.

[jax1964]

My sentiments exactly - we are not disputing the terms and conditions of a business account we are disputing the amount of the penalties charged. What difference does it make if you have a personal account or a business account - a penalty is a penalty. Do they think their liquidated losses are more if a chq/dd is unpaid from a business account?

[andrew1]

Hi Jax, Only just noticed your thread but business (Ltd co) accounts are no different. In fact if you look at the cases used in the claims from years ago they were mostly Ltd companies. It's the law - they cannot charge a penalty that exceeds their liquidated loss. Ie - what it costs. I claimed against the co-op and they just paid up without question on my Ltd Co buisness account and I've got a couple more I'm doing for a friend. Lets hope yours pay up too without the necessity of going to court.. Have you tried just ringing them up and saying that you'd prefer to negotiate a settlement than run up their legal costs? That's what I did after sending out my Prelim letter.

[jax1964]

Hi Andrew. Thank you for your comments its good to hear of some successes on Ltd Co account. I might try giving them a ring.

 

Jax

[tumble]

I have a ltd company account with Natwest who refunded £945 on lba. However i received no reply on personnel account and have issued mcol which has been acknowledged. I have a two sole trader accounts which i held prior to ltd and they have five days to respond to s.a.r .

[jax1964]

Thats very interesting Tumble. Amazing that they pay out on a Ltd Co. account after a LBA and yet they are giving me so much bull. I know the amounts are very different but that should make no difference.

 

Keep going with your personal account I had no where near as many problems getting a full settlement out of NatWest with my Advantage Gold account or credit card. You will win.

[innocent]

Hi there

 

Won my personal account and credit card account money today, gr8!!!!

 

Already thinking now of business accountm but I have a question???

 

 

I had a limited company for a short space of time.... now closed

 

If I claim for "innocent limited" will the cheque say "innocent limited" and not "innocent"????

 

I was 100% share holder in the limited company

 

(think the bank account having checked may have been set up as a sole trader by mistake anyway??)

 

Help appreciated

 

Innocent

 

 

 

(p.s. love the contractual interest idea this time)

[andrew1]

Hi there

 

Won my personal account and credit card account money today, gr8!!!!

 

Already thinking now of business accountm but I have a question???

 

 

I had a limited company for a short space of time.... now closed

 

If I claim for "innocent limited" will the cheque say "innocent limited" and not "innocent"????

 

I was 100% share holder in the limited company

 

(think the bank account having checked may have been set up as a sole trader by mistake anyway??)

 

Help appreciated

 

Innocent

 

 

 

(p.s. love the contractual interest idea this time)

 

Hi innocent, congrats on you win - good feeling isn't it?

 

Ltd Co. I would imagine that the payment would be in the name of the company. However, this may depend on how the company was closed. Was it liquidated with creditors or just would down to nothing and eventually deregistered?

 

If it were liquidated then funds would invariably go to the liquidator. Otherwise as a 100% shareholder there shouldn't be any reason IMO why it shouldn't come to you as it was your money that kept the company going.

[innocent]

It went down to nothing and de-registered....

 

But I suppose Im asking: how can I cash a cheque registered to a de-registered limited business???

 

thats ultimately (but obviously confident of a win )

 

 

PS ITS AN AMAZING FEELING... WISH IT COULD BE MORE OFTEN

 

Innocent

[innocent]

Um preview innocent

 

I meant a cheque addressed to a de-registered company....

[andrew1]

Um preview innocent

 

I meant a cheque addressed to a de-registered company....

 

It might be worth opening a new account ! It won't be any use otherwise. Trouble is when a company is closed it's dead and you can't pay a dead man!

 

I am in a similar position with a friend of mine who closed his Ltd company down in the same way as yours but because the bank of Ireland ran him to the ground in charges. I'm trying to get those back for him, but It's a little difficult trying to get the legalities of who the cheques made out to as he invested his own money when cashflow problems hit him - the bank just kept rolling out the charges it crippled him. I'm not finished trying to get the correct answer but it is tricky.

[jax1964]

Put my claim against Natwest to Court but had no acknowledgement. Phoned Natwest and they said they had received it but had forwarded it to the local office (right next door to the Court as it happens) for them to deal with. Requested judgement and got it.No payment rec'd so rang Natwest who put me through to their Litigation Department. They said they had not rec'd the Court Application and therefore hadn't acknowledged it. They said they would put in to have judgement set-aside, but, as we were within our rights to have sent the bailiffs in and have called them before doing this, they appreciated it and would check the figures and then pay out. Rec'd yesterday from Cobbetts copy of application to have judgement set aside and a copy of their defence and a CPR 18 request.

 

My application and judgement was through the Hitchin County Court, however Cobbetts are trying to have the judgement set aside through the Northampton County court - can they do this or do they have to go through Hitchin?

 

Can I object to the judgement being set aside?

[Guest NATTIE]

the advice normally given is not to dispute the set aside because as they delay payment, the interest daily stacks up so they will be paying more to you. Nice:D

[jax1964]

CPR Part 18 request states.

 

1. In your claim you state: The Defendant debited charges and interest in respect of purported breaches of contract"

 

2. Please provide the following particulars in support of your claim:

2.1 In relation to each charge please identify (a) the date when the charge was charged; (b) the amount of the same; and © the reason(s) given for the charging of the same.

2.2 In relation to each charge, please clarify the following: (a) is it the case of the Claimant the came should not have been charged?; (b) If yes; please explain why the claimant contends that the same should not have been charged? © If no; is it the case of the Claimant that the same should not have been charged in this amount? (d) If yes; please explain why the Claimant contends that the same should not have been charged in this amount and identfy the sum the Claimant contends should have been charged. (e) If no; please state the claimant's case.

 

3. In your claim you state that the charges are; "unenforceable under the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and at Common Law".

 

4. Please specify all of the facts relied on by the Claimany in support of the contentions in paragraph 3 above, and in particular please identify (a) the section(s) of Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 ("UCTA 1977"); and (b) the principles of common law relied upon by the Claimant in alleging that the contractual provision(s) referred to are unenforceable. Please identify the contractual provision(s) that he Claimant alleges are unenforceable by reference to UCTA.

 

I understand part 2.1 - this is another copy of my schedule of charges, but need help with parts 2.2 and 4. Would be very grateful for any help. I should also like to send them my CPR part 18 request asking for disclosure of charges etc - can anyone suggest how this might be worded and anything else I should request.

[jax1964]

Can anyone help me get my head around this defence and what I need to do now - ant help is really appreciated:

 

The Defence from Cobbetts:

 

1. THe claim form does not include a Statement of Truth signed by the Calimants. The Court is invited to exercise their case anagement Powers under Practice Directions 7.1 of the Civil Procedure Rules to strike out the Particulars of Claim in their entirity and dismiss the Claim or make other Case Management Directions as are considered appropriate. the following Defence is entered strikly without prejudice to the foregoing contention.

 

2. THis defence is filed and served without prejudice to the Defendants case that the Particulars of claim do not disclose reasonable grounds for bringing a claim against the claimant to recover the bank charges (and interest thereon) referred to in the Particulars of Claim or any other sum(s). In the event that the Claim is not properly particularised then theDEfendant will apply to strike out the claim and/or for summary judgement in respect of the same.

 

3. Without prejudice to the non-admission set out in the foregoing paragraph, if and to the extent that the Claimant proves the allegation that the Defendant debited charges to the Claimant's bank account, insofar as such charges were debited on a date or daets more than 6 years prior to the issue of this claim, any remedy in respect of the same, whether damages, restitution or otherwise, is barred by the operation of the Limitation Act 1980 and/or the doctrine of laches and the defendant will apply to strike out this aspect of the claim and/or for the summary judgement.

 

4. No admissions are made as to what charges have been debited to the Claimant's bank account.

 

5. The Claiamnt is put to strict proof of each and every charge the subject of the claim and must identify in respect of each charge (a) the date the same was debited (b) the amount of the same and © the description applied to the charge.

 

6. In relation to the allegation that tyeh contractual provisions pursuant to which the charges have been applied are unenforceable by virtue of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 (UCTA 1977) and/or the common law, and the Claimant is required to identify:

6.1 (a) the section(s) of The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 ("UCTA 1977"); and (b) the principles of common law relied upon by the Claimant in alleging that the contractual provision(s) referred to are unenforceable and

 

6.2 the contractual provision(s) that he Claimant alleges are unenforceable by reference to UCTA.

 

Until such time as these sections/provisions are identified the Defendant cannot plead to the allegation referred to in paragraph 6 above. Ther Defendant therefore reserves its right to plead further to the allegations once (and if) the Claimant identifies the relevant contractual information.

 

7. To assist the Claimant with the proper particularisation of the claim(s), the Defendant serves with his defence a request made pursuant to CPR part 18. If the Claimant fails to provide the particulars requested in the time stipulated and/or the defects with the claim(s) (referred to in paragraph 1 above) remain then the Defendant will aply to the Court for (among other things) an order striking out the claim.

 

8. Pending the proper particularisation of the Claim(s) the Defendant is unable to plead to the Claimant's claim(s) beyond at this stage denying that the Defendant is liable to the Claimant as alleged in the Claim or at all. The Defendant reserves its right to amend this Defence to plead further to the Claimant's claim(s) once or if the claimant properly particularises the same.

 

9. SAve as hereinbefore appears the defendant joins the Claimant on the claim(s) and denies that it is liable to the Claimant as alleged or at all.

[jax1964]

I have managed to do most of the CPR part 18 request but can anyone help with point 4.

 

Please specify all of the facts relied on by the Claimant in support of the contentions in paragraph 3 above, and in particular please identify (a) the section(s) of Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 ("UCTA 1977"); and (b) the principles of common law relied upon by the Claimant in alleging that the contractual provision(s) referred to are unenforceable. Please identify the contractual provision(s) that the Claimant alleges are unenforceable by reference to UCTA.