Business account over 19,000 in bank charges.** SETTLED IN FULL ***

[sarahpp]

Sorry Dolfos and Bill. I have tweaked yet more since reading Dolfos's last post to reflect that their argument for offering settlement because of small claims costs is rubbish.

 

Take your point Bill. This is a very valid part of their letter which needs "debunking" in the reply.

 

Sorry for tweaking again Dolfos

 

:o

[bill-k]

Take your point Bill. This is a very valid part of their letter which needs "debunking" in the reply.

:o

Although I was going to add that my earlier thoughts on "Without Prejudice" were in a general sense, and not specific to this letter, it's nice that you found them useful in this case, after all Sarah. Thanks for acknowledgement !!

 

It would seem to me, from LL's post, that "Without Prejudice" does not exclude the entire contents of that letter from being mentioned, but is a warning that certain parts of the content may not be. So I guess one can refer to it, but carefully ?

[sarahpp]

Agreed - I have referred to the content without direct quotes. I think that a reply to correspondence must, in most cases, refer to the content of the original letter and I don't think that anyone should or would have a problem with that because otherwise, where is the mutual dialogue?

[bill-k]

... because otherwise, where is the mutual dialogue?

 

Of course - yes !!

[dolfos]

Thanks bill-k and sarah for all advice on this. Will get letter posted this morning:)

[photoman]

Can someone please clear up this "without prejudice" business for me.

1/ Is it wise or worthwhile heading your own correspondence "without prejudice". If you do, does this mean that they cannot use your letter in any court bundle against you, should you accidentally say something that you wish you had not? Or does it mean, they can only refer to parts of it, but not quote it? Or does it mean they need your permission?

2/ any correspondance from them heading same way? Does this mean you cannott publish, post or use it in any court bundle as evidence? Or does it mean that you can only refer to it between yourselves in any correspondance?

 

In short, should we, or shouldn't we. Would the benefits of not heading our letters in such a way, allow for us to demonstrate that we have tried to be reasonable.

 

I n short, should we? Can we use anything recieved and headed in such a way, and how do we deal with responding to them ?

[photoman]

PS: do we make ourselves liable for action if we publish "without prejudice" letters on here?

[dolfos]

ok after sending refusal of full and final settlement got a rather snotty again without predjudice letter stating:

 

Before we can properley consider your request you will appreciate that we must understand percisely to which overdraft charges you refer. If you wish to pursue this matter, please write to us again with a specific breakdown detailing amounts and dates of the charges in question whereupon we will be able to consider your request

 

Please note for the purpose of this exercise Total charges is insufficent as it comprises a number of various charges components which must be split and itemised for the purpose of your claim?????I am sure you will find corrobarative commment to this effect in plentiful evidence

 

You will find a detailed breakdown of your overdraft charges in the pre notification advice which was sent to you every time you recieved a current account statement. If you no longer hold these are staff will be happy to assist you although a fee will be payable.

You will of courserequire this level of detail/information should you decide to take this matter further.

 

The letter then concluded if within 8 weeks don't hear from us they assume issue resolved (yeah right)

 

I don't know what they are going on about I sent them copies of the charges breakdown table twice. as far as total charges go they are not brokendown on the statements they just state total charges then interest andthe date they will be deducted so don't know what they are on about with total charges bit either. This all seems like further delay tactics. Any thoughts???

 

I will try and log on again but going away tomorrow till 2nd January so if no reply from me I'm not being rude just not about at mo.

 

If I don't write prior to xmas happy xmas to everyone and a BIG thankyou

xx

[bill-k]

Enjoy a well-deserved break, Dolfos. It sounds to me like they are asking you for "Standard Disclosure" !!!!

[photoman]

Dolfos, in reply to your last post:

 

ok after sending refusal of full and final settlement got a rather snotty again without predjudice letter stating:

 

Before we can properley consider your request you will appreciate that we must understand percisely to which overdraft charges you refer. If you wish to pursue this matter, please write to us again with a specific breakdown detailing amounts and dates of the charges in question whereupon we will be able to consider your request

 

Please note for the purpose of this exercise Total charges is insufficent as it comprises a number of various charges components which must be split and itemised for the purpose of your claim?????I am sure you will find corrobarative commment to this effect in plentiful evidence

 

You will find a detailed breakdown of your overdraft charges in the pre notification advice which was sent to you every time you recieved a current account statement. If you no longer hold these are staff will be happy to assist you although a fee will be payable.

You will of courserequire this level of detail/information should you decide to take this matter further.

 

Dolfos,

I've just agreed to help a friend with their own claim (I've already got my own under way, and that's with LloydsTSb).

My friend banks, like youself, with HSBC, and this was the first time I had ever really seen a HSBC statement. It is a bit vague and misleading to say least !!

I think this is what they are referring to in the above paragraph, (you may have already realised this, so please excuse me if so):

On the actual statement listing all your transactions, it often just says things like "total charges", ....However, I notice they also provide a monthly addition/ insert with your statements entitled

"Your account charges and debit interest"

This actually lists each charge;

eg; Excess Overdraft fee £27.50 or Unpaid Direct Debit Fee £10.

What they are now trying to claim, is that you have simply put on your schedule of charges for example "Total Charges" £37.50 , and what they want is a breakdown listing each charge, ie what this "total Charges" comprised of.

 

Did you list each item on your schedule (eg, Excess overdraft fee, returned direct debit etc etc or did you anywhere just put "Total charges" )?

If you did the full breakdown, I suggest you just send them a short letter with another copy of your schedule (in which case this could have just been a stalling tactic on their behalf), if not, and you did just list "total charges", then you'll need the breakdown sheets, as this is the only way you can prove that ALL of the charges you are claiming you actually can do so (eg, "total charges" may consist in part of things such as "arrangement fees", which are not recoverable,)

photoman (ps Merry Christmas)

The letter then concluded if within 8 weeks don't hear from us they assume issue resolved (yeah right)

 

I don't know what they are going on about I sent them copies of the charges breakdown table twice. as far as total charges go they are not brokendown on the statements they just state total charges then interest andthe date they will be deducted so don't know what they are on about with total charges bit either. This all seems like further delay tactics. Any thoughts???

 

I will try and log on again but going away tomorrow till 2nd January so if no reply from me I'm not being rude just not about at mo.

 

If I don't write prior to xmas happy xmas to everyone and a BIG thankyou

xx

[dolfos]

Dolfos, in reply to your last post:

 

Hi photoman,

 

I did list all the charges but with the business statements comes a bit of paper at the end stating total charges, the amount and interest applied so these charges are not broken down. In addition unpaid cheques and DD are applied seperately througout the statement. I am away at mo but have managed to log on briefly and I feel it is a dealy tactic. It is for the bank to break it down further if a court feels it is relevant as these are no diffrent from the total charges on my personal account as far as I can tell. I have not added the interest on or anything just used what they have given me.

Will file claim next week had enough of them just messing around and telling us what to do even now. They wouldn´t have even responded to us if we hadn´t put a complaint into the FO who have done sweet FA too despite their statements in the press. The whole thing is just a game to the bank and I am fed up playing it their way sending off countless papers which they already have. I am satisfied I gave them a comprehensive enough breakdown in my letters stating days and dates and amounts and reason for charges.

If a judge decides further information is required than that is fine. Even taking out the total charges the claim is over 20K without any interest applied.

If anyones got any good ideas for my letter in response to theirs I would be grateful or do you think I should not even bother replying to their letter and go ahead and file the claim on my return.

Thankyou guys for staying with me. This break has given me renewed optimism and I shall return on full boosted energy!!!

I hope you all had a great christmas

Happy New Year!!!!!

xx

[photoman]

Dolfos, Nice to see you've got renewed igour in this matter, don't let them wear you down in a vain effort to make you give up !

Yes, agreed they may just be stalling, and if you feel totally confident that you are not trying to claim for anything your not entitled to, then don't play their silly games, and just progress onto next stage.

DO however make sure you are are only claiming that which you can, not any items such as "arrangement fees", or the like (even though they are also extortionate). If your seen to be trying to claim anything other than what you are entitled they could perhaps use this against you. Only list the items as they appear on the statements that are reclaimable.

As for interest..........why aren't you claiming it.......it's yours? remember though it is only the interest that is levied as a result of the charges?

As for the interest you are levying by Mutuality on the whole, what rate are you levying?

If you've any doubts about anything, I'll be happy to take a peek at your spreadsheet, if you PM me the link (presume you've used Vamps Google sheets) ? As ever when doing such, temporarily remove any personally identifiable information before sending me, just in case gets into wrong hands.

If, I can't help, then there are plenty on this site who can, I'll send you some of my own reccomendations?

Best regards, and HAPPY NEW YEAR

Photoman

 

PS> Take a peek at my own link, you may find it useful and interesting, Looks also like Elsinore joining the "biggie claim society", so look at their threads also/

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/lloyds-bank/54548-could-biggest-claim-site.html

[Guest NATTIE]

Dolfos- I sometimes see threads a lot later than I usually do but can you confirm apart from the interest that the DD/SO or Referral charges come to approx £19k and that overdraft arrangement fees and standard business charges, ie paying in cash taking out cash have not been included which may explain charges at the end of the month?

I will have a read back just in case it has been asked and already answered.

[gemspan]

Hi Dolfos

 

If you have listed the charges as set out in the spreadsheet then I agree with you that they are absolutely delaying. This is such a big claim that they will want to really test you to and take you to the limit. Dont let the B***ers get you down. You are entitled to this money. Furthermore, once they have settled it might be worthwhile looking into the situation your husband would have been in had they not levied these charges. YOu may not even have had to do an IVA. Keep up the good work. We are all rooting foryou. I wouldnt respond to this letter as I feel it will just keep delaying things. If it was me (for what it is worth!) I would just slap them with a claim if you are sure you have itemised the charges fairly.

 

Good luck and a happy and prosperous new year!!!!

 

Kind rgards

Annie

[dolfos]

Hi guys Happy new year!!

Just got back and have another snotty letter from dear Mr Cuff

He is still rattling on about total charges and advises us to check the pre notification advice parts of each statement of my husbands business account. When I requested all information related to charges to his account all they sent was copy statements which did not include the pre notification advice with it. Surely it should have as Mr Cuff is stating total charges as stated on the statements is not suffice. He goed on to say staff will be happy to provide this info but a fee shall be payable. Am I right in thinking the fee still can not be any higher than 10UKP as it still relates to info on my husbands business account. Why was this not sent within the DPA request?

They are again fishing for time in my opinion even without the so called total charge charges the amount comes to nearly 22K in returned cheques, DD's and unpaid SO any advice appreciated. Should I request this pre notification advice be resent and if so inclose a cheque for 10UKP or shall I go on with claim using the charges I am satisfied are truely unlawful and file the claim. All letters from HSBC are marked without and predjudice.

Oh and by the way the lovely offer of 500UKP has now been rescinded???

(I am really upset about this as it is a real generous heart felt offer NOT!!!!!)

[sarahpp]

Happy New Year Dolfos

 

You are quite correct. The £10 SAR fee which you sent them in August should have been enough to get all of the information they hold on you. This is very clearly a delaying tactic. If they felt that the information which they sent to you was adequate for purpose in September why is it not now.

 

You are also correct in that they cannot charge you more than the statutory £10 for this information but, I suspect, what they are trying to do is buy another 40 days in which to provide the information.

 

I would write them another letter enclosing a £10 fee and make it very clear what information you wish them to supply as well as making it clear in your letter that you believe that they are seeking to delay court proceedings. That way, you can prove to a judge (if needs be) that whilst you know very well what they are up to, you have also been co-operative and done your best to comply with their request. Sickening I know but, I feel that you have to play the game I am afraid. It looks much better in court if you have been as reasonable as possible. It may be worth reminding them that the interest is increasing daily and it is in their best interests to settle the matter quickly.

 

I think you should set them a firm time scale for starting court proceedings though. After all, you told them in your original request why you wanted the information and they should have sent you everything you needed in the first place - also worth mentioning in the letter.

 

Just my opinion mind- I would be happy to be corrected by anyone with more experience of these delaying tactics.

[the_final_straw]

**This post is for HSBC Business customers ONLY**

 

I am at the moment in talks with Mr Cuff about my business account and I am finding out some very interesting stuff -

 

1. Business accounts are NOT covered by Subject Access Requests.

 

2. 'Total Charges' include LEGIMATE fees for services and unlawful charges.

 

3. You need to specifically ASK for a further breakdown of 'Total Charges' after you receive your duplicate statements. They will then provide you with a more detailed breakdown of 'Total Charges'.

 

I would strongly urge any HSBC business account customer to thoroughly research their agreements as almost all of them will be different depending on your circumstances when the account was opened and agreed overdraft limits, merchant services, percentage turnover, individual charging structures, etc. etc. etc..

 

As I am discovering, Business accounts are NOT the same as personal accounts.

 

If anyone with a HSBC BUSINESS account would like to correct me or add to this list please feel free.

[Guest NATTIE]

1. False

2. Probably because business pay for paying in cash cheques and withdrawing cash as well as change.

3. Not sure

[photoman]

Hi guys Happy new year!!

Just got back and have another snotty letter from dear Mr Cuff

He is still rattling on about total charges and advises us to check the pre notification advice parts of each statement of my husbands business account. When I requested all information related to charges to his account all they sent was copy statements which did not include the pre notification advice with it. Surely it should have as Mr Cuff is stating total charges as stated on the statements is not suffice. He goed on to say staff will be happy to provide this info but a fee shall be payable. Am I right in thinking the fee still can not be any higher than 10UKP as it still relates to info on my husbands business account. Why was this not sent within the Data Protection Act request?

They are again fishing for time in my opinion even without the so called total charge charges the amount comes to nearly 22K in returned cheques, DD's and unpaid SO any advice appreciated. Should I request this pre notification advice be resent and if so inclose a cheque for 10UKP or shall I go on with claim using the charges I am satisfied are truely unlawful and file the claim. All letters from HSBC are marked without and predjudice.

Oh and by the way the lovely offer of 500UKP has now been rescinded???

(I am really upset about this as it is a real generous heart felt offer NOT!!!!!)

 

IMO

I would gather from the reply requesting that you check the "pre-notification parts of each statement" that what they are still trying to imply here is that some of the charges you are trying to claim are in their view legitimate.

They are trying to imply that sometimes they could relate to an "arrangement fee" (eg agreeing an overdraft) or your regular monthly account maintenance charges.

As long as you have entered just the returned item fees, and other arbitary set cost items such as unauthorised borrowing (and none of the above), directly from and as they appear on your statement, then I personally think that the onus is on them to prove that these charges were for anything other than ordinary automatically levied fees.

If they are instead/also trying to imply that some form of manual intervention occured at some points, then let them dispute each and every charge, and to also indeed produce proof that some manual intervention had in fact occured on those occasions.

You have not been privy to how each and every event was dealt with, and I don't believe that you could be blamed, if it came before a judge if 1 or 2 of these charges had actually required a greater level of intervention than usual (and they could prove it).

At worst I think that the most that would happen, is that reclaiming a couple of the charges would simply be dissallowed.

This is what this whole action is about. They are only entitled by law to recoup any cost they actually incurred as a result of the event, in order to put both parties back into the same position they were before it occurred, without profiting. How can it cost the same every time? How can advances in automation have bizarely made the cost of dealing with such matters increase three or four times fold over a couple of years?

As long as you are happy that you have only claimed for those charges which are deemed wrong in law, and not tried to reclaim for anything other, then i would say they are just trying to either stall you, or sow some doubt in your mind.

[the_final_straw]

1. False

2. Probably because business pay for paying in cash cheques and withdrawing cash as well as change.

3. Not sure

 

1. Are you absolutely 100% certain? I have emails and telephone recordings from Mr Cuff stating this very clearly...we are talking about business accounts arent we?

 

2. and lots of other things as well (and they are all fees for services) If you try and reclaim them and you lose ...what happens?

 

3. This is true. Its what I did and I got the answers I was looking for - see my posts HERE

 

*this is not intended to hijack a thread.

[Guest NATTIE]

1. Data Protection Act not covering business accounts? Are you kidding me? if you have someone on tape then the Information Commissioners Office would be interested in that info.

2. Don;t know no one has lost so far.

3. stand by comment- not sure = I don;t know as I am expert in NatWest not HSBC

 

I rephrase one on the edit Subject Access Request not applicable to Business accounts is total rubbish

[the_final_straw]

natweststaffmember,

 

1. Thats good to hear. I shall fire off an email right now to Jonathon Cuff and ask him to confirm this. He might have dug a bit of a hole for himself as I have saved the message

 

2. Indeed. But I cant find a single won case of 'total charges' on a business account. Can you point me to a succesful 'total charges' business claim?

[Guest NATTIE]

I have to be honest and say that I am checking that last bit in relation to SAR from a Mod I just need to be 100% certain.(am 99%)

I think there is an ongoing thread in relation to if they do not tell you sue them because they would have to prove what each charge is. Will they?

[elsinore]

It's possible there is right and wrong in TFS's point 1.

 

The word Subject in the title Subject Access Request I think means individual person or similar. So if a bank account is in your own name, even a 'business' account, then you are the Subject and entitled to information under the Data Protection Act.

 

However, if your account is in the name of your company i.e.limited liability, then I think it is not covered by the DPA.

 

Having said that, there is nothing to stop a limited company applying for and, indeed, demanding, the same sort of information. Although that sort of business should have all those records! The bank would probably make you pay through the nose for it.

 

IMHO

 

Elsinore

[Guest NATTIE]

Thanks