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

[bram stoker]

Good morning Bill.

[bill-k]

Good morning to you, Vamp !!

 

I hear you're away over Christmas, and Chezt has been fielding a lot of queries in your spready thread. I'll try and help her out a bit, and learn some stuff as well if I can. I have yet to master the calculation of interest on penalties, and then interest on that !! Should be fun.

 

When are you off ?

 

And have a nice one.

 

Bill.

[sarahpp]

I think, Molly, that if you put a few of the earlier charges down on a spready that calculates this, then that will give you an idea of whether it's worth punching in the lot and claiming it, or kepping it simple and letting the bank keep that bit. It will at least be worth brownie points later on, if you need them.

 

 

Morning Bill

 

That is part of the reason I kept mine simple. If I get to court I don't fancy explaining to the judge why I claimed back interest at 24.9% (for example) and then slapped another 24.9% on top although I realise that some people may be more adept at arguing that point.

[bram stoker]

I'm really busy until 31 Jan, but will pop in as much as poss. No online access 22/12 - 3/1.

 

I've some guides in my Chambers if that helps.

 

Enjoy Christmas all. x

[bill-k]

Morning Bill

 

That is part of the reason I kept mine simple. If I get to court I don't fancy explaining to the judge why I claimed back interest at 24.9% (for example) and then slapped another 24.9% on top although I realise that some people may be more adept at arguing that point.

Agreed, Vamp. Unless this interest is a significant amount, it's probably not worth the argument.

[millymollymoo]

Hello and Good Morning to everybody, Hi bill-k,

 

I have decided that I will keep to what I have already, nice and simple:) and when it gets to the N1 I will remember to iffer the alternative of 8% stat!

 

I do have a question however, how successful is claiming the contractual interest on Credit Cards? This is ok to do this??

 

I do not think they are going to like it one bit:D ! Oh well!!

 

I have to say you are all such a lovely bunch of people and have really helped me understand things a lot better.

 

I have got to go and do some Xmas shopping now. I will catch up later!

 

Have a lovely day X:)

[JonCris]

Agreed, Vamp. Unless this interest is a significant amount, it's probably not worth the argument.

 

Agreed bill-k

 

Trouble with that argument is that most don't know just how much of a significant amount it is until they work it out

 

We have seen time & time again members who after recalculating the interest to allow for contractual compound interest come back on line to express their surprise as to the great difference it has made to what they thought was a relativley small claim amount

[Glenn UK]

Hello and Good Morning to everybody, Hi bill-k,

 

I have decided that I will keep to what I have already, nice and simple:) and when it gets to the N1 I will remember to offer the alternative of 8% stat!

 

I do have a question however, how successful is claiming the contractual interest on Credit Cards? This is OK to do this??

 

Successful in that as far as i can make out those who have tried to claim it and stuck to their guns have reclaimed contractual interest, i did with MBNA. Be careful though there is a lot of confusion over what contractual interest is and so many people say they have reclaimed it but in fact haven't, at least that was the case in the MBNA thread.

 

what i mean is i claimed my charges, interest paid on those charges and then on top of the lot i charged contractual interest.

 

As far as i am aware no one has got to court with this issue and whilst many will say of course not because the banks wont set foot in court.

They could easily defend this issue i believe without raising the issue of charges, by paying out on the rest of the claim which would then leave only the interest to argue about. Its a good reason to be careful when accepting partial settlements because you could end up not getting what you're entitled to and having no effective means of arguing over it if you went to court.

 

I do not think they are going to like it one bit:D ! Oh well!!

 

The argument you need to win is not about the rate, its about the right to claim the interest at all based on the contract. Once you convince the court if it comes to it the rate is a relatively small issue, whatever rate you actually choose.

 

I have to say you are all such a lovely bunch of people and have really helped me understand things a lot better.

 

I don't know if you made it to the rally, if you did I am surprised you still hold such a view about the members of this here forum !! Only joking of course.

 

I have got to go and do some Xmas shopping now. I will catch up later!

 

Have a lovely day X:)

 

JMHO

 

Glenn

[millymollymoo]

Thank you Glenn:).

[natwesttookmymoney]

" I have decided that I will keep to what I have already, nice and simple and when it gets to the N1 I will remember to iffer the alternative of 8% stat!"

Molly - I'm claiming 8 per cent in addition. The contractual interest is your loss, the statutory interest is like damages.

Westy

[bram stoker]

No. Statutory interest is added in place of contractual interest. If you can argue contractual, then you don't claim statutory.

 

I think you are confusing this with the claim for interest that they deducted from your account - the portion of which relates to the charges as opposed to true overdraft.

[bill-k]

Thanks Milly - hopefully you'll have had a good day when you read this.

 

Yeah - great bunch - and VERY tolerant !!

 

Westy - Am I reading that right ? You are claiming contractual AND statutory ? Do tell, if you would (in simple terms - it's me, remember !)

[bram stoker]

I posted inbetween Bill.

[natwesttookmymoney]

No. Statutory interest is added in place of contractual interest. If you can argue contractual, then you don't claim statutory.

 

I think you are confusing this with the claim for interest that they deducted from your account - the portion of which relates to the charges as opposed to true overdraft.

 

Hi, Vampiress.

An honour to be in your presence again, ma'am.

 

No confusion in my mind but I guess I could have made myself clearer. My account has been in overdraft for the vast majority of the last 6 years (since it was opened). When it hasn't been, it's because I was persuaded into a loan to pay off the overdraft - which was generated by charges (same old same old).

Therefore, I've been charged interest on the charges, so I suggest I have a clear and demonstrable loss caused by the bank's unlawful charging regime. Were that not the case, then there is the principle of equity, or mutual reciprocity - I have been denied use of the money. Further, the bank should not gain from its unlawful activity - so the interest rate that it charges me (authorised interest rate - unauthorised gets too complex for my brain) is a fair basis on which to assess my loss. The 8 per cent statutory has been described - not just here, but in other arenas and in other information - as the 'damages', if you like. So there are three tiers: the charges, the interest I have been charged and debited on them, and the statutory interest. Four, if you count reciprocity.

Had I not been charged interest, had i only gone o/d or exceeded the o/d occasionally, then I agree it would be harder to justify - you'd be depending entirely on reciprocity.

 

Do you agree? Or not?

Westy

[bill-k]

I posted inbetween Bill.

I'm too slow !!

I was considering mentioning some popular misconceptions, but I didn't think Westy would have fallen foul on that one. I wonder if a "Sticky" (I think that's what it is) could be put up with these in, or as part of the FAQ's.

1. Statutory is NOT the only option, now;

2. We can claim the interest charged to us by the banks on the charges, but this is NOT the Contractual interest which we also ADDITIONALLY claim now;

3. Cont. interest is compound, NOT simple interest and just altering the rate p.a. is incorrect;

4. If claiming Contractual, then lower rate(s) & Statutory should be claimed in the alternative;

5. The Limitations Act, whilst still applying to these charges, does NOT limit us to just reclaiming them over the last 6 years;

6. Bill-k doesn't ALWAYS mess about in other people's threads !!

 

Worth considering, at all ?

[bill-k]

We're leapfrogging here, but to this simian brain, it appears that Westy is taking Contractual interest to mean JUST the O/D interest previously charged to his account on the penalties made. Whilst this is obviously contractual, the reciprocal part of the contract is us effectively NOW charging the bank the same rate on the money they have been witholding.

 

Or am I out of my depth, as well as my tree ?

[natwesttookmymoney]

Hi, Bill

Did you send your post before you read my last?

W

[natwesttookmymoney]

Hi, Bill

Yep, we're leapfrogging.

I am talking ONLY about the interest charged on the charges. And I'm very kindly not seeking to recover the full unauthorised rate, which is 29.5% at the moment. Contractual - that's the interest they charge in line with their T&Cs, as amended, is it not? I am willing to be corrected, if I'm wrong.

What's the chances of that happenin', eh?

DON'T answer that!

W

[bill-k]

No -after, Westy, but I read it quickly so I didn't miss my slot !!!

 

Did I misunderstand ? Sorry if so.

[bill-k]

I won't DARE answer that, but that is why I wasn't doubting you at first. There may be something more to discuss here, but I've gotta pop out for about 10-15 mins. Will resume then if OK.

[bram stoker]

Ok - my view of the situ...

 

You get charged - you want that charge back.

When overdrawn you get charged interest. Some of this interest relates to the charges - you want that portion of interest back too.

 

How to calculate this - tricksy. When just applying a rate, you can easily exceed the amount of interest they actually took from your account. This is why I decided in my own calculations, to start with what they have taken, and apportion it (using the advanced spreadsheets). More on this in my Chambers.

 

The above is all included in your claim. That is your claim.

 

You then wish to add interest as you have suffered a loss / they have had unfair gain, depending which argument you are using.

 

If you can argue contractual do so. Statutory interest is only in place if there is no contractual interest present.

 

The arguements - 1. Mutuality and reciprocity. OR 2. Unjust enrichment.

 

Hope that clears things a little.

[Glenn UK]

 

The arguements - 1. Mutuality and reciprocity. AND 2. Unjust enrichment.

 

Hope that clears things a little.

 

Vamps

 

please excuse me being a little forward, I have changed that to read AND unjust enrichement.

 

Since whatever rate you are asking for it is arguable that the contract allowsit and that the banks has unjustly enriched itself by unlawfully taking your money and using it I think.

 

Small but important difference imho.

 

JMHO

 

Glenn

 

PS i was always told that size doesnt matter, however, sometimes small things make a big difference

[bram stoker]

I'm of the frame of mind still that it is OR and have seeked clarification on this.

 

If you claim mutuality and reciprocity you are simply arguing that you have a contract with the bank that states a rate that they use, and that you can use the same rate.

 

If you are saying they are unjustly enriched you are then asking for the rate that they have used in seeking profit elsewhere.

 

Different arguements which will effectively provide different rates.

 

I believe the first is simpler and more straight-forward. You can also use the "I didn't authorise the borrowing" arguement to get the unauthorised rate. The normal banking profit rate scenario will give a lower rate.

 

I'm not fully versed on the 2nd arguement.

[Glenn UK]

Vampiress

 

i think you make fair points and i suppose i would use the arguments sequentially in the same way that we might ask for the unauthorised, followed by authrorised and if the court didnt like 'please let me have some interest' Sec 69.

 

But on the basis of what you have said i agree with your interpretation.

 

ill go back to work now

 

Glenn

[Guest bong]

I think it is similar to claiming statutory interest in the alternative to contractual. You put both in in the hope that you will get one of them.