Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • no need to use it. it doubles the size of the thread and makes it very diff to find replies on small screens too. just like @username it - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread already inc you ...gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.
    • Hello all,   I ordered a laptop online about 16 months ago. The laptop was faulty and I was supposed to send it back within guarantee but didn't for various reasons. I contacted the company a few months later and they said they will still fix it for me free of charge but I'd have to pay to send it to them and they will pay to send it back to me. The parcel arrived there fine. Company had fixed it and they sent it via dpd. I was working in the office so I asked my neighbours who would be in, as there's been a history of parcel thefts on our street. I had 2 neighbours who offered but when I went to update delivery instructions, their door number wasn't on the drop down despite sharing the same post code.  I then selected a neighbour who I thought would likely be in and also selected other in the safe place selection and put the number of the neighbour who I knew would definitely be in and they left my parcel outside and the parcel was stolen. DPD didn't want to deal with me and said I need to speak to the retailer. The retailer said DPD have special instructions from them not to leave a parcel outside unless specified by a customer. The retailer then said they could see my instructions said leave in a safe space but I have no porch. My front door just opens onto the road and the driver made no attempt to conceal it.  Anyway, I would like to know if I have rights here because the delivery wasn't for an item that I just bought. It was initially delivered but stopped working within the warranty period and they agreed to fix it for free.  Appreciate your help 🙏🏼   Thanks!
    • As the electric carmaker sees sales fall and cuts jobs, we take a closer look at its problems.View the full article
    • Care to briefly tell someone who isn't tech savvy - i.e. me! - how you did this? Every day is a school day.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • 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 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • 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
  • Recommended Topics

NatWest Credit Card Charges


citybloke
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3639 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

Hi

I put in a claim for credit card late payment charges on my account to be returned to me from NatWest credit cards.

I've had a reply saying they will refund the last 6 years £12 charges + 8% but not the interest that has been accruing as a result of these charges at the credit card interest rate - Can I insist they pay the contractual interest (credit card interest was 19.9%) also?

 

NatWest also state that for the charges over 6 years old, they are not legally obliged to refund these charges - Is this correct?

 

Many thanks

 

Citybloke

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you got that in writing?

 

AFAIK, and I will be corrected if wrong, but there is no time limit of how far back you can reclaim their unfair charges...

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I have it in writing - The exact quote is "We are only legally obliged to refund charges within the last 6 years"

 

What do you reckon on them not wanting to pay back the interest that has accrued?

 

Thanks

 

Have you got that in writing?

 

AFAIK, and I will be corrected if wrong, but there is no time limit of how far back you can reclaim their unfair charges...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

You will need to sue to get the contractual interest and charges over six years old. You would use S32(1)© Limitations Act 1980 for the charges over 6 years old.

 

Case Law for this is Kleinwort Benson -v- Lincoln City Council.

 

Have a look in the Barclaycard forum for shelley's recently won thread because, although a different bank, there is a lot of useful information in there as to how to proceed to court.

 

Regards

 

ims

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

You will need to sue to get the contractual interest and charges over six years old. You would use S32(1)© Limitations Act 1980 for the charges over 6 years old.

 

Case Law for this is Kleinwort Benson -v- Lincoln City Council.

 

Have a look in the Barclaycard forum for shelley's recently won thread because, although a different bank, there is a lot of useful information in there as to how to proceed to court.

 

Regards

 

ims

 

Cheers ims

What about them saying they will only pay 8% interest and not the 19.9% they were piling on in interest on the £12 charges they say they will pay back?

 

Thanks

 

Citybloke

Link to post
Share on other sites

What they say they will pay and what a court might say they should pay are two different things.

 

No reason why you shouldn't go for interest in restitution at 24.9% if you wish

 

ims

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for clearing that up ims...

 

Hi

 

No probs.

 

Just to put some meat on the bones, if you consider that the original charge of £12 is unlawful then so is any interest the bank has charged on that £12. In addition the interest (or profit) they made on that interest is also unlawful and so is the interest (or profit) they made on that interest too and so on.

 

If you expand this, there are several levels of this unlawful proft and this encompassed in the principle of unjust enrichment and that was the basis of the case law of Sempra Metals.

 

While the general feeling is that a nominal rate of 24.9% is a good rate for claiming interest in restitution for this unjust enrichment, there are recorded wins on the site where a claimant has used 29.9% ass the nominal rate. Some have even got 8% statutory interest on top.

 

At the very least you should claim back the charge and the interest the bank charged you on that figure but the higher rates are available if you wish. It is down to the individual claimant to go for whatever they feel comfortable with.

 

Hope this helps.

 

Regards

 

ims

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Hi All

After several letters back and forth from myself and NatWest trying to settle my claim, they are only willing to pay back charges up to 6 yrs old, but only on the condition that I make no further claim. So i will have to go to court for the whole amount/period.

I intend to use the S32(1)© Limitations Act 1980 for the charges over 6 years old (Case Law for this is Kleinwort Benson -v- Lincoln City Council) and wondered if anyone had advice on how I should word the limitations act part of my N1 form?

Thanks as always

Citybloke

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are many threads with POCs in the bank forums....here's one to start you off.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?309037-Charges-older-than-6-years-***WON***-Compound-Int-t-and-**NO-SET-OFF**

 

Have a read around and use the site search facility too because you will need POC (particulars of claim) to go with your N1

 

ims

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 2 weeks later...
Hi Citibloke,

 

are there any developments on how you got on with this?

 

Hi carcar

No developments at the moment, as i'm waiting to see if I can get statements going back further than I have already. Either way, I will have to take this to court to get what i'm claiming as they won't budge on charges over 6yrs old.

 

Citybloke

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

You will need to sue to get the contractual interest and charges over six years old. You would use S32(1)© Limitations Act 1980 for the charges over 6 years old.

 

Case Law for this is Kleinwort Benson -v- Lincoln City Council.

 

Have a look in the Barclaycard forum for shelley's recently won thread because, although a different bank, there is a lot of useful information in there as to how to proceed to court.

 

Regards

 

ims

 

Hi ims

 

I'm unsure how to word the fact i'm claiming charges over 6 yrs old using the S32(1)© limitations act and the case law you mentioned.

 

Are there any example wordings for tihs? as it's probably a generic statement for this scenario. I've had a look on CAG, but don't seem to be able to find what i'm looking for....maybe just my poor searching!!

 

Cheers

 

Citybloke

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers ims....will study that.

 

I think the only option open to me is court action as they are adamant about not having to consider charges older than 6 yrs old. I'm just trying to get some older statement information from them, but they are saying they don't have it.

 

Citybloke

 

Hi

 

This is pretty much a step-by-step

 

long thread but well worth a read and note-taking

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?309037-Charges-older-than-6-years-***WON***-Compound-Int-t-and-**NO-SET-OFF**

 

ims

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...

I know this comes a bit late. But NATWEST DO keep statements over 6 years old. Or at least the very infomation. I recieved 07/05/14 copy statements going back to October 2001 which is about when I opened the account.

 

Assuming nothing more happened here. If for any reason you did not progress I would recommend Saring them again, make them aware that Natwest can provide transaction lists going back to at least 2001 and restart your claim.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

 

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bump, was this resolved?

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

 

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...