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

[bill-k]

I think if you have a read through at least the DMG vs IR, which follows on from Klienwort Vs Benson you will get the drift.

 

incidentally entering a clause in a contract between a business and a consumer doesn't render that term lawful or enforceable if it is deemed unfair.

 

Thanks for that reminder, Glenn. I have to admit, reading case histories is as much fun for me as spreadies are for some peeps here - so I haven't read up those !!

 

Yes, I believe unfair contract terms are governed by UTCCR - which, again, to my shame, I have not read !!

[e28bigalbexley]

Thanks for that reminder, Glenn. I have to admit, reading case histories is as much fun for me as spreadies are for some peeps here - so I haven't read up those !!

 

Yes, I believe unfair contract terms are governed by UTCCR - which, again, to my shame, I have not read !!

 

Dont you dare let that halo slip now Bill

[bill-k]

Dont you dare let that halo slip now Bill

It's round my neck already and being pulled tight !!! :o

[Delboy01]

Thanks for that reminder, Glenn. I have to admit, reading case histories is as much fun for me as spreadies are for some peeps here - so I haven't read up those !!

 

Yes, I believe unfair contract terms are governed by UTCCR - which, again, to my shame, I have not read !!

 

Damn Bill,,, and I thought you knew what you were doing, and what you were talking about.....

 

You see how easily some people are duped !!

 

Yours

 

Severely Dissapointed;) ;)

[bigmama59]

Do you know if anyone has actually won a claim including contractual interest at the unauthorised rate for the Woolwich? I have worked my figures out on charges of £3888 starting in 2001 and the total figure on the spreadsheet comes out at £12739:eek:

If I use Mindzai's spreadsheet it comes to £10689

 

How does this affect going to court, which court would it go to and how much would it cost?

[Guest Battleaxe]

And have I definitely got this right ? There was not a single penalty charge involved in that claim, then, Battleaxe ?

This really intrigues me !!

 

Bill there were penalty charges also, but they added the extra interest each month, so it was identifiable. I added to my claim on the dates they applied it. I was prepared for them to argue it, but they didn't, they just coughed up and paid.

 

I go out for the morning and you lot have been busy. had a talk with the lat at Natwest when I went for a statement, she spotted the GE money and asked about it, so I told her the whole story. She aid once I get the lot sorted to come back and she will do something about the GE Finance loan. She reckoned Natwest can do me a better deal. I just started to laugh nervously, She said the account has been operated impeccably (her words) and ireplied because I am now in charge, no DD's and I pay the bills on the due date. A & L were costing us at least £1200 every month with that overdraft and charges. We are living on less and all out bills are paid, well have three in dispute but we know the reason for that. the ones I have sorted are up to date and have been for four months. What does that say about banks being finanacially responsible. Never again will I trust a bank. I am not paying anything by DD, took some talking to everyone concerned to accept manual payments on the due date, but it is working. It takes about two hours of time each month to pay the bills, but I know they are paid and no nasty surprises are waiting for me.

[bill-k]

Damn Bill,,, and I thought you knew what you were doing, and what you were talking about.....

 

You see how easily some people are duped !!

 

Yours

 

Severely Dissapointed;) ;)

 

Dear Severely Disappointed of Bromley,

 

I am so sorry to have disappointed you. It just goes to show that you can fool some of the people all of the time, but you can't con a con-man from Peckham !!

 

Here's a little present for you - just to say sorry:-

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/post-519057.html

[bill-k]

Do you know if anyone has actually won a claim including contractual interest at the unauthorised rate for the Woolwich? I have worked my figures out on charges of £3888 starting in 2001 and the total figure on the spreadsheet comes out at £12739:eek:

If I use Mindzai's spreadsheet it comes to £10689

 

How does this affect going to court, which court would it go to and how much would it cost?

I guess you'd have to trawl the Woolwich **WON** section for your first answer, BigMama. I believe the allocation of court is based on the claim value LESS any interest, so you should remain in the SCC with a £5,000 ceiling. But the court fee IS based on the total claim value, so that may be quite large.

And, of course, the Judge can decide to allocate upwards if that seems appropriate.

[bill-k]

I claimed the interest which was applied to my over authorised o/d limit and got it back, I just put it down as interest on O/D and they accepted it.

And have I definitely got this right ? There was not a single penalty charge involved in that claim, then, Battleaxe ?

This really intrigues me !!

 

Bill there were penalty charges also, but they added the extra interest each month, so it was identifiable. I added to my claim on the dates they applied it. I was prepared for them to argue it, but they didn't, they just coughed up and paid.

OK, thanks. I'm still trying to get to grips with JonCris appearing to say that we can claim all the unauthorised O/D interest we were charged, apparently without there ever being a penalty charge involved in the claim.

[Mindzai]

I have worked my figures out on charges of £3888 starting in 2001 and the total figure on the spreadsheet comes out at £12739:eek:

If I use Mindzai's spreadsheet it comes to £10689

 

Hmm i'd be interested to see why the figure is so different on each sheet. Which spreadsheet did you use other than mine?

[bill-k]

Hmm i'd be interested to see why the figure is so different on each sheet. Which spreadsheet did you use other than mine?

Mindzai, your sheet calculates the interest by taking the AER/APR rate input, and converting it to the actual annual rate used to calculate the interest, which IMO is correct.

Vamp's sheets (and maybe others) directly calculate using the AER/APR rate, which although technically incorrect, Vamp believes is sufficiently correct for our claims.

Batty Bill has to go along with that - or suffer the consequences !!!

[paulwilko]

My Wife is trying to claim Contractual interest and would be very grateful if you could tell me if the wording is correct

 

Much appreciated

 

Thx

 

Paul

 

 

 

 

Brief details of claim

 

Money claim for return of penalty charges applied to the Claimants bank account by the Defendant

 

 

Value

 

Charges £351.00

Interest at the Unauthorised rate of 34.9% Interest up until 30/01/2007 amounts to £1706.80 as detailed in schedule A attatched hereto. Interest per day thereafter, or part thereof is £1.96.

Court fee £120.

Subject Access Request Fee £10.00

 

Total £2187.90

 

 

Particulars of claim

 

The Claimant Jane Wilkinson (nee Jane Cushnie) has an account ……………..with the Defendant which was opened on or around 24/5/2000 and closed on or around 22/08/2005.

 

During the period in which the Account was 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. 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.

A list of the charges applied is attached to these particulars of claim.

 

Defendant charges interest to the Claimant, via the Account, at its published “unarranged overdraft rate” of 34.9%. The Defendant claims that it is entitled to charge this rate, by virtue of the Terms & Conditions.

 

The unarranged overdraft rate is charged to the Claimant, via the Account, when the Claimant draws money from the Account whilst he has not obtained permission from the Defendant for exceeding any overdraft limit that he has. It is in effect, a rate that the Defendant charges the Claimant when he draws funds from the Defendant when he has no right for doing so.

 

Using, that reasoning and maintaining the principal of equity, mutuality and reciprocity between the parties, the Claimant contends that he is entitled to an equal rate of interest in this case. The Claimant notes in particular that the Defendant erred in law, had no legal right to levy the charges to the Account and refused to refund the Charges when asked to do so by the Claimant.

 

If the Terms and Conditions form part of contract between the parties

hereto then there is an implied and/or imposed term of contract that the Defendant must pay the Claimant at the same rate of interest which it reserves for itself, in similar circumstances. If no express contract exists between the parties hereto then the Claimant contends that an implied and/or imposed contract exists between the parties hereto relating solely to the Claimant’s right to charge interest to the Defendant at the rate which it reserves for itself in relation to similar circumstances.

 

In the alternative, should this court not find that aforesaid implied and or imposed contractual term does exist, Claimant claims interest pursuant to s69 County Courts Act. Interest, in that case, up until 30/01/2007 amounts to £157.87, as detailed in Schedule B attached hereto. Interest per day thereafter, or part thereof, is £0.11p

[bigmama59]

Hmm i'd be interested to see why the figure is so different on each sheet. Which spreadsheet did you use other than mine?

 

 

I used Vamp's spreadsheet as well to see if the figures I got were right as it was such a big jump from just the charges

[paulwilko]

Hi yes I used Vamps sheet.., just changed the rate to 8% for the alternative.

 

Does it look correct I am not sure regarding the wording on the N1

 

Thanks paul

[Mindzai]

That would be incorrect - you cant compound the 8%, and if you're using a non-compounding sheet, you shouldn't be for a contractual claim. Statutory is simple, contractual is compounded,

[crackberry]

what's this contractual interest malarky?

[Mindzai]

I suggest you start at the other end of the thread

[millymollymoo]

Hi I have started this thread concerning default being given, however it has turned into a contractual interest argument now.

 

Should we or shouldnt we claim Contractual Interest on a Unpaid debt, or even can we if we pay the debt off or is that morally wrong. Please help as its all become confusing any help from you on this thread would be much appreciated.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/natwest-bank/61556-would-you-pay-up.html

 

Milly X

[millymollymoo]

Hey one other thing peeps:) goldfish state that WE HAVE NO RIGHT to contractual compounded interst, its their right NOT OURS as atwist to claiming this rate of interst and especially not CASH rates. .Me thinks get stuffed see you in court!!

 

If anyone wants to see what they wrote take apeek at post 67.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/other-institutions/45909-millymollymoo-goldfish.html

 

 

Milly X

[natwesttookmymoney]

MilliMollyMoo

 

Methinks you're right. It's a load of crap - the Court will decide what interest to award, not them.

 

Westy

[Spiceskull]

Phoenix as this has been discussed many times & as you appear not to have read the WHOLE thread I'm not going to go through it again.....only to say wrong

Sorry to correct you - and others will back me up on this - I do read through a whole thread, and have always done this since I first came to the forums a year ago.

 

I am not suggesting that people do not claim contractual - if you can get it then good luck. What I am saying is that:

 

a) there are no implied terms in the contract that allow for you to charge contractual interest

b) if you place too much emphasis on the contractul element of your claim it is likely that the bank will beat you down on that element in court

c) the bank is authorised to lend money at published rates, and, subject to acceptance by the consumer, has a right to charge that rate

 

However, as for the fairness of the terms I am in complete agreement with everyone, and believe that the focus should be on arguing that element of the claim. The bank cannot defend unfair terms, and this angle will prevent them from sidetracking any hearing onto the subject of contractual.

 

That said - the terms are unfair, and there is no implied term allowing you to claim contractual...so...why not amend the terms yourself. You can read all about this on my own Phoenix/Spiceskull v HSBC threads...whilst it was not established in court, the bank threw in the towel because they realised they could not defend successfully against the onslaught of my arguments...

[millymollymoo]

MilliMollyMoo

 

Methinks you're right. It's a load of crap - the Court will decide what interest to award, not them.

 

Westy

 

 

Westy that made me giggle too. Me thinks I like your way of thinking!!!

 

Milly X:)

[millymollymoo]

Sorry to correct you - and others will back me up on this - I do read through a whole thread, and have always done this since I first came to the forums a year ago.

 

I am not suggesting that people do not claim contractual - if you can get it then good luck. What I am saying is that:

 

a) there are no implied terms in the contract that allow for you to charge contractual interest

b) if you place too much emphasis on the contractul element of your claim it is likely that the bank will beat you down on that element in court

c) the bank is authorised to lend money at published rates, and, subject to acceptance by the consumer, has a right to charge that rate

 

However, as for the fairness of the terms I am in complete agreement with everyone, and believe that the focus should be on arguing that element of the claim. The bank cannot defend unfair terms, and this angle will prevent them from sidetracking any hearing onto the subject of contractual.

 

That said - the terms are unfair, and there is no implied term allowing you to claim contractual...so...why not amend the terms yourself. You can read all about this on my own Phoenix/Spiceskull v HSBC threads...whilst it was not established in court, the bank threw in the towel because they realised they could not defend successfully against the onslaught of my arguments...

 

 

Phoenix have read your thread and it is excellent what you have done. I bet they squirmed:lol: I have p'md you.

 

Milly X:-)

[blobalbob]

Hello again, wow this thread is getting looooooong. I've been hunting down a revised prelim and found it, eventually, I did read the whole thread about 2 weeks ago but my minds lost the latest do's and don'ts on the exact wording. Could I be a real pain and ask if this is correct for a revised prelim with Contractual interest charged at the Agreed Overdraft rate?

 

Dearest Barclays

 

RE: Revised request for repayment of charges

Your Ref: *********

 

SORT CODE: **-**-**ACCOUNT NUMBER: *******

 

Thank you for your letter dated *** December 2006, offering me the sum of £***. I am prepared to accept this amount as a part-payment only towards the full amount, which I have now recalculated.

 

While waiting for your response I have spent the time effectively, researching the issue of reclaiming charges. I now realise that I am entitled to add contractual interest to the whole of my claim. As I am substantially revising my request, and in the interests of fair play, please take this letter as a fresh preliminary request for repayment.

 

My request

I am writing to ask you to refund to me the charges which you have levied on my above-mentioned account as detailed in the supporting spreadsheet.

 

(usual prelim stuff follows)

 

What I require

 

I calculate that you have taken £**** in unfair charges.

 

In addition to this amount, I also claim contractual interest at 15.6% EAR Barclays standard ‘Agreed’ rate of overdraft interest as set out in the attached schedule of charges. I believe this rate to be justified under the principle of mutuality and reciprocity: it is based on your agreed overdraft rate a figure that would be deemed fair, rather than the un-authorised overdraft interested, 27.5% EAR, which I reserve the right to apply if you do not repay this amount in full.

 

Therefore the total amount owed as of today’s date is £****.

 

My targets

(same as prelim)

 

 

Is this OK, not sure about the "reserve the right" bit? Should I just apply full 27.5%, I read this was taking the peas?

Thanks for your help

 

ps. Thanks Billk for replying to my previous post

[bill-k]

ps. Thanks Billk for replying to my previous post

I hope I was helpful !!

 

Letter looks fine to me, although I do not like to use the terms AER/APR in these, as these rates are for marketing purposes, really. I just use the term "annual rate."

 

It is a matter of personal preference as to whether you claim the upper unauthorised rate from the outset or not. I personally do, as the bank will almost certainly offer less, anyway, so you are haggling from a higher initial amount. You can then always settle for any amount below this. My claim, when it goes in, is for the lower rate - and then the statutory rate - "in the alternative."

 

Your choice, though, but I would continue to "reserve the right" to claim higher rate if you decide to only claim the lower rate, now.