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

[millymollymoo]

Bill...breakfast;) !!! Fantastic advice as always:D

 

Milly X:)

[bill-k]

Cheers, Molly, but before I put my feet under your table, do get a second opinion if you can, as this is not my strong point.

 

What is my strong point ? Getting free brekkies without really deserving it !!

[Spidee9]

Hi I am a bit confused about the interest and am unable to use the speadsheet on my computer. Barclaycard would not give me all the statements I wanted so I sent them a letter asking for £350.00 and I owe them £239.64. They sent me a letter offering £64.00 and I got a dca letter from Westcott. I called them and refused £64.00 told them account in dispute and that they should call off Wescott. Barclaycard told me that the Information commissioner had CHANGED THE RULES and that my statements would be with me very soon. That I was to look though charges and contact them back and get this taken off my bill. (Talk about don't ask don't get.) she said that I would still owe money and arrangements can be made to pay this off. I got statements next day!! I have found £180.00 charges First charge in jan 04 for £20 at bottom of statment says interest 1.385% do I calulate the interest on that charge and times by 24 and do simular to other charges? I want to get this letter sent off a.s.a.p as I only have a temp job and can't really afford to pay of Barclaycard in one go. Please, Please help as if this does go to court I want to win against Barclaycard.

[bill-k]

Hi Spidee. yes, you ned to get your figures right before you make your claim. If I were you, I'd start by getting a working spreadsheet, as you will not be able to calculate contractual interest very easily without it.

 

Have you tried using the Google spreadies in Vampiress's Chambers?

What you are doing to calculate interest at the moment is not correct.

 

I'm afraid if you hurry this, you will probably lose out.

 

Get your spready ready first - I always sez !!

[Woolie75]

I posted my request for payment to Lloyds TSB, with my spreadsheet of charges. On my claim I put the contractual interest rate down.

*****Thanks for your help with that Vampiress*****

My letter has been received by a Michael Fallon on the 11/01/07 at 7:03am. Just waiting for a response, none received so far.

 

View my post for further updates Woolie75 vs Lloyds TSB, am also taking on the Halifax as well, my subject access request was sent to them and received, letter from them received stating I should get a reply by 16th February 2007. I shall be claiming for contractual interest rate with them as well.

[richwhit1]

Have been reading all the threads regards C.I for a while now and just thought at this stage I'd ask the question "whose paid out so far"??

 

I'm aware that MBNA and Natwest have paid out at Unauthorised Borrowing rates , but wondered if anyone knew of cases where First Direct and Barclays have buckled in and settled??

 

Any advices, as ever greatly appreciated.

 

richwhit1

[sarahpp]

I don't know about Barclays or First Direct but, Nationwide and Capital One have, I believe.

[Guest bong]

Forgive the slight deviation, but still on the subject of claiming contractual interest, the main justification I've seen is "mutuality and reciprocity" but, try as I might, I can't find an legal mumbo-jumbo to back it up.

 

What do you think about playing the "fairness and balance" argument in relation to contractual interest. Is it, in fact, the same thing as "mutuality and reciprocity". If it is, then F&B has the advantage of some legal mumbo-jumbo to back it up (which I found when I was background reading) :

 

The legal basis of "fairness and balance" appears to be UTCCR Schedule 2, para 1(b) : inappropriately excluding or limiting the legal rights of the consumer vis-à-vis the seller or supplier or another party in the event of total or partial non-performance or inadequate performance by the seller or supplier of any of the contractual obligations, including the option of offsetting a debt owed to the seller or supplier against any claim which the consumer may have against him;

 

and the associated OFT Guidance document (OFT 143 @ http://www.oft.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/7...0/0/oft143.pdf

which says at Annex B : “Terms Excluding Or Limiting Liability, paras 1a and 1b of Schedule 2 : Fairness and balance require that both parties to a contract are equally bound by it, and equally liable to pay compensation for failure to abide by it. A term which could be used – even if that is not the intention – to prevent or hinder customers from seeking redress when the supplier is in default tends to upset the balance of the contract to the consumer’s disadvantage.”

 

Is one interpretation that we paid "compensation" for breaching an overdraft limit in the form of contractual interest, so they should pay similarly for breaching the contract by imposing an unlawful charge.

 

Interested to hear any comments (including "get off my thread" or "Mad Nick, you're talking cobblers" - I wouldn't be the least bit offended by either.

 

Regards Mad Nick

 

PS Happy Christmas everyone.

 

I've been searching for some legal precedent for this mutuality & reciprocity argument and my googling brought up a paper written by unlockingthelaw.co.uk about contract law and a statement in it that the effect of the UTCCR (which implemented EU Directive 93/13) is that "the party dealing with the consumer cannot insert advantageous terms into contracts where there is no comparable term in favour of the consumer".

 

I then searched this thread to see if this had been debated in here before which brought up the above post made on 20 Dec which doesn't look like it got any discussion. It seems to me that the UTCCR and the OFT's interpretation of the UTCCR "fairness and balance require that both parties to a contract are equally bound by it and equally liable to pay compensation for failure to abide by it" (as quoted by Nick) could provide our answer to the bank's challenge of the contractual interest claim at the unauthorised rate.

 

Simply that the contract is currently weighted in favour of the bank (and against the consumer) by entitling the bank to charge interest at x% on unauthorised borrowings, and that until the bank addresses the fact that its charges were and are unenforceable, and/or unreasonable at law, you fully expect the court to uphold the OFT's standards and interpretation of the UTCCR and endorse your claim to interest at the rate specified in the contract, in the interests of the legal requirement of fairness and balance.

 

I think that this, used in addition to the unjust enrichment argument, gives further weight to our claims for contractual interest.

[bill-k]

Have been reading all the threads regards C.I for a while now and just thought at this stage I'd ask the question "whose paid out so far"??

 

I'm aware that MBNA and NatWest have paid out at Unauthorised Borrowing rates , but wondered if anyone knew of cases where First Direct and Barclays have buckled in and settled??

 

Any advices, as ever greatly appreciated.

 

richwhit1

I have had full settlement of claims from Natwwest, MBNA, A+L and Capital One, all for max. rate contractual interest. However, these were all below £1,000. Larger claims may possibly be contested.

 

Bong has started a thread for linking to contractual claims, but this is so far not happening. There is need for some kind of quick reference to be made possible, I think, but the practicalities are that people are not necessarily going to make the effort of posting extra links to their own threads without some incentive - or even advertising !!

[Yankeeruinx]

Bill-k Hi sorry to ask but I am about to take on Barclays and I wish to add contractual interest. I am trying to get my prelim sent off. I have used the templates off of here for the prelim but I can not getting the wording right and I really don't want to make a mess of this. Could you please give me some advice on how to approach them with the prelim letter.

[bill-k]

Bong, well done (as usual !!) for your research, and also for bringing up Mad Nick's post. In my flitting about, I either missed it or ignored it. Vamp has recently mentioned her concern over where exactly we find the law itself regarding this "principle" so I'll pass this to her as well.

 

I think you and Nick are right, this should be excavated a bit more, and given some trying out. I will later go back and give Nick's post (if I can find it) some of the attention it was apparently denied.

 

Thank you - BOTH of you !!!

[bill-k]

Yankee, this iz wot I rote for my prelims. Don't forget that you need to get your spready right first. If your figures are wrong at this point, your claim is wrong.

Bill-k, XXXXXX XXXXXX

Barclays plc

XXX

XXXXXXX

Date: XXXXXX

Dear Sir/Madam

Request for repayment of charges - Account Number: XXXXXXXXXXXX

I am writing to ask you to refund the charges which you have levied from the above account over the period that we held it with you. In the light of recent publications, I now understand that the regime of fees which you applied to the account in relation to failed/refused transactions, balance overlimits and so forth are unlawful at Common Law, Statute and recent consumer regulations. Additionally, it has now been confirmed that your particularly high level of penalties are considered to be unfair per se by the OFT., who reported this on the 5th April 2006. These charges are therefore presumed to be unlawful in the absence of specific proof to the contrary.

 

I would draw your attention to the terms of the contract which you agreed to when the account was opened. It is an implied term of that contract that you would conduct yourselves lawfully, and in a manner which complies with UK law. I am now frankly shocked that you have operated the account in this way, as I had always reposed confidence in your integrity and expertise as our fiduciary. I consider that your representations that these charges are fair and reasonable are deceptive and that we have thus been deceived by you into agreeing to pay them. This concealment of the true nature of these charges has prevented us from asserting our right until now.

 

If you would now be so kind as to check your records for these charges, and refund them fully and immediately, along with contractual interest at the rate of XX.XX%, then I shall consider the matter resolved. For your assistance, I attach a schedule of these charges, along with the interest accrued on them. If you are not prepared to do this within 14 days, then I hope that you will enter into a sincere dialogue with me about this matter, and I am writing this letter to you on the assumption that you will prefer to do this than merely respond with standard letters and leaflets.

 

If you do not respond timeously or satisfactorily, I shall collate the details of the relevant charges myself, and send you a letter before action giving you a further 14 days in which to reflect. I do hope, however, that you will now act reasonably and responsibly in not forcing me to do this. I believe that these targets are more than sufficient for a large company such as yours with dedicated staff and departments.

 

Please also be aware that, in the absence of a satisfactory conclusion to this matter, I shall issue a legal claim at the expiry of the second deadline. However, I trust you will not allow the matter to reach this stage, and thus look forward to your early and sincere response.

Yours faithfully,

 

Bill-k.

Encl: Schedule of charges

[Guest bong]

Bill did you really send them that many kisses??

 

thanks for the click BTW!!!!

[bill-k]

Bill did you really send them that many kisses??

quote]

Cheeky - just 'cos it's more than I sent you !!!

Yeah, but my LBA starts : "OK., you lot. No more Mr Nice Guy."

[Yankeeruinx]

Bill-k That is awesome just what I have been looking for just a couple more quick questions. I am using Mindzia's spreadsheets, now for the shedule do I send them print offs of the whole thing so they can see how the interest was worked out? Also will I need to know the formulas used to substantiate my claim? Lastly in the LBA section where you refer to collating the relevant charges myself before forwarding them to the bank does that mean I have to send the spreadsheet again or something else with the LBA?

Sorry to be a pain but nearly done now

[bill-k]

Yankee, just the page(s) showing the contractual rate of interest should be all you send for now. The other rates should only be needed if you claim through court. You shouldn't need to know the formulae needed - that is more than a Personal Litigant should be expected to know.

Yes, that is the spready referred to in the LBA. You send them an updated spready (with extra interest accrued on it).

[TideTurner]

Barclaycard told me that the Information commissioner had CHANGED THE RULES and that my statements would be with me very soon.

 

 

All, I have had great success obtaining information from the banks by following up letters with tel calls. Before I pick up the phone, I get a blank piece of paper, write the date and time on it and Spoke To.

 

When they answer, I make a note of what was said, and just before the end of the call get the name of the person I spoke to. I then put this in my file.

 

You may never need it, but just in case. Also useful when looking back over correspondence and for notes in court (maybe not admissable, but you can state in confidence the date, time, who you spoke to, and what was said.

[TideTurner]

Bill-K, you ok? You seem to have aged i little.

[sarahpp]

I've been searching for some legal precedent for this mutuality & reciprocity argument and my googling brought up a paper written by unlockingthelaw.co.uk about contract law and a statement in it that the effect of the UTCCR (which implemented EU Directive 93/13) is that "the party dealing with the consumer cannot insert advantageous terms into contracts where there is no comparable term in favour of the consumer".

 

I then searched this thread to see if this had been debated in here before which brought up the above post made on 20 Dec which doesn't look like it got any discussion. It seems to me that the UTCCR and the OFT's interpretation of the UTCCR "fairness and balance require that both parties to a contract are equally bound by it and equally liable to pay compensation for failure to abide by it" (as quoted by Nick) could provide our answer to the bank's challenge of the contractual interest claim at the unauthorised rate.

 

Simply that the contract is currently weighted in favour of the bank (and against the consumer) by entitling the bank to charge interest at x% on unauthorised borrowings, and that until the bank addresses the fact that its charges were and are unenforceable, and/or unreasonable at law, you fully expect the court to uphold the OFT's standards and interpretation of the UTCCR and endorse your claim to interest at the rate specified in the contract, in the interests of the legal requirement of fairness and balance.

 

I think that this, used in addition to the unjust enrichment argument, gives further weight to our claims for contractual interest.

 

Thanks for this Bong (and Mad Nick in retrospect). This is such a long thread , understandably,posts don't always get the depth of discussion they deserve.

 

I know that this will help me, personally, a lot as I will be briefly outlining the rationale behind the rate before a defence is actually filed. It will hopefully give "pause for thought".

 

Thanks again

[bill-k]

Tide - excellent advice. I prefer to ask their name at the outset. It lets them know that they may be held responsible for what they are about to say. Let them "hear" you writing it down, too !! You don't get quite so much "fob-off" rubbish, I reckon.

 

Boy, have I aged, mate - and you know why. Stay young - stay a shark, mate !! There's plenty of fish where you are !!!!!

[Mad Nick]

Sarahpp, Bong et al,

Thanks for this Bong (and Mad Nick in retrospect). This is such a long thread , understandably,posts don't always get the depth of discussion they deserve.

Bong mentioned "unjust enrichment" and so have many others. I would just inject a note of caution about referring to "unjust enrichment". Whilst it's clear to all of us what we mean, I think a lawyer would run rings round us. If you haven't already, just try Googling it - I discovered two things :

• the language is completely impenetrable - so many types of "unjust enrichment" it makes your head explode : proprietary, personal ........ Try Wikipedia and go from there. There's whole books on the subject.
  
• Scottish law seemed OK (didn't look too closely, though) but English case law is all over the place with different cases apparently contradicting each other. There look to be all sorts of failed attempts in the last 5-10 years or so by the law profession to bring some clarity to "unjust enrichment".

I decided to avoid using the term completely. No need to give the Banks' solicitors a chance to show off. It's probably one of those legal phrases which sounds perfect but is actually a can of worms. Mad Nick.

[bill-k]

Thanks for the warning, Nick - Acknowledgement, at last !!!

[millymollymoo]

Ok my heads spinning concerning what rate you should use when applying CI!

I personally used authourised on Goldfish and unauthorised on O/H Cap 1!

In this thread its suggesting Enrichment by using the higher rate.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/lloyds-bank/54548-could-biggest-claim-site-6.html

 

Hope the link works!

 

What are your suggestions now...higher or lower being the right rate?

 

Milly X

[bill-k]

Istill prefer unauthorised as the primary claim, with authorised & statutory in the alternative. They'll want to beat you down before court, so until then the alternatives aren't in the equation, and it is simply a matter of haggling. You never haggle upwards !!!

[Guest strangewayofsavin]

Hi having read the oft site, they maintain they are not a legal entity, so can their statments be used in a court of law