Contractual interest?

[bill-k]

Good aftie ladies !! Thanks for helping Pict. I'm just lurking, but will pop back.

 

FOMTL, Chezt !!! Bill & Bong !!! What a pair, eh ? That kiddies prog "Tiny Planets" springs to mind, too. That was Bing & Bong I think.

 

Then there's "Billabong" - G'day Sheilas !

[Guest bong]

right chezzy, (bills a bit quiet this morning I notice:shock: ) anyway back to business..

 

the only things I can think of at the moment are that

 

1. you could mention that you have written to the defendant asking for details of costs incurred (and manual intervention?) but they have not provided them, and

 

2. you could also mention the statement of the OFT as back up for the penalty charge assertion.

 

can't think of anything else

[Guest bong]

talk of the devil..

 

must've slipped in here quietly while I was waiting for tea bag to brew. Cappuchino chez? bit posh aint it?

 

P.S. won't be me coming back with a formula bill, that's for SURE. Its like Japanese to me.

[bill-k]

Pict, this is the formula for compound interest. Change the function in the first entry in the column to this, then just copy the cell down all the way to the last entry. You can do a one-off "drag" I think. You might have to change the cell references in the formula, too.

 

If the top row you're using for the first entry is row 14, then this is OK., otherwise, change the 14 to the correct row number.

 

$E$3 refers to the cell that holds the annual interest rate you are using. (E3 in this case)

 

C14 is the cell showing "days since offence", and D14 is the actual penalty charge itself.

 

 

=D14*((1+($E$3/365))^C14)-D14

 

Does this help ?

[Guest bong]

Very impressive Bill!! And there's me thinking you were posting expletives for a minute!! Now that does deserve a click someone - they still won't let me even though I've been giving rep elsewhere, or in other words, yeah I admit, spreading myself around.

[pict]

Excellent. I think I've managed to keep up so far. Unfortunately I've got to go to work and I dont finish until 22:30:(. I'll try the spread sheet tonight when I come back.

Thanks again to everyone for their support......

[bill-k]

talk of the devil..

 

must've slipped in here quietly while I was waiting for tea bag to brew. Cappuchino chez? bit posh aint it?

 

P.S. won't be me coming back with a formula bill, that's for SURE. Its like Japanese to me.

 

I heard you putting the kettle on. I'm glad there's summat I can handle that you can't, Bong !! My ego needs a few straws to clutch !!

 

Poor old Mindzai - Nothing's his own any more !! I believe he's taken to wearing a kilt these days for the sake of convenience. Clan McDongle tartan, I expect (sorry, Pict, I hope you're not a McDongle !!)

 

Chezt (I just noticed BTW - excellent work in the Spreadsheet thread) - I have a query with your 8% alternative. And I think Bong might help out here. I have always applied my 8% Statutory from the date of each charge (in the same way that we do with contractual), and NOT from one particular date. Although it is only granted by the court, I was under the impression that it is granted retrospectively, and not just from the claim date (or whatever date you use). The spready I have been using calculates it this way (and I think Pict's does this, too). But I'm prepared to be "Bonged" over this, as I'm basing it on assumptions.

 

Does your spready work out your Statutory from a single date, Chez, or does it apply it to each charge and from each date ?

 

Rich tea, anyone ?

[bill-k]

Excellent. I think I've managed to keep up so far. Unfortunately I've got to go to work and I dont finish until 22:30:(. I'll try the spread sheet tonight when I come back.

Thanks again to everyone for their support......

 

Catchulater, Pict.

[Guest bong]

Chezt (I just noticed BTW - excellent work in the Spreadsheet thread) - I have a query with your 8% alternative. And I think Bong might help out here. I have always applied my 8% Statutory from the date of each charge (in the same way that we do with contractual), and NOT from one particular date. Although it is only granted by the court, I was under the impression that it is granted retrospectively, and not just from the claim date (or whatever date you use). The spready I have been using calculates it this way (and I think Pict's does this, too). But I'm prepared to be "Bonged" over this, as I'm basing it on assumptions.

 

Does your spready work out your Statutory from a single date, Chez, or does it apply it to each charge and from each date ?

 

Rich tea, anyone ?

 

sounds more polite than your last offer bill. bananas spring to mind.. :o

 

anyway..not sure I understand what you mean about the statutory interest bill. what made you think that chez's interest isn't worked out from the date of the first charge?:-?

[bill-k]

Very impressive Bill!! And there's me thinking you were posting expletives for a minute!! Now that does deserve a click someone - they still won't let me even though I've been giving rep elsewhere, or in other words, yeah I admit, spreading myself around.

 

Yeah, it looks a bit like that dunnit ? Not really clickworthy, as it's nicked. It's a standard formula - I just "gophered" it.

 

They're a bit "new age" with this putting ourselves about lark, aren't they ? I really think that they should dispense free prophylactics with such advice as that. (I used the long word, so's the mods can't understand it !! ).

[Guest bong]

don't make me have to hunt down the dictionary bill! let me have a guess prophy - fortune telling? lactics - milk? a free glass of milk while getting your tarot cards read?

[bill-k]

sounds more polite than your last offer bill. bananas spring to mind.. :o

 

anyway..not sure I understand what you mean about the statutory interest bill. what made you think that chez's interest isn't worked out from the date of the first charge?:-?

 

I forget you ladies remember everything !!

 

Well, perhaps in a similar way to my earlier comparison between the two interest rates, you will see that compound is calculated for each separate charge and applied separately to each charge, then the total is simply added up at the bottom.

 

To my logic, when (well - if, really) the 8% statutory is applied by the court, then it is presumably applied according to the calculation already provided to the court in your spreadsheet. That being so, then does your spreadsheet not calculate the stat. in the same way as the cont. - that is, by applying 8% to each separate charge, and calculating it from the date of each separate charge ? Not from a single date.

 

The POC wording suggests otherwise, but that doesn't make sense to me.

 

More importantly - does this make sense to you ?

[Guest bong]

ENOUGH SAID! I've looked it up.

 

now try explaining how that got into the contractual interest thread Bill!

[bill-k]

don't make me have to hunt down the dictionary bill! let me have a guess prophy - fortune telling? lactics - milk? a free glass of milk while getting your tarot cards read?

 

Are you pulling my wossname ?

 

Clue ?

 

You knew, really - you're just being a lady.

[Guest bong]

I forget you ladies remember everything !!

 

Well, perhaps in a similar way to my earlier comparison between the two interest rates, you will see that compound is calculated for each separate charge and applied separately to each charge, then the total is simply added up at the bottom.

 

To my logic, when (well - if, really) the 8% statutory is applied by the court, then it is presumably applied according to the calculation already provided to the court in your spreadsheet. That being so, then does your spreadsheet not calculate the stat. in the same way as the cont. - that is, by applying 8% to each separate charge, and calculating it from the date of each separate charge ? Not from a single date.

 

The POC wording suggests otherwise, but that doesn't make sense to me.

 

More importantly - does this make sense to you ?

 

me? I've the memory of a peanut. In fact I'm due to go and have some tests done on my memory next week...if I don't forget the appointment!

 

the interest is added from the date of each charge but the wording in the POC justs refers to the earliest date, does it not?

[bill-k]

ENOUGH SAID! I've looked it up.

 

now try explaining how that got into the contractual interest thread Bill!

 

It could be tenuously defended by earlier comments about us innocent people being told by CAG to go forth & multiply. A perfectly politically correct suggestion in this day and age, I maintain !!

[Guest bong]

innocent people!! love it:D

[bill-k]

me? I've the memory of a peanut. In fact I'm due to go and have some tests done on my memory next week...if I don't forget the appointment!

 

the interest is added from the date of each charge but the wording in the POC justs refers to the earliest date, does it not?

 

Yes it does. My point. Why is this para. worded differently to the contractual para ? The stat. para suggests that the 8% is worked out by taking the total charges claimed, then adding 8% simple interest to that total, over the entire period of the claim. If you work it out that way, it is incorrect, and your POC and spready don't concur.

[bill-k]

innocent people!! love it:D

 

It's why our system is the world's envy. Presumption of innocence !

 

As long as we don't get caught, we're still innocent in the eyes of the law !!

[Guest bong]

Ahh light bulb moment..its just because its worded differently. in that case yes change the wording for the statutory to the wording used for the contractual so it doesn't appear to be on a different basis. with mine I just put from earliest charge date to claim date, plus daily etc..but its clearer to put from the date of each charge..blah blah

 

well spotted

[chezt]

Cappuchino chez? bit posh aint it?

 

Not really when u know the easy way .... coffe in a mug with cold milk (not full fat) then whizz up to a froth with handheld blender thingy ... pour on hot water ... enjoy!!!

 

Can't hang around atm .... lil'un is up n scoffing lunch then going to visit her nannie who's on a day off!

 

catch u laters x

[bill-k]

It looked like I was being pedantic, there, but I wasn't sure if I had actually misunderstood the reason for having the different wording. I'm glad that is all it was, and that I hadn't missed out on something. Of course, that's why you didn't get what I was banging on about.

 

It's really only dotting an "i" I suppose, as it's just the alternative, but if we're going to be cutting & pasting for future claims then worth considering, perhaps.

 

I see you're currently doing some sterling stuff on the spready thread, Chez. Wow - I didn't realise what a spready queen you are !!

[Glenn UK]

.....................

d) the Claimant claims contractual interest at an annual rate of xx.xx% compounded daily, from the date of each transaction to DATE of £xxx.xx, as set out in the attached list of charges. The claimant further claims interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment, at a daily rate of 0.xx% per day.

 

 

Dont forget the contractual interest you charge a percentage per day not a value. the value changes as the interest compounds.

 

Glenn

[Glenn UK]

Just come back to here & folks here will check stuff for you. Glenn will be pleased his thread's being properly used again !!!

 

Well, urm, used properly eh?

 

Wouldnt that be a kind of oxymoron where youre concerned 'Bill-K and properly' in the same sentence?

 

Only joking i remember you when you had no green squares, now look at you? Wont be long and youll be all pink!!

 

A pink gorillla, now theres a thought, and he knew about the blue oyster bar too!!!

 

Glenn

[bill-k]

O. M. G. He's back. Hi again, Glenn. Teacher's back in class. No more paper planes. Long time no see, Glenn, I hope you enjoyed the break from me !!

 

I ended up using a fixed figure for the daily amount, instead of a %age, as I couldn't work out how to express a compound daily %age. It is OK to do that though, isn't it ?