Egg Money card charges reclaim

[lhmcr1]

Hi,

I am new to this forum so I will briefly go over the situation.

I started a charges reclaim against Egg and got the usual refusal back so sent it on to the FOS.

I recently received a letter from the FOS saying that they agree with Egg that the charges are fair.

I managed to get the case to be forwarded to an ombudsman for another look but I can't see the ombudsman disagreeing with one of their adjudicators.

Egg sent the FOS a response which I see has been given in other forum users cases where they say they have satisfied the OFT that it costs a little more than £16 to deal with overlimits.

I am just wondering that if the ombudsman does agree with Egg what the chances are if I continued to court.

I have some questions:

 

1) If Egg file a defence, will they refer to the ombudsmans decision of support for them?

2) Again, if a defence is filed will they refer to their claim of satisfying the OFT?

3) How likely is it that the claim will be allocated to another track an raise the possibility that if Egg win, they can reclaim their costs from me?

 

I do want to go as far as possible to reclaim the charges, but if going to court is going to result in problems and added costs (other than the court fees) then would it be best to leave it.

Thanks for taking the time to read this post.

[seriously fed up]

interesting one for me as I have poc prepared for Egg who I reckon owe me something like £1000 and are offering £300.

To be honest, I suspect that going to the OFT was a bad move, or at best a waste of time as its not often they agree with an individual complaint. Any chance you could post up what they said to you as this would give us some insight why they didnt disagree with Egg? I have always found Egg's stance a bit odd (or fishy, if you like fish with Egg) that because they are an internet bank, late payment etc letters can cost £16 when "snail mail" banks can only get away with £12.

But somehow I dont think that Egg will have been fully investigated as to the reasonableness of their charges? Just a guess.

To your questions

 

1. I would think so. If it were you or me, wouldnt you?
   
2. seems to me to be the same question, so same answer
   
3. that is something that has been used up here in Scotland by RBS and by Bank of Scotland - kick the claim upstairs, make it expensive and thus riskier so that the claimant backs down practically no matter how good their case is. The argument will focus on the complexity of the issues to be determined.
   

On the other hand, banks arent notably keen to take consumers on re charges for credit cards, so what MIGHT happen is that if you make a claim they will appear to resist, might even submit a defence (probably referring to the OFT) but come to an agreement with you before the case gets to court - sort of game of legal chicken.

My understanding from random reading of the Egg forum is that they often give up before court - often just before court. Others might want to offer their perspective.

[Mistermind]

1) If Egg file a defence, will they refer to the ombudsmans decision of support for them?

 

The ombudsman is the executive branch, the court is the judiciary branch independent of the executive, answerable to their own interpretation of the statute books and precedents established in higher courts of which there are none in this case. If the courts were bound by executive decisions then there would have been no point in the OFT mounting a multimillionpound lawsuit on bank charges all the way up to the Supreme court.

 

2) Again, if a defence is filed will they refer to their claim of satisfying the OFT?

 

The OFT for pragmatic reasons decided not to tackle cards levying £12, £16 for Egg. The OFT were at pains to point out repeatedly they did not declare £16 was a fair price, just that they would not intervene at the £16 level - in April 2006. The OFT based their decision on Egg's "genuine pre-estimates". Your case is to bring these pre-estimates into ajudication by open court, with figures then becoming available for nationwide publication.

 

3) How likely is it that the claim will be allocated to another track an raise the possibility that if Egg win, they can reclaim their costs from me?

 

If your claim is below £5,000 there is no reason to switch from Small Claims to higher courts. You could also abandon your claim if a reallocation were ordered by the judge. Small Claims Court is about redistribution of money, the High Court is about legal principles. Unless you want a definitive fight about principle there is no reason for either party to go there.

 

Legal eagles can confirm, I believe there is no appeal allowed on the verdict of Small Claims Court. You may like to consider Egg has more to lose than you.

[lhmcr1]

Thanks for the reply.

I haven't got the FOS's letter to hand at the mo, I'll post it as soon as I can, AFAIK the FOS mentioned that Egg had satisfied the OFT with their "little more then £16" claim, (I don't understand either) citing the higher credit score needed and also the fact that a DD must be set up to make payments.

I did notice someones post about a well worded letter to Egg that made them pay up within a few weeks, that could be interesting. But i think I need to wait for the ombudsman's decision now.

[seriously fed up]

Re 3 see http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/scotland/267969-walls-santander.html

I know its bank charges and this is credit card, but that's not to say they wont try it.

[lhmcr1]

Well, I've just had the ombudsmans final decision and, surprise, surprise, they have not upheld it.

They are saying that Egg have shown satisfactory evidence that it costs them a little more to deal with people who go over their limits, hmm!!

They have asked me to either accept or reject their decision, I am incined to reject and go to court.

I have read about people taking Egg to court and most say that they cave in right at the end..

So, I now need to make the decision wether to go to court.

I looked with interest at another member sending a letter or email to Egg requiring them to act with integrity and honesty, or something along those lines, and within a couple of weeks recieved a settlement, does anyone have any more info about this?

[Mistermind]

Sticky: V-E Day: Victory over Egg 5)

 

The thread above has been pinned by CAG management at the top of Egg Forum for 2 years for the benefit of all who wish to help themselves.

See 30 April 2007 template letter by Mock1982.

 

Egg DID go to Small Claims Court in November 2006 (listed as the first of 122 claimant wins). The judge's ruling on a fair charge was £5. Evidently Egg had no appetite to further publicize this precedent, and never again defended penalty charge refund claims in court, defending against other claims yes.

 

It does not help that you got the Financial Ombudsman Service to rule against you, then got a second "Ombudsman (?)" to rule against you. Egg might therefore be encouraged to contest in court and quote the above two in support. Any adverse ruling against you in court would of course strengthen Egg and weaken future claimants.

[lhmcr1]

I was unaware about the incompetencies of the FOS until I read about them on here.

I do see what you are getting at Misterind but I am very tempted to proceed through court, I would ask if any other CAG members have gone to the ombusdman first, been rejected, then gone on to court.

[Mistermind]

No harm to make as if you intend to see them in court, showing Egg all legal papers correctly filed.

 

Egg lawyers will make as if they will meet you in court. Chances are they will quietly back down at the last minute and pay, because over 4 years they have shown no appetite for a showdown whose outcome would affect the entire credit card industry. Equally the court verdict in your case if adverse will do no favours for others still waiting to reclaim.

[lhmcr1]

I have today sent by Eggmail an amended version of moc1982's template letter. I only hope it is still relevant as it appears to be around three years old.

I did notice while looking through other peoples claims something about Dublin Bank only charging £3, are Dublin bank anything to do with Egg, Citi or whoever owns them now?

Any reply I get I will note on here.

[Mistermind]

Irish Republic banks have raised their penalty charges slightly, I think around ten or twelve euros, nothing like the £39 a time that NatWest and Abbey used to charge. UK banks despite finally winning in the Supreme Court against the OFT, have I believe also reduced their charges somewhat, particularly Barclays. However Lloyds remain fierce on this front. If anybody has the spread of latest figures it would be interesting to see. In the old days if you went accidentally 10p overdrawn you could be hit with a total of £400 charges within one month, so for those in dire straits there was no way out of this.

 

Irish banks are unrelated to Egg, just to make the point that £30 penalty charges in the UK never were an inescapable law of nature. If you google AIB or ACCbank you should see their scale of charges published online.

[lhmcr1]

Well, I went by secure EggMail the Pre-Post audits etc... letter on the 4th August, no reply as yet, will contact again today to find out what is happening.

[lhmcr1]

Well then, spoke to the FOS team at Egg and they say they have now closed the complaint, and that I need to reopen it by starting court proceedings, they say they would not answer my secure mail about the pre and post audits because the case is now closed.

[seriously fed up]

Legal eagles can confirm, I believe there is no appeal allowed on the verdict of Small Claims Court. You may like to consider Egg has more to lose than you.

 

Not a legal eagle, but I was trying to help someone with a small claim in which he "lost the first round", and in Scotland there can be an appeal of a decision to the Sheriff Principal in the area.

 

Allied to this, bearing in mind that

 

1. Egg won the Slater case (approved limits etc),
   
2. its the debtor bringing the case and thus the onus of proof is on them
   
3. would it not be possible for Egg to make a counterclaim - for instance there are maybe £2000 of fees that you would like back, but you owe £4000 and the account is currently "in dispute" on Slater case grounds?
   
4. moreover, might the onus of proof not be on the debtor in disproving Egg's counterclaim?
   

Just a thought

[lhmcr1]

Seriously fed up: My account is not in dispute and I the charges were as a result of me being overlimit as a result of Egg's delayed balance. This case is not in Scotland. The total amount of my claim is just over £200.

[seriously fed up]

Look not a problem - I was just making the point about procedure in Scotland (you might want to check if there is a parallel thing in England though) and the numbers were just to make the point which wasnt specifically directed at you - more of a general point.

[lhmcr1]

Look not a problem - I was just making the point about procedure in Scotland (you might want to check if there is a parallel thing in England though) and the numbers were just to make the point which wasnt specifically directed at you - more of a general point.

Sorry seriously fed up, made the above quote a bit quick there, should have put in some smiley's, or made better use of punctuation, certainly didn't mean to come over as being aggressive towards you:shock:.

No offence.

[seriously fed up]

And I can assure you that there was none taken. Just wanted to clarify the point that I had made. :roll:

[lhmcr1]

Seriously fed up: With regards to the reclaim I might just start MCO proceedings and see what Egg's response is and then cross each bridge (or letter) as it comes. Your point is valid, however, and I will certainly be keeping in mind all that has been said in this thread.

[joncow75]

subbing: as in same situation

[lhmcr1]

Hi all,

Have decided (after much thought) to proceed down the MCOL route with Egg, but it will have to wait till early new year when funds permit.

Should be interesting to see just what happens.

[Spit]

i have used MCOL twice and its always got the desired result

[lhmcr1]

i have used MCOL twice and its always got the desired result

Yes, but had you been to, and been rejected by the FOS first?

Not being funny, it's a genuine question.

[joncow75]

Good luck, I hope it works out well for you and you get a result. I'm in a similar boat, but won't have the finances till around Feb, then I'll be around a month behind you

[lhmcr1]

Just hope it goes in my favour if it gets as far as actually going to court.