The gasman V HBOS

[thegasman]

Hi

 

Not sure if I am on the right thread here.

 

I'm also in dispute with HBOS over charges.

 

I sent them a letter claiming the last 6 years charges back. The letter included a full schedule of charges including dates and amounts. Not surprisingly they wrote back stating that they believed their charges were entirely fair.

 

I then wrote a without prejudice letter to them offering them a settlement based on £12.50 per charge (I just took the £12 figure banded about and added 50p in case it is decided that say £12.10 is acceptable; crazy I know). I stated in the letter that if I didn't receive a reply with 14 days I would start court proceedings. I haven't heard any more from them.

 

I now need to follow up with court action but I am not sure what amount I should claim. Should it be the full charges of between £25 and £35 each over the 6 year period plus interest at 8% or should I make a claim for the amounts charged less £12 for each charge, plus the interest.

 

Any advise would be appreciated.

Many thanks.

 

John

[sea-sidelady]

Hiya John.

 

I have started you on your own thread as you will get more help this way.

 

First thing...Claim the lot! No one has stated the correct amount will stand at £12, so you want all your money returned. So yes claim the full amount of £35 per charge and all the £28 monthly fees.

 

If you have sent the prelim letter and the lba letter, then yes you are ready to file at court.

 

Everything you need is in the step by step guide in my signature, but if you need any help just ask.

 

You can claim the 8% now.

[thegasman]

Thanks sea-sidelady

 

I purchased the Patricia Pearl book and the lawpack kit from the site and I have gone through the initial letter procedures so I will now start the court process for the full amount.

 

I am one of those daft people financially who stays loyal to these organisations even though I could get a better deal elsewhere, mortgage being the classic example, but loyalty means absolutely nothing to them. I have similar problems with credit card companies in that I have never missed any payments and usually pay a little over the minimum amount each month but they repay this by writing informing me that the interest is going up by 10% or so. It's absolutely outrageous and criminal in the moral sense at least.

 

My thanks to everyone on this site as it has encouraged me to take these people on. I don't want to have something for nothing but I do want to be treated fairly.

 

I'll update the thread as and when anything happens.

 

Best Regards

 

John

[thegasman]

Hi

 

I went along to my local county court and started proceeding against Halifax/HBOS on 4th June 2008.

 

I received a reply from Halifax dated 18th June. I assume there letter was standard in that it simply states that they have asked the Financial Services Authority to suspend the normal timetable for dealing with this. The letter then states that they will not issue or respond to any further communications on this matter until the OFT have reached a conclusion.

 

I have received two letters from Halifax Retail Collections department during this time ( strange interpretation of non communication - LOL!!!), the first asking for payment to be made into my account and the second dated 29th June 2009 stating that if I do not make a payment into my account within the next 7 days they will assume I no longer want the account and they will refer it to their collections department and possible reporting of this account to a credit reference agency.

 

Having looked at several threads on this site I assume this would at the very least be a breach of the Banking Code and if I have understood correctly the Consumer Credit Act.

 

I will write back to them within the next few days with copies to Trading Standards, FSA. OFT and probably the Government as major shareholder.

 

Any advice or directing to a thread would be appreciated.

 

Many thanks

 

John

Edited July 1, 2009 by thegasman

[sea-sidelady]

Send them an account in dispute letter.

 

They can't chase you for this now. I will find the letter for you.

[sea-sidelady]

ACCOUNT IN DISPUTE

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

Your ref:

 

 

Thank you for your letter of **DATE**, the contents of which are noted.

 

 

I am disputing the total value of these debts with **BANK** due to unlawful and unreasonable charges. As such, therefore, I consider this account to be in dispute and no further action or payment shall be made until this matter is resolved.

As per OFT guidelines Section 2.8k "not ceasing collection activity whilst investigating a reasonably queried or disputed debt."

 

This process may take some time, due to the Office of Fair Trading's test case, but I will try to expedite this issue as a matter of urgency.

 

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 would prefer to do this than merely respond with standard letters and leaflets.

 

I would appreciate your due diligence in this matter.

 

I look forward to hearing from you in writing.

 

Yours faithfully

 

Send this.

[thegasman]

Thanks sea-side lady:)

[sea-sidelady]

You're welcome.

 

That should stop the letters. You might get one saying they won't send any more.

[thegasman]

Hi all

 

Update.

 

I received the Allocation Questionnaire and returned it to the Court. I asked that the case be heard on the grounds that justice is being withheld by allowing the stay of these cases to continue any longer. I don't hold out much hope but it just might fall before a judge on a standing up for justice day. I am waiting for the Court reply.

 

On a much more serious note in my opinion the Halifax have completely ignored my Account in Dispute letter (not even bothering to say they don't accept it) and continued to send 'threatening' letters. I wrote to the Office of Fair Trading with the details and hopefully many other people have too so that they will investigate this situation. I sent a copy of my complaint to the Halifax but again no specific reply from them.

 

My claim against the Halifax is for about £2100 and the account in dispute has been left with an overdraft balance of £850 approx. which is the figure I calculated was owed to me based on a charge of £12.50 per item (not really relevant but just showing why the balance is there).

 

I don't know why I am so surprised but I am - My wife has a separate account with Halifax into which her wages are paid and last Friday we received notification from the Halifax that they had taken the money from her account on the previous Monday to pay off the disputed amount in our joint account. They waited until just after her wages were paid in to do this and didn't give her any prior notification.

 

I find this totally outrageous in that the money is in dispute and more importantly subject to an ongoing Court case. To my mind what they have done is to stick two fingers up to the legal/justice system and have taken the law into their own hands.

 

Fortunately this doesn't cause us any immediate financial hardship but I can't just let this rest.

 

I will be writing to the OFT, FSA, Trading standards, Chancellor, MP's about this and making a hell of a nuisance of myself but I wonder whether anyone can guide me to the right legaleeze to use in this matter.

 

My blood pressure has risen again now I have written this - LOL!!

 

Speak again later

 

Regards

 

John

[yourbank]

Moore-Blick, the deputy Master of Rolls for the Courts has already stated that the stay in place is a reasonable step. Expect your case to be stayed.

The bank used the Right of Set Off so if you are gonna leave an account dormant, do not hold funds in another account with the same bank.

You need to understand that UTCCR 1999 which is what you are arguing means that for a breach, the term doesn't exist so I hope your claim is for the full amount and not just £12.50 per charge cos you are selling yourself short.

[thegasman]

Thanks yourbank.

 

I have claimed the full amount thanks to this site.

 

We should have cleared the other account but I assumed (wrongly) because the amount was in dispute and subject to a Court case nothing would happen until the case was resolved.

 

Regards

 

John

[thegasman]

Hi all

 

Received the expected Stay from the Court today.

 

So the Court has taken my fees but have put the case on hold whilst the bank has just taken the money anyway - there's justice for you

 

John

[thegasman]

Copy of letter going out to Prime Minister's Office, my MP, my MEP's today-

 

Don't expect eveyone to agree with it but I would be obliged if you would let me know if there are any obvious errors of fact - thanks

 

10th August 2009

Dear,

I write to ask your views on the unjust problem of penalty charges being applied by the UK High Street Banks and their apparent disregard of the guidelines set out by the Office of Fair Trading (OFT), Banking Code, and maybe other bodies, when a customer disputes these charges. I also ask for your views on the prolonging tactics being used by the Banks and the Financial Services Authority by continued appeals and requests for staying of Court cases. The latest appeal by the banks appears to be little more than begging exercise for mercy because it might cost them a lot of money if justice is served. This action is denying reasonably speedy justice to take place. All very serious charges and yet it doesn’t appear that anyone in authority is prepared to speak out and take action against this.

It has long been held under common law in this Country that contractual penalty charges which exceed the actual loss suffered are unlawful but it would seem from the High Court Appeal case last year that it is doubtful that this would be a valid legal argument with regard to bank charges. The judges obviously have to work within the law and I respect this but I see this situation as socially unjust and just another example of clever lawyers trying to circumnavigate true justice.

The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 has confirmed that a disproportionate penalty would be an example of an unfair term and that this would therefore be unenforceable by law and the Director General of the OFT announced in 2005 that any penalty charge which exceeds actual losses is disproportionate.

Cont.

10th August 2009/ Eleanor Laing MP/pg2

Charging anything up to £40 for a computer generated letter informing you that a direct debit or similar has not been paid and then applying the charge to the account which then possibly takes your account into an unauthorized overdraft situation must be considered disproportionate by the vast majority of people. Yet despite all of this the Banks continue to apply these charges.

The Banks are making billions of pounds in profit from these unjust charges so they are unlikely to do anything about the situation so it up to Parliament to force the issue. A 2005 survey by the BBC and others concluded that 1 in 5 bank customers suffered from these unjust charges and I suspect this ratio is now much higher. This is an extremely large proportion of the electorate and therefore requires action if Parliament is to be truly representative of the people of this Country.

To get a feel for the anger being generated by this situation I would suggest you take a look at some of the consumer forums on the internet. Two such websites are –

www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk

and

www.moneysavingexpert.com

To make matters even worse (and that is saying something) some banks are completely ignoring the Banking Code and Office of Fair Trading Guidelines by continuing to pursue payment of these charges after the alleged debt is officially in dispute. So on the one hand the Banks have managed to get all such cases stayed by the Courts but on the other hand they are still pursuing the alleged debts and even taking money from other accounts you have with them to settle this disputed debt. I find this situation totally outrageous and unjust. We find ourselves in a situation where justice is being denied us for a time but the banks can obtain what they perceive as justice with immediate effect. It seems to me that the Banks are implying that they are above the law. This is a totally unacceptable situation and must be addressed immediately.

My own personal experience of this is with the Halifax (a bank in which the Government is a majority shareholder) and I attach a summary of my experience to date so that you can see what is happening.

I look forward to receiving your speedy reply and your views on this matter and confirmation of what you intend to do to rectify this situation.

Yours sincerely,

10th August 2009

xxxxx v Halifax Bank

Details-

1. 2008 – Letter to Halifax requesting charges data for previous 6 years and expressing my dissatisfaction at the level of charges being applied to the account.

2. 2008 – Letter from Halifax stating that charges considered fair and reasonable and list of charges as requested received by me.

All letters from this point sent either special delivery or recorded delivery.

3. 23/02/2009 – Letter to Halifax with schedule re-claiming charges.

4. 05/03/2009 – Letter from Halifax stating that charges had been applied correctly and stating that I should contact them to discuss repayment.

5. 03/2009 – Day after receiving above letter I telephoned but they had nothing to add only being interested in repayment by me.

6. 17/03/2009 – Letter to Halifax stating my disappointment at their attitude and response and making a non prejudicial offer of settlement based on a charge of approximately £12.50 per item.

7. 2009 – Numerous computer generated letters from Halifax requesting payment of money.

8. 04/06/2009 – Letter to Halifax stating my surprise that they continued to chase payment when the account is in dispute and informing them of my intention to start County Court proceedings. Also reminded Halifax of my non prejudicial offer.

9. 04/06/2009 – Commence County Court proceedings against Halifax.

10. 02/07/2009 - Formal ‘Account in Dispute’ letter sent to Halifax and pointing out that they were in breach of the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) guidelines by continuing to harass me for payment at this time. Also requesting communications is in writing.

11. 20/07/2009 – Due to continued harassment by Halifax I sent a letter of complaint to the OFT and wrote to Halifax informing them of the complaint with a copy.

12. 29/07/2009 – Notification from Halifax that they would call on 30/07/2009 regarding this.

13. 30/07/2009 – I waited in all day and evening but a Halifax representative did not arrive.

14. 07/08/2009 – Notification from Halifax that they had taken the disputed debt, which is also subject to a Court case, from my wife’s personal account into which her wages are paid at the end of each month and paid it into our joint account to clear the disputed amount on Monday 3rd August 2009.

15. 10/08/2009 – Received notification from Ilford County Court that the action has been stayed.

16. 10/08/2009 – Letter to OFT regarding bank set off.

17. 10/08/2009 – Letters to Prime Minister, MP, MEP’s.

18. 10/08/2009 – Letter to CEO Halifax re set off.

[London000]

Copy of letter going out to Prime Minister's Office, my MP, my MEP's today-

 

Don't expect eveyone to agree with it but I would be obliged if you would let me know if there are any obvious errors of fact - thanks

 

10th August 2009

 

 

Dear,

 

I write to ask your views on the unjust problem of penalty charges being applied by the UK High Street Banks and their apparent disregard of the guidelines set out by the Office of Fair Trading (OFT), Banking Code, and maybe other bodies, when a customer disputes these charges. I also ask for your views on the prolonging tactics being used by the Banks and the Financial Services Authority by continued appeals and requests for staying of Court cases. The latest appeal by the banks appears to be little more than begging exercise for mercy because it might cost them a lot of money if justice is served. This action is denying reasonably speedy justice to take place. All very serious charges and yet it doesn’t appear that anyone in authority is prepared to speak out and take action against this.

 

It has long been held under common law in this Country that contractual penalty charges which exceed the actual loss suffered are unlawful but it would seem from the High Court Appeal case last year that it is doubtful that this would be a valid legal argument with regard to bank charges. The judges obviously have to work within the law and I respect this but I see this situation as socially unjust and just another example of clever lawyers trying to circumnavigate true justice.

 

The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 has confirmed that a disproportionate penalty would be an example of an unfair term and that this would therefore be unenforceable by law and the Director General of the OFT announced in 2005 that any penalty charge which exceeds actual losses is disproportionate.

 

 

Cont.

 

10th August 2009/ Eleanor Laing MP/pg2

 

Charging anything up to £40 for a computer generated letter informing you that a direct debit or similar has not been paid and then applying the charge to the account which then possibly takes your account into an unauthorized overdraft situation must be considered disproportionate by the vast majority of people. Yet despite all of this the Banks continue to apply these charges.

 

The Banks are making billions of pounds in profit from these unjust charges so they are unlikely to do anything about the situation so it up to Parliament to force the issue. A 2005 survey by the BBC and others concluded that 1 in 5 bank customers suffered from these unjust charges and I suspect this ratio is now much higher. This is an extremely large proportion of the electorate and therefore requires action if Parliament is to be truly representative of the people of this Country.

 

To get a feel for the anger being generated by this situation I would suggest you take a look at some of the consumer forums on the internet. Two such websites are –

www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk

and

www.moneysavingexpert.com

 

To make matters even worse (and that is saying something) some banks are completely ignoring the Banking Code and Office of Fair Trading Guidelines by continuing to pursue payment of these charges after the alleged debt is officially in dispute. So on the one hand the Banks have managed to get all such cases stayed by the Courts but on the other hand they are still pursuing the alleged debts and even taking money from other accounts you have with them to settle this disputed debt. I find this situation totally outrageous and unjust. We find ourselves in a situation where justice is being denied us for a time but the banks can obtain what they perceive as justice with immediate effect. It seems to me that the Banks are implying that they are above the law. This is a totally unacceptable situation and must be addressed immediately.

 

My own personal experience of this is with the Halifax (a bank in which the Government is a majority shareholder) and I attach a summary of my experience to date so that you can see what is happening.

 

I look forward to receiving your speedy reply and your views on this matter and confirmation of what you intend to do to rectify this situation.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

 

 

10th August 2009

 

xxxxx v Halifax Bank

 

Details-

 

1. 2008 – Letter to Halifax requesting charges data for previous 6 years and expressing my dissatisfaction at the level of charges being applied to the account.

2. 2008 – Letter from Halifax stating that charges considered fair and reasonable and list of charges as requested received by me.

 

All letters from this point sent either special delivery or recorded delivery.

 

3. 23/02/2009 – Letter to Halifax with schedule re-claiming charges.

4. 05/03/2009 – Letter from Halifax stating that charges had been applied correctly and stating that I should contact them to discuss repayment.

5. 03/2009 – Day after receiving above letter I telephoned but they had nothing to add only being interested in repayment by me.

6. 17/03/2009 – Letter to Halifax stating my disappointment at their attitude and response and making a non prejudicial offer of settlement based on a charge of approximately £12.50 per item.

7. 2009 – Numerous computer generated letters from Halifax requesting payment of money.

8. 04/06/2009 – Letter to Halifax stating my surprise that they continued to chase payment when the account is in dispute and informing them of my intention to start County Court proceedings. Also reminded Halifax of my non prejudicial offer.

9. 04/06/2009 – Commence County Court proceedings against Halifax.

10. 02/07/2009 - Formal ‘Account in Dispute’ letter sent to Halifax and pointing out that they were in breach of the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) guidelines by continuing to harass me for payment at this time. Also requesting communications is in writing.

11. 20/07/2009 – Due to continued harassment by Halifax I sent a letter of complaint to the OFT and wrote to Halifax informing them of the complaint with a copy.

12. 29/07/2009 – Notification from Halifax that they would call on 30/07/2009 regarding this.

13. 30/07/2009 – I waited in all day and evening but a Halifax representative did not arrive.

14. 07/08/2009 – Notification from Halifax that they had taken the disputed debt, which is also subject to a Court case, from my wife’s personal account into which her wages are paid at the end of each month and paid it into our joint account to clear the disputed amount on Monday 3rd August 2009.

15. 10/08/2009 – Received notification from Ilford County Court that the action has been stayed.

16. 10/08/2009 – Letter to OFT regarding bank set off.

17. 10/08/2009 – Letters to Prime Minister, MP, MEP’s.

18. 10/08/2009 – Letter to CEO Halifax re set off.

 

Hi there gasman,

 

That is a very good letter. Obviously I could add a few other honest comments about banks methods but I am sure they will not be able to take so much......of swearings...

DD

[thegasman]

Thanks London.

 

Very tempting to add a few expletives - lol!!!