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

[Delboy01]

Just to emphasise a point there by Glenn, you must be fully aware of the risks if you do end up allocated to fast-track. There was a user had a lot to pay on a claim regarding a mortgage early redemption penalty that had been allocated to fast track. Please be very careful.

 

Good luck.

 

Ok thats decided it for me Statutory it is...

[MgintyMIA]

HUGE thanks people, if I win I will def make a nice donation to here. It's been invaluable.

Re point 3) I now need to go though my statements again and add on the debit interest I ignored when there were no charges plus change to -0.01 as suggested. Then I think I will finally be ready! I have one charge from 23 Jan 01 - do you think I should remove it (6+ years) or just leave it and let the bank decide. The latter methinks.

Re point 2) I guess the more backing info the better but a Bank Summary Charge sheet should be suffucient and not the accompanying statement.

Phew - I'm up to page 30 on this thread and my head hurts!!

[bill-k]

Ok thats decided it for me Statutory it is...

Delboy - If you really just want to make sure you stay below the £5k threshold and in the SCC, why not claim contractual, but keep the claim below £5k. You're not obliged to claim every charge if you don't want to, but that way, you get more than if you just claimed statutory.

 

FWIW, my interpretation of Pearl is that interest is NOT included in the claim value for determining allocation, anyway. Interest is set out as a separate amount in the POC's, whether it be stat or cont, and is therefore easily distinguishable from the rest of the claim value. Interest is, however, included when determining court fees.

 

If you want a spready-buddy, mate, then I'll be yours, OK ?

 

- Just don't call me Rodney - or a plonker !!!

 

PS Vamp - you just scared the life out of Delboy !!!

[Delboy01]

Ta Bill, Im am actually at £4300, in charges at the moment with £690 of statutory int to go on to that, I know I can go up to £5000 in charges and I probably will get close to that as I am over my overdraft and expecting more charges to be made. My statutory S/sheet is working fine so I shall now stick to my timescales.

 

I do realise going for contractual would in theory bump it up to poss £8000 or £9000 but I shall stay as I am. (cant believe I have just written that,, DOH! )

 

I do appreciate all of the peoples help on here

 

Thanks Guys and Gals.. Keep the Faith!

[tifo]

my interpretation of Pearl is that interest is NOT included in the claim value for determining allocation, anyway. Interest is set out as a separate amount in the POC's, whether it be stat or cont, and is therefore easily distinguishable from the rest of the claim value.

 

If this is so as above, then if the charges are less than £5k and the contractual amount takes it over, will it be allocated small claims?

 

I have a claim coming up where if i add the contractual rate of £4 a day, it adds to over £8,000 just for this. The actual claim is for £450.

 

They also have an unauth rate of 31%.

 

I've been to the bank today and they could not answer whether the unauth rate AND the daily rate are charged or not. All the staff said they do not know.

 

I was charged £4 a day and have a letter stating this is what they will charge me if i go over my limit. This showed as 'unauth O/D fee' on my statements.

 

So, which one?

[bill-k]

If this is so as above, then if the charges are less than £5k and the contractual amount takes it over, will it be allocated small claims?

Yes, that's my interpretation of the rules, and also Bong's, I believe. Bong has been trying to get a clarification of this from HMCS or MCOL, but is still awaiting an intelligent reply I believe.

I have a claim coming up where if i add the contractual rate of £4 a day, it adds to over £8,000 just for this. The actual claim is for £450.

I think you're misunderstanding contractual, here. The £4 per day is what they charged you. Contractual interest is what we are about to charge them on our entire claim. You might need to do some more reading up, I'm afraid !!

They also have an unauth rate of 31%.

Now, that's what I call contractual interest !!

I've been to the bank today and they could not answer whether the unauth rate AND the daily rate are charged or not. All the staff said they do not know.

Not necessary - you charge them the unauthorised rate.

I was charged £4 a day and have a letter stating this is what they will charge me if i go over my limit. This showed as 'unauth O/D fee' on my statements.

You claim back the £4 daily charges, plus you then add contractual interest at 31% pa compounded daily on each of those £4 charges.

So, which one?

So it's both.

[Delboy01]

Guys Guys, dont do this to me pleeeeeez

 

Are we saying that we are trying to get confirmation that if YOUR CHARGES are under £5000,, but your contractual interest is £4000 per se

 

It can still go in the SCC ????

 

Delboy

[bill-k]

Guys Guys, dont do this to me pleeeeeez

 

Are we saying that we are trying to get confirmation that if YOUR CHARGES are under £5000,, but your contractual interest is £4000 per se

 

It can still go in the SCC ????

 

Delboy

Yes, mate - 'fraid so !!!

[tifo]

I think you're misunderstanding contractual, here. The £4 per day is what they charged you. Contractual interest is what we are about to charge them on our entire claim. You might need to do some more reading up, I'm afraid !!

 

Bill-K, they themselves cannot make make up their mind what they charge. The lady at the bank today said it's now £8 a day. The i said what's the 31% unauthorised rate that is also stated? She said thats what they charge. I asked so do they charge both? She said depends on the account (my account was 6 years ago so doesn't exist in that name anymore).

 

The fact remains that they charged me £4 a day and i am told to charge this back as it is the contractual rate.

[photoman]

At this point I would just like to bring up the matter of A.T.E insurance.

A couple of members of this site have mentioned this to me.

This is also known as After The Event Insurance (A.T.E), and is more commonly used in Personal Injury claims, but can also be applied to claims such as ours.

Basically from what I undrestand, it covers the legal costs for both sides should you lose in a Fast or Multi Track court. I gather it costs around £250 to insure yourself for legal and court costs upto £50,000, including paying back the premium itself. Otherwise, the premium you also claim back as part of your claim should you win, so it is "self insured" either way.

Well worth looking into if you think your claim is going to go to a court other than small claims.

Do a web-search on it for more info.

 

And perhaps someone looking in who may know more could enlighten us?

[bill-k]

Bill-K, they themselves cannot make make up their mind what they charge. The lady at the bank today said it's now £8 a day. The i said what's the 31% unauthorised rate that is also stated? She said thats what they charge. I asked so do they charge both? She said depends on the account (my account was 6 years ago so doesn't exist in that name anymore).

 

The fact remains that they charged me £4 a day and i am told to charge this back as it is the contractual rate.

[/color][/color]

The £4 is a daily penalty charge. If it were interest, then it would be a varying amount. Whoever told you that this £4 charge was contractual interest was talking out of their alternative orifice !!

The 31% is contractual interest. Because they were charging you an extortionate daily penalty, then they probably have not charged you their 31% interest.

But the fact remains that 31% is what you can now charge them for "borrowing" your money without your (or the law's) authority. That's why you charge them the unauthorised borrowing rate.

[bill-k]

At this point I would just like to bring up the matter of A.T.E insurance.

Interesting that - thanks Photoman. Well worth a Google. I wonder if anybody here has actually taken this out ?

[Glenn UK]

Just to emphasise a point there by Glenn, you must be fully aware of the risks if you do end up allocated to fast-track. There was a user had a lot to pay on a claim regarding a mortgage early redemption penalty that had been allocated to fast track. Please be very careful.

 

Good luck.

 

Vamps

 

Hi there, happy new year and hope you are well.

 

couple of points/clarification in the case in question are you able to confirm this was definitely to do with an ERC and not bank charges?

 

And when you say they had to pay a lot, do you mean they lost and ended up with costs being awarded against them or do you mean they had a lot of fees to pay out?

 

If its the latter then the fees are 'considerable', we paid £250 to submit our claim, another £100 for the AQ and there will be another £250 listing fee if it gets that far i believe.

 

And of course thats before it acutally gets to court.

 

Glenn

 

Ps Edit this has nothing to do with whether you claim contractual interest only the value of the claim as your court decides and there are options for those who dont want to risk fast track but with larger claims.

[miss_CORErupted]

i'm getting a migraine just reading this thread

 

so i don't tihnk i will be claiming

also it feels a bit greedy to me, i don't what other ppl tink about that

[bill-k]

Glenn, it was Jamorgan, I believe. This is the killer post:-

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/post-494428.html

[bill-k]

i'm getting a migraine just reading this thread

 

so i don't tihnk i will be claiming

also it feels a bit greedy to me, i don't what other ppl tink about that

 

Miss_C, I think other people here have realised that the banks are experts at making us, their customers, feel stupid and even guilty. All to their own advantage. Surely, notwithstanding your migraine and your other difficulties, you have at least seen through that myth by what you have read ?

 

Please don't let them take both your money and your self-respect.

 

Please, matey.

[Glenn UK]

I'm getting a migraine just reading this thread

 

so i don't think i will be claiming

also it feels a bit greedy to me, i don't what other ppl think about that

 

I understand where you're coming from, no i haven't got a migraine, the greed bit.

 

however, there are a couple of points that you should understand.

 

You have a contract in law that is supposed to be bilateral ie. its fair to both parties and doesn't favour one over the other.

 

If it isn't bilateral then it means its unfair and when its unfair the law favours the interpretation in the consumers favour.

 

So bearing these issues in mind it seems reasonable that you can benefit from the contract in the same way that the bank does, and that seems reasonable and fair to me.

 

If the sums of money that arise out of applying the contractual rates, its not greed, its a simple consequence of the terms that both parties were working to.

 

Finally something else is that most of us have had the bank impose these terms on us and have been charged the contractual rate. The big difference is that the sums of money we have paid have by and large been relatively small and have been paid out over a number of months and years.

 

 

If you had the time and inclination to input all of your account transactional history into a spreadsheet you could work out exactly how much difference there would be if the bank hadn't imposed these unlawful charges and punitive interest rates.

 

I suspect that many of us would be surprised at how much we have actually paid and that our claims are typically significantly less than those figures.

 

Vamps might have a view on this issue since she developed the spreadsheets many people use, or maybe mindzai because he did something similar.

 

In essence i don't agree it is greedy, i do think its a consequence of the banks greed, but because of the way contract law works its the only option you have to get a fair redress since i don't believe that Sec 69 interest reflects a fair return under these circumstances.

 

JMHO

 

Glenn

[Glenn UK]

Miss_C, I think other people here have realised that the banks are experts at making us, their customers, feel stupid and even guilty. All to their own advantage. Surely, notwithstanding your migraine and your other difficulties, you have at least seen through that myth by what you have read ?

 

Please don't let them take both your money and your self-respect.

 

Please, matey.

 

Damn

 

So much eloquence from a bloody ape!!!

 

I wish id said that

 

Glenn

[bill-k]

Damn

 

So much eloquence from a bloody ape!!!

 

I wish id said that

 

Glenn

You're being uncharacteristically kind to me today, Glenn.

 

So what's this favour you're about to ask me, then ?

 

[photoman]

you do any research on APE (sorry i meant ATE) insurance bill ?

I would value your opinion.......and yours too Glenn if lookin ?

[bill-k]

Miss_C - as Glenn has suggested, how about just looking at exactly what you can claim, just out of interest, by completing a spreadsheet ? No risk, just a bit of effort. Take your time. I'll help. We all will. Even old Glenn, here, as you can see.

 

Take a break, and give it some thought.

[bill-k]

you do any research on APE (sorry i meant ATE) insurance bill ?quote]

Had a quick scan, P-M, and it seems to apply to personal injury claims. I won't use the word "only" - although that seems implied. Also, it seems to be available only if one engages a solicitor on a "no win no fee" basis, and it is arranged through that solicitor. It may be a good thing, but it looks a little like PPI insurance at the moment.

[Paintball]

Dear Bill et al

 

I have read and read and read again through all the information on interest, contractual compound or otherwise until I'm sick of it and have no clear understanding of ANYTHING!

 

Nothing that I have read here has clarified this matter and none of the spreadsheets make any sense. So you know what? I'm going to stick to my original claim of getting back all of the charges that the Coop Bank have levied against me.

 

I do know what I'm doing thank you and yes, I do deserve to get my money back! But if I start going into trying to charge interestother than the 8% at court claim stage then no, I don't know what I'm doing and my feeling is that I shouldn't bother.

 

And I know I'm not the only one on this whole site who's totally confused and fed up with this interest baloney ...

 

P:mad:

[tifo]

paintball ... its so easy ...

 

if you use Mindzai's spreadsheet, you simply insert the bank's unauthorised rate, or any rate you want to charge, on the first sheet. put all your charges on the second sheet (charges to the left, interest to the right). That's it!

 

the third sheet has worked out how much to claim with 8% statutory interest (you add this at court stage).

 

the forth and fifth sheets give you two figures based on whether you want a monthly rate or daily rate on the unauthorised rate you entered in sheet 1. you can then send this amount with the first prelim letter, but you won't be able to add the 8% stat afterwards.

 

contractual interest increases a claim by about 3 times, and stat 8% by about .33 (a third).

 

hope this helps.

[Glenn UK]

Im not sure what the point of your post is paintaball?

 

Everyone has the right to choose what they do or dont do, if you choose not to then thats fine.

 

if i have missed the point im sorry please help me out.

 

 

glenn