Reclaiming Cascading Bank Charges

[adridude]

Ok not to sound dumb but:

 

Dear Sir/Madam.

 

Re: Claim Number # (which I assume is the claim no of the CCJ)

 

I today received the claim forms for the above and note your position.

 

Today I have retuned form N9 outlining that I intend to defend the claim, for your information my defence will be on the grounds that all or part of the claim is money owing from plenty charges and that the law surrounding them is in question.

You should beware that I will be making a counterclaim to recover all plenty charges imposed on account number 12-12-12 12345678 (the account) in the last six years.

 

I asked HSBC (or Lloyds) on the 27th July for information under the data protection act (copy enclosed) for information relating to the plenty charges imposed on the account, as this will be paramount to both my defence and counterclaim I understand they have 40 days in which to send the information but since this matter has now processed to court, I ask that you ask your client forward the information requested to you with all haste for you can send them to myself for I can prepare my defence.

 

Could you please advise to me by return your position and expected time scale for the above paragraph.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

Adrian

[Guest Zooman]

OK not to sound dumb but:

Don't be daft that is what we are all here for (ask questions). BTW I got rid of some typos and formatting once I saw it on page.

 

 

(which I assume is the claim no of the CCJ)

Yes

 

HSBC (or Lloyds)

No. "your client" or "your company" which ever it needs to be

[adridude]

ok so if the DCA initiated the CCJ, then "your client" (by this I mean Lloyds or HSBC because they passed the details on)

[Guest Zooman]

The DCA can not be the ones who bring the claim to court unless they have purchased the debt. But if need be we can adapt that when we see the claim forms.

[adridude]

They told me that they sent my details off to the County Courts, so does this mean that they purchased illegal data as I called s.10 DPA?

[Guest Zooman]

lol, how can that be harassment.

 

I have plenty more questions but until you get the claim forms there is not much more we can do.

 

Two questions for today you may need to phone them.

 

1) Who owns the debt the bank or DCA?

 

if you need to phone them ask have they purchased the debt or are they collecting it for the bank. And while your on to them ask the claim number.

 

 

2) And when did the plenty's accrue (just year is fine)?

[adridude]

1) As below:

LloydsTSB - Account sent back from DCA to Lloyds rady to charge off & send to Courts

HSBC - Account passed to B C & W DCA. I spoke to the DCA myself and she tried to quiz me about what the dispute is. I told her I am under no obligation to discuss this as I have informed their client (HSBC) (by this I mean letter of the DPA s.10 letter, and SAR). She asked what im doing about the account, I said no Im not talking to you, speak to your client, and I hung up.

 

2) As Below:

HSBC: between 2000 and 2005

Lloyds: between 2002 and 2006

 

Was i right in telling the DCA that i dont want to talk to them and that they had to consult with their client about to find out the dispute. i was scared to say anything incase it worked against me..

[Guest Zooman]

excellent no issues there what so ever.

[adridude]

super, so now its a waiting game for either the banks to get hold of me or the County courts?

 

heh it was kinda funny telling the DCA what to do rather than it working the other way around harharhar

[adridude]

Once one wins a case against a bank, can you claim all of the phone call, postage, fuel and milage costs involved in resolving the dispute?

 

So far my banks have rung me up about £20 in 2 weeks thanks to 0845 numbers, I've spent loads of money on postage and fuel running around, and all in all, its making me poorer lol

[meagain]

i think you have to be able to show that any damage is as a result of their actions and Im not sure this would be easy.

 

Nod. Strictly speaking, because civil cases are decided on "balance of probabilities" rather than "reasonable doubt", you'd need to demonstrate that it was highly likely to be a result of their actions, but the net result is still the same - difficult to prove.

 

You could try adding a small token amout (~£50) if you're really brave, but don't be surprised if both the bank and the judge challenge it.

[adridude]

I remember logging a complaint once when I was unemployed as one of those charges swallowed up my Benefits.

 

The Jobceter told me that banks cannot do this and that I should go and chellenge them and get it back. Aparently State Benefits cannot be swallowed up by default charges, or something like that.

 

But then the bank manager asked me which law or bylaw dictated this. SO I threw my hands up and thought sod this.

 

Surely if one received benefits once every 2 weeks, needs food and that, when the bank takes it, its obvious that it will have an adverse affect on you. Expecially 2 weeks without being able to buy food.

[Glenn UK]

Nod. Strictly speaking, because civil cases are decided on "balance of probabilities" rather than "reasonable doubt", you'd need to demonstrate that it was highly likely to be a result of their actions, but the net result is still the same - difficult to prove.

 

I entriely agree balance of probabilities, i think it is almost impossible to show even onthe balance of probabilities that the penalty charges were the cause of your problems.

 

I think it would be messy and potentially a big headache.

 

JMHO

 

Glenn

[meagain]

The general rule for Small Claims is court fees (filing + allocation) only, though YMMV. The judge will look for "reasonable and responsible litigation". If you have been reasonable, and the bank has been excessively unreasonable during the process, then you might be awarded these costs (also v.v.), or the judge might make an order as to wasted costs.

 

(Disclosure: I have not actually reached court yet, and am recalling what I have been told. As always, ICBW.)

[adridude]

YMMV? and v.v.?

[meagain]

YMMV? and v.v.?

 

Your Mileage May Vary (i.e. it might work, it might not work), and vice versa, respectively.

 

[adridude]

thanx

[adridude]

Hi,

 

I just got LloydsTSB to say that 'Our charges are fair and well within the boundries of the law'

 

I did inform them of the OFT Publication of the 5th April 2006 regarding their charges being deemed unfair.

 

Does this mean I have an instant case? (i guess it does), not only that, does this mean I can legally slate them and publicize this (i.e. they are trying to act legal, illegally?)

 

Cheers

 

Adrian

[adridude]

Hey Zooman (or whoever else can help),

 

I hjust had a letter for HSBC saying:

 

Dear Mr xxxxx,

 

bla bla bla,

 

We regret we are unable to comply with your request as any charges applied to your account are a true and accurate record of transactions.

 

The processing of these details is in compliance with the DPA 1998.

 

....

 

That was the s.10 of the DPA I called when they sent my details to the DCA..

 

What would you recommend the next step is? Informing the Commisioner of Info?

 

Cheers

 

A

[adridude]

I've just had lloyds saying that the 5th April 2006 announcement ONLY applied to credit cards and NOT current accounts.

 

Is this true?

 

Also, they are in receipt of my dispute and responded upon that ( as above) how do i continue...

 

-Adrian

[lee6370]

I don't follow you, what the employee has said is what Lloyds believe, (in public anyway). They would be happy for you to tell everyone that they beleive they are acting within the law.

[blacksheep1979]

its not illegal its unlawful - there's a difference

[andrew1]

... but then what about the fact that one's credit rating is botched up and to get a loan you have to pay a much higher interest rate because of the defaults? That should be easy enough to prove if you have the time to go back on it. The cost of those extra % points can be horrendous and just what those sub prime lenders want to cream more out of you.

 

There is a tangible argument in there somewhere.

[adridude]

i thought that the OFT said 'legally unenforcable'

 

surely them having taken my money is admission of 'legally enforcing'?

[Guest NATTIE]

All employees would say that and so would I in respects to NW while I'm at work. You follow the company line.