Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Whyisitthis
      Shoplifting in Waitrose - Banned No Police called

      By Whyisitthis · Posted

      Sending you a big hug. I’m sorry your going through this. The letters they send sound aweful, and the waiting game for them to stop. But these guys seem so knowledgable and these letters should stop. Hang in there, and keep in touch. Don’t feel alone 
    • lolerz
      One Parking Solutions Windscreen PCN - private flat bays, share of freehold . - Durrington, West Sussex.

      By lolerz · Posted

      In my time I've never seen a payout/commission from a PPC to a landlord/MA. Normally the installation of all the cameras/payment of warden patrols etc is free but PPCs keep 100% of the ticket revenue. Not saying it doesn't happen mind. I've done some more digging on this: Remember, what your lease doesn't say is just as important as what it does say. If your lease doesn't mention a parking scheme/employment of a PPC/Paying PCNs etc you're under no legal obligation to play along to the PPC's or the MA's "Terms and conditions". I highly doubt your lease had a variation in place to bring in this permit system. Your lease will likely have a "quiet enjoyment" clause for your demised space and the common areas and having to fight a PPC/MA just to park would breach that. Your lease has supremacy of contract, but I do agree it's worth keeping cool and not parking there (and hence getting PCNs) for a couple months just so that the PPC doesn't get blinded by greed and go nuclear on you if you have 4 or 5 PCNs outstanding. At your next AGM, bring it up that the parking controls need to be removed and mention the legal reasons why. One reason is that under S37(5b) Landlord and Tenant Act 1987,  more than 75% of leaseholders and/or the landlord would have needed to agree, and less than 10% opposed, for the variation to take place. I highly doubt a ballot even happened before the PPC was bought in so OPS even being there is unlawful, breaching the terms of your lease. In this legal sense,  the communal vote of the "directors" of the freehold company would have counted for ONE vote of however many flats there are (leases/tenants) + 1 (landlord). It's going to be interesting to see where this goes.  
    • COCOPINEAPLE1234
      Shoplifting in Waitrose - Banned No Police called

      By COCOPINEAPLE1234 · Posted

      @Whyisitthisthank you very much for asking. I am still feeling anxious, especially when someone rings the doorbell, or when I receive a letter I feel a it paranoid. I stopped going to the shops unless I really have to. I shop online now. When I see security I feel paralised. 
    • Badtimes123
      LC Asset/Link/Kearns Claim Form #1 - Halifax CC

      By Badtimes123 · Posted

      My expectation was their WS would include the best paperwork, like at least true copies of originals, but these just look wrong somehow, perhaps the font and size of font... Not sending me the DN in CCA request but producing it for evidence I would argue could be a tactic used by them... - Page 11 with ticks - there is no reference to IP addresses - Home addresses are correct for dates in documents   Just looking up example Defendant WS's while awaiting your thoughts on this
    • Whyisitthis
      Shoplifting in Waitrose - Banned No Police called

      By Whyisitthis · Posted

      Hello lovely, just posting to check in to see how you are feeling now? Hopefully your feeling better? 

  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.

      BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld

      ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
        • Thanks
      • 81 replies
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report

      WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,

      Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
      WanTToMoveOn

      Picked By

      WanTToMoveOn,

    • Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available

      BankFodder posted a post in a topic,

      We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,
    View All

  • Recommended Topics

Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.

Natwest Threatening me to court for overdraft charges

mrkhm

By mrkhm
in NatWest Bank

 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5214 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

mrkhm

mrkhm

Posted
Posted

Hello,

 

I would be grateful for a bit of advice.

 

I have been so far fighting the whole charges issue with lots of help from this forum (many thanks andyorch and others)....

 

Since the commencement of the OFT case or bank charges and the putting on hold of most claims, i didnt pursue putting my claim through the courts (also as it cost money to do so).

 

However my claim circumstances are different in that I actually owe the bank, not in terms of a loan, but wholly from overdraft charges, £30 here, £30 there £30 here and there over the years it accumilated.

 

I did have an overdraft of total £2000 (from 2 accounts - 1 student, 1 current) and the debt Natwest have been pursuing me for totals £3.3, the £1.3 wholly made up of bank charges.

 

They have been harassing me with an array of different debt collectors since 2006, but i've been fighting back with help from this forum and the hope of a favourable OFT case response, which we obviously did not get.

 

I've pretty much lost a lot of energy, but I guess I have to go to court to defend myself if need be regarding the overdraft charges which i still feel are unfair. I have not been summoned yet but it seems that way any minute now.

 

So i ask, can i still pursue them through the court system, or shall i just wait for them to summons me? And if i am summoned, what shall i do?

 

What are my options?

 

I realise the banks have a victory in terms of consumers not being able to get back money from them, but is it fair for them to win both ways, in having a re-enforced ability to press for debt of which a substantial portion is made from those overdraft charges? I don't have a loan agreement with them.

 

Please kindly advise?

 

I thank you in advance...

Link to post
Share on other sites
AndyOrch

AndyOrch

Posted
Posted

HI KHM

 

I surmise you have the account isolated now and have other banking facilities in place.My approach is to leave it to them and DCAs to pass the hot brick around.When and if any summons is received Defend in full,they may have won the OFT decision but they have yet still to justify in front of a DJ that their charges are not unfair at common law and transparent.

Im sure no attempt at litigation will be made by the OC, however some of the other Muppet's might try their chances if it is assigned.

 

Regards

 

Andy;)

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites
ieuanMr

ieuanMr

Posted
Posted

I agree with anyorch entirely. Let them do all the running you could offer to settle, if you think the original overcharge was fair at say £12, agree to pay the £12 + interest at 8%. Atlernatively do nothing and if summoned to court defend vigourously and read up on current law especially on OFT854.

 

Whatever you do be polite and respond quickly within 14 days to any information or court action. Read up on court procedures. At the end of the day it is going to cost them a lot of money to take you to court and cost you hardly anthing, they can't even get costs back from you.

 

Agree to conciliation or arbitration and stall, stall, stall.

 

In the end, for minor amounts, they will give up, and if the charges are made up entirly of overdraft fee plus interest I doubt if they wil persue it. They are running the risk of a judge finding in your favour.

 

regards

 

 

Ieuan

Link to post
Share on other sites
mrkhm

mrkhm

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Hi again,

 

And thank you also for your input ieuanMr as well as ongoing input from andyorch

 

Please can you give your advice to this scenario if possible.

 

 

I received a letter dated on the 7th from the solicitors acting on behalf of Natwest pursuing me for the entire amount which is inclusive of bank charges with the threat of court action.

 

In their letter they also state that if i dispute liability for the debt I should state my reasons and supply them with documents. (which is just a repeat of previous cycles with other DCA's but in past instances I have always been laying claim to the OFT test case still being in progress etc... and they usually back off, and someone else comes along and the cycle continues).

 

Then I also received another letter also dated on the 7th, this time from Natwest, saying that due to the outcome of the OFT test case they believe their charges to be fair and reasonable so therefore they would not uphold my claim for refund of charges and if i dont respond in 8 weeks they will assume i have given up.

 

From where i am sitting, these 2 letters look pretty synchronized to set up for court action, one letter saying this is the total outstanging figure (which is made up of overdraft + charges) and one saying the charges are valid.

 

I am happy to pay back the overdraft, because that was genuine money borrowed (2100 from a total of 3100 with charges), but i totally disagree with £30 charges for going 50p over drawn or having a bounced cheque etc...especially as these charges were on my student account and quite a few of them after the accounts were inactive i.e. rolling £30/month charges..

 

And, i am still a full time student with no regular income so having a ccj for 3k or being expected to pay this all off sometime this year by direct debit is near to impossible. I have absolutely no income, so i am in no rush to pay this off.

 

anyorch advises i should just wait for them to pass the hot cake around, but i am worried that the synchornization of the above mentioned letters means definite action this time

 

ieuanMr suggests proposing to settle, and also that i should still respond to any communication.

 

So are you suggesting i should reply to the solicitors? But this time what would i say? normally i would say "oft test case ongoing...etc" but we as consumers have been let down and they know this...

 

Are you also suggesting i should respond to the Natwest letter dated on the same day which justifies their charges and assumes if i dont respond in 8 weeks that they are all clear?

 

I am hoping you can advise in light of these new circumstances...

 

(On a personal note, thanks for your time, but please also be aware I am worried of the impact that court defense will have on my studies, as i am in the middle of intense ongoing uni stuff and normally i'm the resilient type but am worried how much of time this will take up from my studies...)

Link to post
Share on other sites
ieuanMr

ieuanMr

Posted
Posted

I think the OFT case has now been settled and there is little hope for success. I don't know your case well enough to give secure advise but from what you have told me I would say you have to settle.

 

If you hadn't gone to court you could have gone to the FOS and there the matter wold rst until they made their decision. Now it is up to the Bank and their solicitors, they are in the driving seat.

 

Your exams are the most important and you must concentrate on them.

 

Reply to their letter and tell them you are willing to settle, also tell them you are a strudent and suffering hardship and cannot payback more than x amount evry month. But you do acknowledge the debt but dispute the charges plus interest and that you would be evry willing to listen to a suggeston of a repayment plan. You are also willing to accept arbitration. This should give you time and you can concentrate on your studies.

 

You could tell them for instance that you would accept £12 per instance for bank chrages but not £30.

 

I think there ar emore helpful people around on this site and I have limited knwledge and wish you the best.

 

regards

 

ieuan

Link to post
Share on other sites
AndyOrch

AndyOrch

Posted
Posted
Hi again,

 

And thank you also for your input ieuanMr as well as ongoing input from andyorch

 

Please can you give your advice to this scenario if possible.

 

 

I received a letter dated on the 7th from the solicitors acting on behalf of Natwest pursuing me for the entire amount which is inclusive of bank charges with the threat of court action. Mitchels or Shoosmiths?

 

In their letter they also state that if i dispute liability for the debt I should state my reasons and supply them with documents. (which is just a repeat of previous cycles with other DCA's but in past instances I have always been laying claim to the OFT test case still being in progress etc... and they usually back off, and someone else comes along and the cycle continues). Does it give you a time limit to respond?

 

Then I also received another letter also dated on the 7th, this time from Natwest, saying that due to the outcome of the OFT test case they believe their charges to be fair and reasonable so therefore they would not uphold my claim for refund of charges and if i dont respond in 8 weeks they will assume i have given up.

 

From where i am sitting, these 2 letters look pretty synchronized to set up for court action, one letter saying this is the total outstanging figure (which is made up of overdraft + charges) and one saying the charges are valid. No true this letter as been sent to every customer complaint and is standard because of the OFT conclusion

 

I am happy to pay back the overdraft, because that was genuine money borrowed (2100 from a total of 3100 with charges), but i totally disagree with £30 charges for going 50p over drawn or having a bounced cheque etc...especially as these charges were on my student account and quite a few of them after the accounts were inactive i.e. rolling £30/month charges.. Argue then

 

And, i am still a full time student with no regular income so having a ccj for 3k or being expected to pay this all off sometime this year by direct debit is near to impossible. I have absolutely no income, so i am in no rush to pay this off. Let them know they wont attempt litigation because they will get a £1 a month back

 

anyorch advises i should just wait for them to pass the hot cake around, but i am worried that the synchornization of the above mentioned letters means definite action this time.IMHO not worth the court costs or time if they know you have no income

 

ieuanMr suggests proposing to settle, and also that i should still respond to any communication. Your Choice

So are you suggesting i should reply to the solicitors? But this time what would i say? normally i would say "oft test case ongoing...etc" but we as consumers have been let down and they know this...Let them know your arguement your income and offer a £10.00 a month providing they reduce the amount by the unfair charges

 

Are you also suggesting i should respond to the Natwest letter dated on the same day which justifies their charges and assumes if i dont respond in 8 weeks that they are all clear? Standard circular up to you if you respond but I would talk with their Sols

 

I am hoping you can advise in light of these new circumstances...

 

(On a personal note, thanks for your time, but please also be aware I am worried of the impact that court defense will have on my studies, as i am in the middle of intense ongoing uni stuff and normally i'm the resilient type but am worried how much of time this will take up from my studies...)

Not much at all providing you conduct the battle

Regards

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...