Changing claim amount from Prelim to LBA

[bram stoker]

Sorry, just spotted you've actually received it. Did you agree to an offer?

[redsue]

No, not agreed to anything yet - I've just moved the money into a NW savings account until resolved

[bram stoker]

No, not agreed to anything yet - I've just moved the money into a NW savings account until resolved

They could argue that you've "spent" it by taking it from your account.

 

Not sure what advice to give here. I'd have to say give it back if it's still in dispute. Sorry.

[redsue]

Could I not send a letter saying "thank you for your offer I shall accept it as part settlement and pursue the remainder through the courts" - The cash is still in one of their accounts just not the accounts they credited it into - I could argue that I was putting it to one side until the matter was resolved.

[redsue]

sorry vamps I'm waffling - do you know of any mods who may be able to advise?

[bram stoker]

Could I not send a letter saying "thank you for your offer I shall accept it as part settlement and pursue the remainder through the courts" - The cash is still in one of their accounts just not the accounts they credited it into - I could argue that I was putting it to one side until the matter was resolved.

That's fine.

[bill-k]

FWIW, Redsue, I agree with Vamp.

 

I believe that, as long as you haven't signed in Full & Final Settlement, then your full claim still stands. You're being tolerant of their inability to pay it all at once, poor souls, that's all. Until they've paid in full, or let it go to Court, they still owe you the rest.

 

Unless, of course, you decide to accept the partial settlement.

 

"...But we don't want to give you that, do we ? !!!" :grin:

 

Bill.

[redsue]

Thanks bill-k - you know I like you to give me a kick up the backside!

Just wanted some reassurance - off to write my 'computer says no' letter right now!

will let you know how I get on

[bill-k]

Excellent Redsue - I've just bunged another tirade on the other Contractual thread if you wanna take look first, and get in on a group hug !!

[redsue]

quick update - spoke to our local court today who where very, very nice and helpful and they pointed out the fact that it wasn't up to NW to decide what they paid me so I will pursue the rest - got to wait now until the 8th Nov..

When we got back home from work we officially recieved out 'f*** Off' letters from NW - not bovvered - c'ya NW.

Think I may visit our local branch in the morning and speak in VERY LOUDLY ABOUT CLAIMING BACK MY UNLAWFUL BANK CHARGES WITH COMPOUNDED INTEREST!!

[bill-k]

When we got back home from work we officially recieved out 'f*** Off' letters from NW - not bovvered - c'ya NW.

Think I may visit our local branch in the morning and speak in VERY LOUDLY ABOUT CLAIMING BACK MY UNLAWFUL BANK CHARGES WITH COMPOUNDED INTEREST!!

 

I'd love to see the CCTV footage of that, Redsue. :o

 

So, they shut down the accounts of anybody who believes that unlawful misappropriation is not vey nice. So, what is all this s**t about new money-laundering regulations, then ?? Talk about hypocrisy.

 

Bovvered ? Lookamyface - you callin' me a Pikey ?

 

Get me that footage - it'd be priceless !!!

[redsue]

We're moving all our DDs and wages etc before the 30 days are up then I think they will find that it is actually US who is closing down the accounts including my sons cashbuilder account (well done NW - he's 5!) and taking our business elsewhere - I wouldn't give them the satisfaction.

Email and letter sent out to Mr Bacon saying thanks for the instalment where's the rest of my cash - they have until the 8th Nov to repond - will keep you informed matey

[bill-k]

We're...taking our business elsewhere - I wouldn't give them the satisfaction.

 

I believe this kind of closure has been found to be a breach of the Banking Code, (did I spell that right ?) and some forum members have even taken out injunctions - there are threads on this, I'm sure.

 

I personally would have the greatest pleasure in forcing them to keep the accounts open, first of all, by telling them that this kind of victimisation is a breach of the Banking Code. Then when they've been forced to back down, send them a bunch of fork-off letters explaining politely (? ?) that you do not feel that you can leave your money with an organisation that not only appears to condone unlawful misappropriation, but also actively discourages those who do respect the law (by closing them down) - Oh...and invite their comments !!

 

Yeah - take their toys away first, and save them the trouble of chucking them out of the pram themselves. - Then take their pram away.

 

Aren't we rotten ?

[redsue]

Hi everyone - some help needed please

I had an interesting conversation with a NW employee yesterday who was dealing with my claim. I've claimed compounded contractual interest at their unauthorised rate of 24.9%. They've paid out but only at a rate of 8% compounded - she said I wasn't 'entitled' to the rest - so I said fine we will see what the judge thinks I'm 'entitled' to - during the course of this conversation when I brought up the Consumer Action Group - she told me they read the site all the time.

Am I right in thinking that they can't read this site unless they identify themselves as a bank employee - I thought I may have read elsewhere on this site that it may be a breach of the computer misuse act or something like that.

Have I read this somewhere or making it up?!

Any comments would be gratefully received as I'm just about to send them another letter telling them I'll pursue the rest of my money through the courts

[gizmo111]

Hi everyone - some help needed please

I had an interesting conversation with a NW employee yesterday who was dealing with my claim. I've claimed compounded contractual interest at their unauthorised rate of 24.9%. They've paid out but only at a rate of 8% compounded - she said I wasn't 'entitled' to the rest - so I said fine we will see what the judge thinks I'm 'entitled' to - during the course of this conversation when I brought up the Consumer Action Group - she told me they read the site all the time.

Am I right in thinking that they can't read this site unless they identify themselves as a bank employee - I thought I may have read elsewhere on this site that it may be a breach of the computer misuse act or something like that.

Have I read this somewhere or making it up?!

Any comments would be gratefully received as I'm just about to send them another letter telling them I'll pursue the rest of my money through the courts

 

The yare not alone - citicards admit in coourt to snooping on here.

[Rob S]

I would have thought with this site being available readily in the public domain that there isn't much to stop them from accessing the site to read what is going on. After all, you don't even need to be a member to read the forums.

 

Personally I don't see it as a problem. The banks have all had plenty of claims made against them, and as they are unwilling (for now) to reveal their true costs, its not as if there is anything new happening that they are not already aware of, apart from the ever increasing numbers of consumers who are discovering the site and becoming empowered with new knowledge, which then give them the confidence to challenge the banks and their unfair charges:)

[Mike220359]

That's why I've hidden my signature

[121o121]

Yeah, my username has nothing to do with me, i just clicked a few buttons. Now I tend to do a bit of PM'ing, especially now its at the court stage. But they can easily look at the litigation section and look at claim numbers to identify us.

 

Regards

[sarahpp]

I think this is what you were thinking of redsue - from the forum rules.

 

 

> Entry by Banks and their staff is prohibited. Banks will be allowed to enter the forum so long as they have permission from the Administrators.

 

[ignoring this rule is in our opinion a breach of the Computer Misuse Act 1990 - Section 1b.]

[Guest Battleaxe]

I don't mind the banks snooping around my threads, they just might see something they don't like I wish Clydesdale Finance would also snoop and perhaps they might get the idea, that they are wrong and we are right.

 

The banks have their legal eagles and they are powerless, can they make our lives any more miserable? They have already done the damage. I would love that creep Chief Executive from the Bankers Association to have a good of this site, if he hasn't already.

 

It is now our turn to control the Matrix and see how they like it. Until they front in Court make the charges transparent, they have to suck the lemon.

 

Also if they read the ligagation section they see the numbers are stacking up against them.

 

Move over Mr Smith.

[redsue]

thanks sarahpp - I knew I'd seen it somewhere - I think I may mention that in my next letter unless Dave or Bankfodder gave them permission (I don't think)

[Rob S]

Ah, I wasn't aware of that condition in the forum rules! But does that mean they are not allowed to register and post without permission, or does it mean they can't access the site without having a log in and view the posts?

[sarahpp]

Ah, I wasn't aware of that condition in the forum rules! But does that mean they are not allowed to register and post without permission, or does it mean they can't access the site without having a log in and view the posts?

 

I would have thought that "entry" applies to both viewing and posting but, I am happy to be corrected if I have misinterpreted. Also, further down it states that anything posted is copyrighted.

 

You know, my partner is always accusing me of being a bit anally retentive because I insist on reading instruction manuals before I start on a job but, sometimes I am pleased that I do.......

[Rob S]

Sarah,

 

I think the word "entry" could be open to debate as to its intepretation. I'm sure some could argue that if you don't register and have no ability to post that you are not entering the site. I wonder if the site owners have any way of knowing who is actually viewing the site without logging in. Are IP numbers of those who view stored somewhere?

 

I would have thought that the best way of ensuring confidentiality is for people not to use their real names. If they scan any documentation on to the site it needs to be cleared of any personal details and reference numbers. It seems to work ok on Pepipoo who have a similar problem with regards to the safety camera partnerships taking a peek at the goings on. They also have a members only section which is available by subscription only, though I am not sure if that would be the right way forward for here.

[gizmo111]

Sarah,

 

I think the word "entry" could be open to debate as to its intepretation. I'm sure some could argue that if you don't register and have no ability to post that you are not entering the site. I wonder if the site owners have any way of knowing who is actually viewing the site without logging in. Are IP numbers of those who view stored somewhere?

 

I would have thought that the best way of ensuring confidentiality is for people not to use their real names. If they scan any documentation on to the site it needs to be cleared of any personal details and reference numbers. It seems to work ok on Pepipoo who have a similar problem with regards to the safety camera partnerships taking a peek at the goings on. They also have a members only section which is available by subscription only, though I am not sure if that would be the right way forward for here.

 

Quite frankly I don't care who sees what I post if the bank staff and solicitors have nothing better to do than snoop instead of defending their institution with an acceptable breakdown of costs then that really says it all.