Why is no one claiming the contractual rate of interest???

[Seminole]

This is contrary to the information I have had from the County Court where I submitted my claim against abbey. The CC told me that for both determination of the fee and allocation to track contractual interest was included.

 

The logic is that the contractual interest is a part of your claim and in theory is simply a matter for judgement of whether your claim is right or not.

 

Sec 69 interest on the other hand is not part of your claim, you are asking the court to determine and award interest.

 

Its clear for the purposes of valuing the claim that interest is included (see CPR 46.3.a) where the courts is determining the allocation of costs.

 

I have struggled to find a different view in the CPR where it talks about allocation or the value of a claim.

 

This issue has come up a number of times, if anyone has a definitive source then please ost it to put us all out of our misery.

 

Glenn

 

The Patricia Pearl book clearly states that interest is not included when considering the value of a claim for track allocation purposes. This site's initial view was that interest should be included but PP is a district judge with years of experience. Her views on this subject were expressed very explicitly in the book. That's good enough for me.

 

If you have a moment it would be helpful if you could speak to the court again and ask them for the basis on which they asserted that interest was included.

[bill-k]

The Patricia Pearl book clearly states that interest is not included when considering the value of a claim for track allocation purposes. This site's initial view was that interest should be included but PP is a district judge with years of experience. Her views on this subject were expressed very explicitly in the book. That's good enough for me.

 

If you have a moment it would be helpful if you could speak to the court again and ask them for the basis on which they asserted that interest was included.

 

The little experience I have had so far with the Courts has shown me that the Clerks often seem to be making no more than badly-educated guesses, but I think Glenn's contacts are better quality than mine !!

If I could quote a District Judge on these matters, then I would rather do that than quote a clerk. I'm going to order PP's book ASAP. However, I live in Scotland, but am using the English SCC's in every claim so far. Presumably, the "Not for use in Scotland" disclaimer simply means "Not for use in Scottish Courts" ?? Can anyone confirm ?

[Seminole]

The little experience I have had so far with the Courts has shown me that the Clerks often seem to be making no more than badly-educated guesses, but I think Glenn's contacts are better quality than mine !!

If I could quote a District Judge on these matters, then I would rather do that than quote a clerk. I'm going to order PP's book ASAP. However, I live in Scotland, but am using the English SCC's in every claim so far. Presumably, the "Not for use in Scotland" disclaimer simply means "Not for use in Scottish Courts" ?? Can anyone confirm ?

 

Yes.

 

Why were you asking about my ISP by the way?

[sophie T]

Hi Bill,

I have sent an example of my spreadsheet (it's on the previous page) i would appreciate it if you could have a quick look to see if it looks ok. I want to get it sent off today and i think the last post is at 5.

I really appreciate all the help, thanks.

Sophie.

[bill-k]

Date Penalty Penalty 27.5% On Interest Interest On 27.5% Interest

Applied: Charged: Penalties: Date: Penalties: On Penalties:

 

 

25/06/01 £20.00 29.35 25/06/01 0.22 0.33

 

23/07/01 £20.00 28.93 23/08/01 1.14 1.62

 

23/08/01 £20.00 28.46 24/09/01 1.33 1.86

 

Sorry for the delay Bill, here's a sample from my prelim spreadsheet. It wouldn't let me copy it into this page so i have just copied out the first couple of lines... i hope it looks right!!!

Please advise or let me know if i need to add more info...

Thanks for the help, Sophie.

 

Sophie, well done so far

 

However, the sheet you're using calculates the interest as simple interest, and NOT as compound interest. So what you have done is correct, in that the sheet has correctly calculated your interest as 27.5%. BUT you really need to get it to calculate it as compound interest, because this will more than DOUBLE your £29.35 interest on the first £20 charge you listed !!

 

Vampiress's new sheets, using Google should do it for you, or Mindzai's one. Alternatively, you could continue using the one you're using, but with a modification to the calculation formula, which I can show you, if you want.

 

HTH.,

 

Bill.

[bill-k]

Yes.

 

Why were you asking about my ISP by the way?

 

Following an off-topic discussion with Mindzai earlier about ISP's, you mentioned AOL going downhill following TalkTalk buyout. As you seemed clued-up, It seemed worth asking you who you use, as it is probably bound to be better than AOL or Tiscali !!

 

Nothing sinister !!8-)

[sophie T]

Thanks Bill,

I will have a look at Vampiress's sheet now..im assuming its in her chamber??

If it gets too complicated for my small brain i will be back begging for help.

Thank you so much for your assistance!!

[bill-k]

Hi Bill,

I have sent an example of my spreadsheet (it's on the previous page) i would appreciate it if you could have a quick look to see if it looks ok. I want to get it sent off today and i think the last post is at 5.

I really appreciate all the help, thanks.

Sophie.

 

Sophie, sorry for the delay.

 

PLEASE DON'T SEND YET !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

MISS THAT POST - AND CHECK THESE FIRST, INSTEAD !!!!!!!! :!:

[sophie T]

Dont worry Bill,

Im going to make sure i claim back every penny owed to me, even if it means missing the post today!!

I will have a crack at Vamps sheet now. Back in a while!!

[bill-k]

Dont worry Bill,

Im going to make sure i claim back every penny owed to me, even if it means missing the post today!!

I will have a crack at Vamps sheet now. Back in a while!!

 

Whew !!

 

That's good.

 

...and you're welcome, matey !!

[purplecatlover]

can someone please tell em how i work out the daily interest rate on 18.69% instead of 8%?

 

(and if anyone has time and would care to check my poc for me before i print and send i would appreciate it too, theyre currently copied in my thread (cat vs natwest) in the natwets forum,)

[bill-k]

can someone please tell em how i work out the daily interest rate on 18.69% instead of 8%?

 

(and if anyone has time and would care to check my poc for me before i print and send i would appreciate it too, theyre currently copied in my thread (cat vs NatWest) in the natwets forum,)

 

PCL, the spready does all that for you, so you shouldn't have to. The daily rate is quite simply the annual rate divided by 365. So for 8% pa., it is 0.0219178% per day, and for 18.69% pa., it is 0.0512054% per day.

 

For compound interest, it's not that simple, though !!!

[Seminole]

Following an off-topic discussion with Mindzai earlier about ISP's, you mentioned AOL going downhill following TalkTalk buyout. As you seemed clued-up, It seemed worth asking you who you use, as it is probably bound to be better than AOL or Tiscali !!

 

Nothing sinister !!8-)

 

I use Demon. Little bit wary when I signed up with them last year but have to say that they've been fine. Bit slow to upgrade to an 8MB service for existing users but I don't mind that too much. £20 a month including VAT for 2MB.

[hugelyrippedoff]

Hello I am getting my first claim letter to the bank ready, and I now think I understand contractural interest. Can someone please explain though, what is going on when people are talking about letting the court decide between contractural and 8%? If both are going to be on the court claim, should both be on the initial letter? I am easily confused, so this is probably all straight forward, just want to make sure I am doing it right.

Many thanks

Suzy:confused: (I have had too many children, that is the problem! haha)

[bill-k]

I use Demon. Little bit wary when I signed up with them last year but have to say that they've been fine. Bit slow to upgrade to an 8MB service for existing users but I don't mind that too much. £20 a month including VAT for 2MB.

Cheers, Seminole.

[bill-k]

Hello I am getting my first claim letter to the bank ready, and I now think I understand contractural interest. Can someone please explain though, what is going on when people are talking about letting the court decide between contractural and 8%? If both are going to be on the court claim, should both be on the initial letter? I am easily confused, so this is probably all straight forward, just want to make sure I am doing it right.

Many thanks

Suzy:confused: (I have had too many children, that is the problem! haha)

Suzy, If you're claiming Contractual Interest, then your claim is initially directly from the bank, so you claim it directly from them, along with your charges. They then have the option to pay up, negotiate a lower amount, or tell you to sod off. They tend to go for the latter, but you have to give them the option, first !! Next, you repeat your request, but telling them that you will take it to Court if they don't pay up. Chances are, they'll say "sod off" again, but you could be lucky and get a payout. In that case, the Court has not become involved, and neither has the need arisen for claiming Statutory Interest (8%).

Stat Int is only claimed through the Court, if you have to go that far, and is claimed "in the alternative." Basically, you claim the Contractual interest primarily in your Court Claim, but you claim any lower rate of C.I. as a fallback "in the first alternative," and then the S.I. "in the second alternative."

This in effect gives you two further chances, should the bank actually be able to successfully argue against your initial C.I. rate.

 

HTH.,

 

Bill.

 

P.S. - you can't have too many children !!

 

PPs - having said that, I've only got 2, and that's enough for me !! :o

[bill-k]

Sarah - thanks for the click & suggestion !! I don't know if sweeter grapes will help my avatar. I think I'll save up for a facelift !!!

 

Glenn - I've got some back-clicking to do. Yourself amongst many !!

[purplecatlover]

PCL, the spready does all that for you, so you shouldn't have to. The daily rate is quite simply the annual rate divided by 365. So for 8% pa., it is 0.0219178% per day, and for 18.69% pa., it is 0.0512054% per day.

 

For compound interest, it's not that simple, though !!!

 

thanks bill, i think its compound i want though, its to put in my poc of how much interest per day to be added on from date of claim.

[bill-k]

thanks bill, i think its compound i want though, its to put in my poc of how much interest per day to be added on from date of claim.

Sorry, PCL, I should have known. I don't actually know what others have done for this, but on my claims, entered a monetary amount, instead of a percentage, as I couldn't think how to work out the daily rate for compound. So, it reads "at the rate of £XX.XX per day." I've had 2 out of Court payouts so far using this without problem, and several other claims in progress, using it. But not actually had to test it in Court, yet - although I can't see any reason why it would be rejected.

 

I worked it out by changing my spreadsheet day by one day, and noting the difference in compound (and s.69) interest totals over one day.

 

You could just use the rates you're using, and divide by 365 if you want, though, I'm sure. It will work out at less than the above, but unless you have a hugh claim with a trial lasting for ages, it won't amount to that much.

 

HTH.,

 

Bill.

[sophie T]

Hi Bill,

I'm back! I have been trying to get my head around the google advance spreadsheet for compound and it just doesn't seem to make sense.

I tried to download Mindzai's version but it says the link is not in use?!?

This is really beginning to hurt my head as im not sure why i cant get the spreadsheet to work..

I am supposed to be using number 5 sheet in Vamps chambers?? im not so confident that i understand where to implement the info ( i thought i knew).

Can yourself or anyone offer any advice??

Sorry to be a pain. Sophie

[bill-k]

Sophie T - no pain, no gain !!! No problem.

 

I haven't been into Vamp's Chamber lately, but when I first went in, I had trouble. I didn't realise that you have to sign up to the Google facility first. It's no big deal, just a few questions and you're in - no money, no catches. You might have done what I did and tried using the sheets straight away !!

 

I'll have another look myself, though, right now.

 

Catchulater.

[bill-k]

Sophie T, if you can log in to your Google area now, and click on "Discuss" in the top RH corner of your sheet, you should be able to talk to others who are there. I'm there now, if it's any use.

Bill.

[sophie T]

Thanks Bill, Im Logged in there too....

[Glenn UK]

The Patricia Pearl book clearly states that interest is not included when considering the value of a claim for track allocation purposes. This site's initial view was that interest should be included but PP is a district judge with years of experience. Her views on this subject were expressed very explicitly in the book. That's good enough for me.

 

If you have a moment it would be helpful if you could speak to the court again and ask them for the basis on which they asserted that interest was included.

 

I have read through Pearl a number of times and hadn't noticed previously the reference to CRP 26, 26.8.2(b) does seem to exclude interest as she and you say. Its probably because i hadn't been using CPR for reference until recently.

 

All i can tell you is that my claim is well within the SCC track until you add interest, I rang the court and the listings clerk spoke to a judge on my behalf.

 

The advice was that it was fast track based on the amount of interest apparently from the judge.

 

Now it could be that this was only the judges view in this case because of the amount of interest.

 

But when i submit the next claim to court I will quote the relevant CPR and ask if my understanding is correct or not.

 

As i understand it, the CPR are primarily guidance for the courts, this allows them to move a claim from SCC up, or from multi down if they feel its appropriate.

 

Anyway its good to at least have finally found a reference in CPR which supports that some have said.

 

So for future reference its CPR 26.8.2(a) which suggests that interest is disregarded when allocation to track is determined.

 

Thanks for making me look again.

 

Glenn

[bill-k]

So for future reference its CPR 26.8.2(a) which suggests that interest is disregarded when allocation to track is determined.

Cheers, guys, duly noted. I think I'll be needing that later, myself.