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

[JustJon]

Sorry westy didnt realise your claim was for charges debited interest plus contractural (statatory) at authorised rate (2) in my above post so for thoose interested in a successful claim at a high figure as in 2 above read here natwesttookmymoney - v- NatWest

 

plus contractual (Statutory)??? Sorry I don't understand that. It can't be both.

 

I don't think Westy did win authorised CI on top of charges and debited interest (as item 2). Did you Westy?

 

If not, its probably not a good idea pointing people there as a successful example of it, particularly considering the claim value.

 

JMO.

[JustJon]

I think Westy's claim was as detailed in item 1. i.e. Charges + Debited interest + Stat.

[newbody]

Removed to avoid confusion on this subject

[JustJon]

this one of the bits that lead me to believe it was section 2 of the above and from reading his thread he clamied charges debited interest and what he called statury interest at the banks rate of 17.95% and sec69 from how it reads to me

 

I don't think thats possible. I don't think any court/bank would entertain:

 

1) Charges +

2) Debit interest +

3) Interest at 17.95% +

4) sec69 interest

 

Westys thread reads to me as item 1:

 

Charges + Debit interest on those charges at the authorised rate + Statutory/sec69 interest at 8%. I don't think there is any additional CI included as your item 2 outlines above.

 

Anyway, probably best if Westy clarifies.

[natwesttookmymoney]

I don't think Westy did win authorised CI on top of charges and debited interest (as item 2). Did you Westy?

 

I won charges, plus debited interest, plus 8% statutory, as stated in my signature.

If not, its probably not a good idea pointing people there as a successful example of it, particularly considering the claim value. Successful example of what? It's a successful example of demonstrable loss plus SI. That is all I have ever suggested it was.

JMO.

 

:D:D

[natwesttookmymoney]

I don't think thats possible. I don't think any court/bank would entertain:

 

1) Charges +

2) Debit interest +

3) Interest at 17.95% +

4) sec69 interest

 

Nor do I.

 

Westys thread reads to me as item 1:

 

Charges + Debit interest on those charges at the authorised rate + Statutory/sec69 interest at 8%. Correctamundo. I don't think there is any additional CI included as your item 2 outlines above. No, neither do I - unless I've missed something. And the cheque adds up properly.

 

Anyway, probably best if Westy clarifies.

 

Goodness me, I didn't think a minor jest would generate this much confusion!!

 

:lol:

[JustJon]

Goodness me, I didn't think a minor jest would generate this much confusion!!

 

Unfortunately it seems it can.

 

Successful example of what? It's a successful example of demonstrable loss plus SI. That is all I have ever suggested it was.

 

In newbody's original post he explained that "option 2" was to claim the charges + debited interest + interest on the whole lot at the authorised contractual rate. He then said that some claims had been won in this way but they were only relatively small claims (All very true).

 

You then responded by saying that you didn't think your claim was small. People then thought you were implying you had won an £11,700 claim which included additional contractual interest, as explained in item 2.

 

Your case was then cited as a successful "large" contractual interest claim (As item 2). I think you'll agree that would give people the wrong impression and can't be a good thing.

 

Anyway, I don't want to get into a long drawn out argument about it. As long as its clear to people reading the thread that a large (£11,700) contractual interest claim has not yet been won AFAIK.

[TideTurner]

Unfortunately it seems it can.

 

 

 

In newbody's original post he explained that "option 2" was to claim the charges + debited interest + interest on the whole lot at the authorised contractual rate. He then said that some claims had been won in this way but they were only relatively small claims

 

I've seen little or no claims where people are going for damages. Where there is a loss there is damage. The fact that people have been 'hiding' from the system under the threat of the CRA's, DCA's or Banks, or simply haven't been able to obtain credit as the result of threats is damage in itself. I have recently filed and claimed SI from the date of my loss and claimed for damages for Invasion of Privacy, Unlawful Provision of Information etc. Where your information has been processed outside the EC without your specific consent, you have a claim.

 

Tide

[natwesttookmymoney]

 

In newbody's original post he explained that "option 2" was to claim the charges + debited interest + interest on the whole lot at the authorised contractual rate. Err......I don't think so....He then said that some claims had been won in this way but they were only relatively small claims (All very true).

 

Let's just see what Newbody's post actually said:

 

"2) is to claim bank charges and then the banks authorised borrowing rate compounded on top of this (my emphasis) (the general concenus on if you are going down this path is to apply for it from the outset i.e in your Prelim letter and Lba. Some have won with this but the sums claimed for have been small so easier for the banks to payout and swallow the cost. )"

 

You then responded by saying that you didn't think your claim was small. People then thought you were implying No implication about it: I won a large claim. you had won an £11,700 claim which included additional contractual interest, as explained in item 2. No I didn't. My claim wasn't made up as you stated, nor did I ever imply that it was. I did not mis-state or mislead: I made it very clear what I had claimed and won and I'm sure you'll be happy to take this opportunity to correct any misleading impression you may have given. The subject is complex enough already without misquoting.

 

Your case was then cited as a successful "large" contractual interest claim (As item 2). I think you'll agree that would give people the wrong impression and can't be a good thing. I didn't give the wrong impression, I'm sure you'll agree. However, some have got the wrong end of the stick, clearly.

 

Anyway, I don't want to get into a long drawn out argument about it. As long as its clear to people reading the thread that a large (£11,700) contractual interest claim has not yet been won AFAIK. In fact no case with additional CI much over £2000 has been won - the only wins (so far) have been in the realm of 'nuisance vale'.

 

 

Hope that's all clear. Wouldn't want people scratching their heads with puzzlement as they look at my post and subsequent discussion!

[JustJon]

In newbody's original post he explained that "option 2" was to claim the charges + debited interest + interest on the whole lot at the authorised contractual rate.

Err......I don't think so....

Really? Go back and actually read the post Westy from start to finish. See if you can find anything you've missed and then come back and correct that cocky statement you've just made, if thats not too much to ask of you.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let's just see what Newbody's post actually said:

 

"2) is to claim bank charges and then the banks authorised borrowing rate compounded on top of this (my emphasis)(the general concenus on if you are going down this path is to apply for it from the outset i.e in your Prelim letter and Lba. Some have won with this but the sums claimed for have been small so easier for the banks to payout and swallow the cost. )"

But you missed a bit. Just above the part that you've quoted:

 

Charges(bounced dd cheques s/o : unauthorised clearing payment charges etc : unauthorised overdraft fees (if charges put you into that postion)) + the interest the bank charged you for these fees (debited interest) at that point in time (from here on in i will refer to these as the bank charges)

 

The operative part of that paragraph is "from here on in i will refer to these as the bank charges" which changes its meaning quite considerably.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

No implication about it: I won a large claim.

Newbody was describing how most (added) contractural interest claims were small. You then said that yours wasn't small. Do I really need to spell out how that was misleading?

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm sure you'll be happy to take this opportunity to correct any misleading impression you may have given. The subject is complex enough already without misquoting.

As it should now be clear where the misunderstanding as come from I presume you will be taking your own advice here.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

I didn't give the wrong impression, I'm sure you'll agree. However, some have got the wrong end of the stick, clearly.

 

I realise thats its probably too much to ask for you to acknowledge any responsibility whatsoever but just think about this for a second: Why do you think people got the wrong end of the stick (again)?

Maybe its their fault?

No better than that - Maybe its my fault for pointing it out.

Anybody but yourself.

[natwesttookmymoney]

JustJon

 

I really don't understand what you're on about, I'm afraid. I quoted point 2 from Newbody's post in its entirety.

[TANZARELLI]

Please folks if you too wish to debate who is and who isn't right, and who said this and who said what, please could you do it via PM, as this trhead is getting long enough as it is, lets get back to the nitty gritty of CI and why it should/shouldn't be claimed.

 

Don't wish to see arguements break out.

 

Thankz

 

Tanz

[millymollymoo]

Resubscribing and

 

With you tanz;)

 

Milly XX

[natwesttookmymoney]

JustJon

 

It would appear that you have a point. Having re-read Newbody's post very carefully, it can appear that he is referring to charges and interest debited as 'bank charges' - bringing the two elements together under one heading. If he is, then I have indeed misunderstood.

 

As far as I'm concerned, charges are charges; interest (in whatever form) is interest. I don't conflate the two.

 

For the sake of clarity, as my signature says and my thread makes clear, I claimed and won charges, plus debited interest, plus statutory interest at 8%. Plus court costs, of course.

[Quest]

Wow this is one big thread. Just wanted to ask for soma advice re continuation of a claim including compound contractual interest.

 

I calimed against nationwide for just under £5k, including charges (£2k), court fees and CI (£2.5k).

 

Nationwide have paid all charges, court fees and statutory interest ( I put the 'option' to pay statuory in my POC ).

 

Question is ; given that Nationwide have not settled in full; therefore do I leave the claim as is and go for the balance (which is the CI interest less interest paid)?

 

Also, in expectation of their defence, ' weve paid up', what is the best approach for me to take in the likely forthcoming AQ?

 

Quest

 

I should add that I did advise NW that I was going to claim CI in my prelim and LBA so I believe I still have the option of going for this

[Guest Battleaxe]

Quest,

 

IMHO, as you stated the option of 8% interest in your POC and they paid on this option, I don't think you could go for CI and I am sure a Judge would only grant 8% on these grounds.

 

If you stated CI from the outset in your preloim and LBA this would be a different argument.

[TANZARELLI]

Quest,

 

IMHO, as you stated the option of 8% interest in your POC and they paid on this option, I don't think you could go for CI and I am sure a Judge would only grant 8% on these grounds.

 

If you stated CI from the outset in your preloim and LBA this would be a different argument.

 

I agree with you Battleaxe.

 

Tanz

[innocent]

Quest,

 

IMHO, as you stated the option of 8% interest in your POC and they paid on this option, I don't think you could go for CI and I am sure a Judge would only grant 8% on these grounds.

 

If you stated CI from the outset in your preloim and LBA this would be a different argument.

 

I have stated the 8% option in my POC (due to be handed in TODAY) :o

 

but have included the contratual interest request in my LBA....

 

(so I think I would be ok, based on your responses)

 

 

Why?

[sezj127]

Ok after (finally) making it through this thread. Im still pretty undecided what to do with my Halifax cc claim. I have discovered the route of contractural intrest in between sending my LBA and filing my N1 and am a little confused as to how to go about (if i still can) in persuing this route. My claim if it goes to court (due to file 19th March) with the 8% interest stands at £492.54. However should i chose contractural (16.9% say, as an average rate) this would rise to £645.43. I have not mentioned this in either my prelim or LBA (wasnt aware it could be done at the time), so is this route still an option?

 

To be honest though after reading this thread im starting to lose my confidence in attempting to claim the CI and to just claim the standard 8% at court as i have done with 3 previous claims (1won and paid, 1won and awaiting cheque, 1 ongoing in court).

 

Any help/advice will be very much appreciated and my thread is sezj127 V Halifax (Credit Card) should anyone care to answer there/have a read through so far.

[Glenn UK]

Ok after (finally) making it through this thread. Im still pretty undecided what to do with my Halifax cc claim. I have discovered the route of contractural intrest in between sending my LBA and filing my N1 and am a little confused as to how to go about (if i still can) in persuing this route. My claim if it goes to court (due to file 19th March) with the 8% interest stands at £492.54. However should i chose contractural (16.9% say, as an average rate) this would rise to £645.43. I have not mentioned this in either my prelim or LBA (wasnt aware it could be done at the time), so is this route still an option?

 

To be honest though after reading this thread im starting to lose my confidence in attempting to claim the CI and to just claim the standard 8% at court as i have done with 3 previous claims (1won and paid, 1won and awaiting cheque, 1 ongoing in court).

 

Any help/advice will be very much appreciated and my thread is sezj127 V Halifax (Credit Card) should anyone care to answer there/have a read through so far.

 

if you wish to pursue the CI route then you can issue a revised LBA shoiwng the CI and give the defendant a further 14 days and i dont think you will have any problems at least in terms of the process.

 

Personally i wouldnt put 8% in the alternative or indeed anyhting else (i did in my orignal claims) instead i would simply put the CI in with 'or at an appropriate rate determined by the courts in the laternative'.

 

It wont stop banks paying or offering 8% but it will stop them saying that this offer is in accordance with your POC which i believe some of them have.

 

Incidentally as far as i can make out the judges are quite capable of making an award of interest at whatver level they feel fit as long as interest forms part of the POC.

 

 

Edit it appears to me that there is a lot of negative comments about attemtping to claim CI based on the fact that some people havent won it and of course thats true not everyone is successful. However, by the same token a lot of people have claimed and won contractual interest (for clarification i dont mean interest debited to their account, i mean interest charged on top of their charges and debit interest) and it seems to me that its worth including in your POC and if you do the work abnd stick to your guns then there is a good possibility you will get it.

 

If you make a mistake then you may not, I didnt get it on one of my claims because i made a mistake, but on theother hand you may.

 

JMHO

 

Glenn

[innocent]

Personally i wouldnt put 8% in the alternative or indeed anyhting else (i did in my orignal claims) instead i would simply put the CI in with 'or at an appropriate rate determined by the courts in the laternative'.

 

It wont stop banks paying or offering 8% but it will stop them saying that this offer is in accordance with your POC which i believe some of them have.

 

Like the idea!!!!!!

 

Well submitted a CI claim yesterday to Lloyds, with 8% in alternative....

 

.... but due to submit 2 more CI claims in 2 weeks; may use this!!

 

 

Innocent

[golfscape]

Hi all,

 

Has anyone compiled a list of all successful contractual interst claims?

 

or if I wanted this info would it mean going through each settled claim to establish if statutory or contractual awarded?

 

Specifically is this info available for Lloyds?

 

:grin:

[Glenn UK]

Hi all,

 

Has anyone compiled a list of all successful contractual interst claims? Dont think so, would you like to start one?

 

or if I wanted this info would it mean going through each settled claim to establish if statutory or contractual awarded? Yes and it would be a good thing to do.

 

Specifically is this info available for Lloyds?

 

:grin:

 

What do you think?

 

Glenn

[Guest bong]

wasn't Lucid and Mindzai's claim against Lloyds?

[golfscape]

Yes thanks Bong Lucid and Minddzais claim was against Lloyds and it contained CI.

 

Glenn UK....was that supposed to be helpful?

 

cheers