Do you have charges going back more than 6 years?

[deemacperth]

Right, here's my tuppence worth on the statute of limitations.

 

I had an account with Lloyds from 1996 to 2001. I have requested a full disclosure. When I receive that, I will claim back from the current date to the point which would take me up to the 6 year limitation, that should be uncontested.

 

I will then attempt a further claim for the remainder without mentioning the statute of limitations. I would expect the bank to defend this using

Cave v Robinson Jarvis & Rolf [2002] UKHL 18, [2002] 2 WLR 1107 the gist of which is:

 

"If the claimant can show that the defendant knew he was committing a breach of duty, or intended to commit the breach of duty - I can discern no difference between the two formulations; each would constitute, in my opinion, a deliberate commission of the breach"

 

I suspect this would suceed, as we cannot prove that they deliberatly knew they were being unlawful. Unfortunatly ignorance of the law is allowed in the statute of limitations, just because they should have known isn't good enough.

 

What I would hope to rely on instead is a similar case

Sheldon v R H M Outhwaite (Underwriting Agencies) Ltd [1996] 1 AC 102

 

"concealment occurring one month or even one day, after the accrual would afford the plaintiff no protection at all. Perhaps a more cogent argument against the construction is that if it is correct even a concealment taking place more than six years after accrual of the cause of action would bring section 32(1) into play. But that is not a realistic objection, since it is not conceivable that a potential defendant would set out to conceal facts relevant to a cause of action when more than six years had elapsed since its accrual." Yet it is that inconceivable event which has occurred in this case; Cobert set out to conceal facts long after the time when it believed the German limitation period had elapsed."

 

Now here's the interesting bit. We're all telling them they're unlawful, applying these charges, going against the duty of care they owe us as our fiduciary and that they've been deliberatly concealing the facts by charging us and sending out the letters, but what are they still doing? Has any bank actually admitted fault yet or is it more a case of refunding claims as a goodwill gesture.

 

That's my thoughts anyway. Dave, perhaps you could ask closey to get her boyfriend (the barrister) to see how valid my argument is?

 

[BankFodder]

Well put.

 

On the first scenario you have to consider the standard of proof. All that you have to establish is that the bank probably did know. - more than 51%.

 

For instance, if it can be shown that the bank was arguing all the time that the charges were intended to cover their administrative costs then if you can convince the judge that this was clearly untrue then this would be enough in my view to persuade a judge that they did know and that they were concealing the cause of action.

 

On the second point I don't think that there is any problem. It is clear that the banks are still concealing. in fact their is no difference in their position at any point in the last 25 yrs at least

[Seminole]

Not sure what you have in mind, but keep us posted. Good luck.

 

Have a look in the Nat West forum and the thread entitled "Nat West Offer Received and Rejected".

[Seminole]

Questions:

 

If a court was faced with deciding whether a charge was a penalty and that charge arose more than six years ago, which issue would they consider first- the Limitation Act or the contract term?

 

If someone brought an action for charges covering a period of more than six years, is there any way that the bank could only defend the Limitation Act aspect of the claim?

[alanfromderby]

They can admit part of the claim and defend the rest.

[Seminole]

I agree that they can admit part of the claim but doesn't that admission become part of the judgement anyway?

[Seminole]

From the guidance on replying to a county court claim:

 

If you admit only part of the claim, complete Form

N9A and Form N9B (see ‘Disputing the Claim’ overleaf)

and send them to the court within 14 days. The claimant

will decide whether to accept your part admission.

If it is accepted, the claimant may request the court to

enter judgment against you and the court will send you an

order to pay. If your part admission is not accepted, the

case will proceed as a defended claim.

[alanfromderby]

Excellent!

[deemacperth]

Hmmm, question here.

 

If we lodge a claim in the small claims court and win setting aside the statute of limitations, it will almost certainly be appealed.

 

Now if that ruling is set aside in a higher court, would we be liable for costs even though the original claim was under £5000?

[mahala]

I used to have an account with Abbey (in fact I think I may still have an account with them with £50 in it, but have no idea of the account number - a long story). Due to my then-partner's ability to spend everything we earned before it hit our accounts, I was hit with huge fees every month.

 

Now, I changed bank account in 1999, so I know the charges are outside the statute of limitations, but was reading somewhere on the site that there may be a way around that.

 

Is it worth me paying for a DPA request, or am I likely to be told to sod off when I try and claim fees back because they were levied more than 6 years ago?

 

Edited to add that this account started out as my personal account, but was later turned into a joint account. Will they require signatures of both parties? I have no idea how to contact my ex and would not wish too. Anyway, when they decided to come after us for the debt, it was me that paid it all - they made one attempt at contacting him and decided to write him off and came after me for the lot.

[thegoodsamaritan]

If its a joint account it only requires one party to ask for copy statements so you can ask for statements all the way through the time you had the account.

 

Basically for them to send you copy statements (if they still have this information!) you're going to need to send then £10 fee with your DPA request. I suppose as the statute of limitations is yet to be tested in regard to bank charges its unsure what the outcome of a small claims case against them would be, so you would be risking the DPA fee, plus any court fees.

It depends how many charges you are looking to claim back - i think it may cost the bank more money to defend it than it would take just to pay you. Then again I doubt the banks would be happy if it were to become common knowledge that people could claim back as far as they liked without challenge from the banks.

 

Also another note, in 1999 bank charges were nowhere near the level they are now. But they WERE still unlawful!

[neilloffhagen]

A question on joint and single accounts. My wife had her own account with Abbey for over 15 years, then we made it joint about 2 years ago. If we want to start claiming for anything over the period before I joined the account would it all need to be done by my wife herself, or could I still do it all in my name?

 

Thanks,

 

Neil.

[thegoodsamaritan]

A difficult one to call. At first I thought your wife would need to claim for anything back further than the two years it was joint. But the more I think about it the fact that it's now joint allows you to ask for statements as far back as possible so you could imply that you could make a claim.

 

Hypothetical Situation:

What if your wife asked to be removed from the account completely and you agreed? (note: i'm not suggesting you do this, just going off on a tangent that's all! ) The account number would still be the same but it would now be in your name only. Could you then still sucessfully claim back charges from when you were not even listed on the account?

I'd say probably not but any legal eagles out there want to comment?

[deemacperth]

Hmmm, question here.

 

If we lodge a claim in the small claims court and win setting aside the statute of limitations, it will almost certainly be appealed.

 

Now if that ruling is set aside in a higher court, would we be liable for costs even though the original claim was under £5000?

 

 

Anyone??

[baconbuttyman]

barclays: just recieved statements today, they total £1200 from june 1999, can i go back and claim that far, or only to apr 2000, any help woild be apreciated

unpaid dd: £20 in 1999 and £25 in 2002

[neilloffhagen]

A difficult one to call. At first I thought your wife would need to claim for anything back further than the two years it was joint. But the more I think about it the fact that it's now joint allows you to ask for statements as far back as possible so you could imply that you could make a claim.

Appreciate your thoughts. Once I've settled with HSBC I'll start with Abbey

 

Neil.

[Spiceskull]

Appreciate your thoughts. Once I've settled with HSBC I'll start with Abbey

 

Neil.

I'll be doing the same, but rather I'll be hitting HSBC twice. This will have to be estimated, as I have already requested a DPA + 6 years history, to be told it is no longer held...should be brilliant fun

[BankFodder]

barclays: just recieved statements today, they total £1200 from june 1999, can i go back and claim that far, or only to apr 2000, any help woild be apreciated

unpaid dd: £20 in 1999 and £25 in 2002

 

You can calim what you want. It is up to them to raise the issue of limitation and it is up to you whether to settle for the 6 years or to go for the rest.

You couild decide to go for the 6 and then try for the charges byond 6 as a separate and subsequent claim. ^ yrs is just about certain. Pre-6 is experimental.

 

however, I can tell that there one user who has succeeded in getting a defulat judgment for claims well beyond 6 years - even though the bank and their lawyers were well aware of the claim.

They even referred to the limitation period in their correpsondence and then on the day, didn't defend.

We are now waiting to see if they will apply for a setaside.

Watch this space. I can't say more at present.

[baconbuttyman]

You can calim what you want. It is up to them to raise the issue of limitation and it is up to you whether to settle for the 6 years or to go for the rest.

You couild decide to go for the 6 and then try for the charges byond 6 as a separate and subsequent claim. ^ yrs is just about certain. Pre-6 is experimental.

 

however, I can tell that there one user who has succeeded in getting a defulat judgment for claims well beyond 6 years - even though the bank and their lawyers were well aware of the claim.

They even referred to the limitation period in their correpsondence and then on the day, didn't defend.

We are now waiting to see if they will apply for a setaside.

Watch this space. I can't say more at present.

 

have drafted a prelimenary letter going all the way back to 1999 with out any dates, only mentioning the account is now closed, leaving it up to them to realise the limitations, if they raise the subject then i will be re-evaluating the situation in my lba.

we will have to wait and see

[mechs]

I have recieved today a letter for an old account closed in 2003 with £124 worth of charges on it, after reading this disscussion I phoned the Halifax and asked for a full disclosure ( wonder why they want to take my £10 now) they say they can only go back 6 years as thats all thats required by law all data before that is destroyed so I asked for my original contract as well, will keep you posted as to what happens BTW I had to hold on for about 10 minutes because the phones were busy ...........I cant think why LOL

[Guest BlueRuby]

Well, I've got ALL my statements from RBS right back to when they were Williams & Glyn! So once my current claim against them is settled, I wouldn't mind trying my luck a bit further. Just looking through the 3 or 4 months of 1999 I have to hand, I've found over £100 of charges.

[Bucephalas]

Had an account with Nasty Westy between 1988 and 1996

They fleeced me good and proper over this period.

I would estimate £2500.

[paulwlton]

closed my account in 98 with rbs asked for statements from 98 till when i opend my account, just received them but only from june 96 looks like they keep up to 10 years worth of info. 1800 in charges over the 2 years, 25 for unpaid direct debit 15 referal fee i was only earning 5 pound per hour at the time 150 pounds in charges in 1week.what b------s.

[Seminole]

Has anyone had more than 6 years of statements back from Nat West in response to a DPA enquiry?

[Shanks]

Being a rather sad person I have kept every statment ever received from my building society account since it was opened in 1997. My wife has had to apologise now after readingt that we might be getting a pile of cash back now because of it

 

After some lurking I have recently put a claim in for all the charges dating back to 2000 which amount to about £1300. I was vbery dissappointed that I would not be able to claim the other £1700 that I was charged between 97 and 2000. (The interest on that if they let it go to court is almost another £1k)

 

If however there seems to be a chink of light regarding trying for these older amounts then please let me know. My LBA is due to go out Monday next week so I cannot change my claimed amount now but i'd be very interested in going back for another bite afterwards

 

Cheers, Shanks