Is the bank taking your Benefits ?

[lynski3053]

ok will do thanks ever so much

[Vital Spark]

Fraud by failing to disclose information

 

Section 3 provides that where a person dishonestly fails to disclose to another information which he is under a legal duty to disclose, & intends to make a gain or cause a loss or the risk of a loss an offence has been committed.

 

Does the above apply to banks who don't send all teh information requested, if the £10 was paid when teh SAR was submitted/ Should say that a receipt was acquired for the £10 posatal order.

[TideTurner]

Vital Spark,

 

This will come down to interpretation, for what it's worth, my own is that this refers to the non disclosure of information when making an application or entering into contract. Non disclosure relates to information which, if it was disclosed would have a direct affect on the contract.

 

Haven't got it to hand, but there are many instances on this site where the banks or agents appointed by them have produced misleading information 'production of an instrument' which causes another to do or say something with a view to making a gain or causing another to cause a loss or risk of a loss.

 

Also, there is the Bill of Rights Act 1689, which is set in stone ( a constitutional statute). This shows that the making of charges, if unjustified, is illegal.

 

Bill of Rights Act 1689

"That all grants and promises of fines and forfeitures of particular persons before conviction are illegal and void".

"Before conviction" means that no fine can be imposed until and unless the individual is convicted in a court of law. Of course, under constitutional law, the Bill of Rights Act 1689 is repealed by the Road Traffic Act 1991. This is because the Road Traffic Act provides for fining outside of a court and, under British law, it is always the later Act that takes precedence.

However, Lord Justice Laws said in the 'Metric Martyrs' judgment (sections 62 and 63):

"We should recognise a hierarchy of Acts of Parliament: as it were "ordinary" statutes and "constitutional statutes". The special status of constitutional statutes follows the special status of constitutional rights. Examples are the Magna Carta, Bill of Rights 1689, The Act of Union ? Ordinary statutes may be impliedly repealed. Constitutional statutes may not?"

 

The banks are fully aware of this, but for whatever reason seem to believe they can ignore it.

 

Tide

[steven4064]

There have been several discussions on CAG over the last 6 months on the Theft Act/Fraud Act and the conslusion has been that you could try to prove theft/fraud but would almost certainly not get a conviction

 

Steven

 

If this post is helpful, please click the scales

Any opinions are without prejudice & without liability.

Almost everything I know concerning the law I learned from this site

[TideTurner]

Steven,

 

My case is currently ongoing. Should it fail, I have door number 2 (the criminal route) to go down. I've looked at the Fraud Act in detail, and will include this in my Civil action, albeit subliminally, to provide a taste of things to come. Can't say more as my case is ongoing, but there are a few more surprises and a couple of aces which will be presented if necessary.

 

Best thing I ever did was push for as much information as possible, not listening to their excuses and insisting on my rights to information.

 

Tide

[steven4064]

But are you actually going to get it before a DJ with the bank there?

 

Steven

 

If this post is helpful, please click the scales

Any opinions are without prejudice & without liability.

Almost everything I know concerning the law I learned from this site

[TideTurner]

Of course,

 

I only intend to plant the seeds for a later case, this can be done when presenting the evidence upon which you intend to rely (Court bundle or other correspondence).

 

Don't want to expand at the moment, but I'll post details on my thread when all done.

 

Tide

[muggins73]

I've had a brief butchers at this thread, so forgive me if my question has been answered a thousand times over:o

I am aware that you can stop the bank from taking you money via the Right of Appropriation but what can be done 'exactly' when the deed has already been done?

 

I have recently returned from holiday to find that Abbey National have taken a wopping £256.53 in one fail swoop from the joint account in charges which has left pretty much nada by way of my partners Incap Benefit to pay any of the direct debits that have fallen due. Needless-to-say this has buggered up finances somewhat which has inturn caused further charges, to the point of no return. I am livid, as I am sure most of you can sympathise, and would like to know what can be done about it, without embarking on court proceedings?

[JonCris]

muggins I should write to them pointing out their 'mistake' quoting the Social Security Act the details of which are included in the original appropriation letter at the head of this thread.

 

Give them a few days to repay you & if they don't then contact your MP

[steven4064]

Hi all

 

I have asked the mods to see if we can't have a concerted campaign about this. The banks are blatantly ignoring the law and (currently) being allowed to get away with it.

 

Steven

 

If this post is helpful, please click the scales

Any opinions are without prejudice & without liability.

Almost everything I know concerning the law I learned from this site

[muggins73]

muggins I should write to them pointing out their 'mistake' quoting the Social Security Act the details of which are included in the original appropriation letter at the head of this thread.

 

Give them a few days to repay you & if they don't then contact your MP

 

Thanks JonCris for the response.

 

May I ask, whether or not, such action will be opening a can of worms? Please understand that I am trying to cover all bases, and by this, I mean, is there any chance that my branch will take offence and think that I am meerly being both clever and awkward, which in the long-run would do me no justice, as we all know these banks are a law unto themselves?

IYHO would it not pay to meerly ask them for a refund of the charges and start afresh, providing that is, that they didn't close the account down)?

 

After reminding them of their mistake, the thought of having to write and instruct them each time a deposit is made concerns me somewhat.

Abbey have already stated that they do not have the resources to monitor my account and transfer monies between my sole account and joint account (whichever one is in credit) in order to prevent these default charges in the first instance.

 

Your views would be greatly appreciated.

[steven4064]

Muggins,

 

They seem perfectly able to monitor your account and charge you when it gets overdrawn!!

 

I agree that having to write to them ever time you expect a payment could become very onerous (to say the least). I suppose they may take offence (perhaps in the same way as a burgler does when they get the cuffs on!!).

 

You could go through the process of reclaiming the charges and then do it again once the first claim was won. If Abbey do close your account you should remind them that the FSA takes a dim view of bnanks that do that.

 

I have produced two letters - one to the Chancellor (covering Tax Credits) and the other to the Minister for Work and Pensions (covering other benfits) about bank charges and benefits - if any of you would like to send such a letter to one or both of the ministers, I have posted the letters here. Copy to your own MP as well.

 

Steven

 

If this post is helpful, please click the scales

Any opinions are without prejudice & without liability.

Almost everything I know concerning the law I learned from this site

[muggins73]

Muggins,

 

They seem perfectly able to monitor your account and charge you when it gets overdrawn!!

 

I agree that having to write to them ever time you expect a payment could become very onerous (to say the least). I suppose they may take offence (perhaps in the same way as a burgler does when they get the cuffs on!!).

 

You could go through the process of reclaiming the charges and then do it again once the first claim was won. If Abbey do close your account you should remind them that the FSA takes a dim view of bnanks that do that.

 

(I wrote to the Chancellor and Minister for Work and Pensions about bank charges and benfits - if you (all) would like to write I have posted my letters here)

 

Steven

 

If this post is helpful, please click the scales

Any opinions are without prejudice & without liability.

Almost everything I know concerning the law I learned from this site

 

Thanks Steven for the words of wisdom. Much appreciated and duly noted.

 

Fab letter, by-the-way, should come in useful further down the line;)

[muggins73]

I've put this together and would appreciate your input. I'm livid and exceptionally tired so let me know if it's too much:)

 

 

Abbey National plc

Dear Sir/Madam,

Bank Charges and Benefits and the First Right of Appropriation

ACCOUNT NUMBER: xxxxxxxxx

I am writing to you following several charges debited from my account totalling £xxxx on 08th July 2007.

Bank charges are unlawful penalties for breach of contract. However, the bank or building society is only allowed to charge you what it costs to cover their administrative charges. If they charge you more than this, you may have a legal right to get back the difference.

Notably, and in my instance, if the income in an account comes from benefits, they are also contrary to the legislation relating to benefits. If the income comes from Tax Credits, they are contrary to section 45 of the Tax Credits Act 2006. If the income is from incapacity benefit, job seekers allowance, etc , they are contrary to section 187 of the Social Security Administration Act 1996. The working of these two acts comes under the Treasury and the Department of Work and Pensions, respectively and are quoted below for your immediate attention.

Where do I find section 45 of the Tax Credits Act 2006? I need to insert it here.

Social Security Administration Act 1992

Miscellaneous

Certain benefit to be inalienable **

 

187- Subject to the provisions of this Act, every assignment of, or charge on-

(a)benefit as defined in section 122 of the Contributions and Benefits Act;

(b)any income-related benefit; or

©child benefit,

and every agreement to assign or charge such benefit shall be void; and, on the bankruptcy of the beneficiary, such benefit shall not pass to any trustee or other person acting on behalf of his creditors

When you open an account with a bank or building society and use their services, you are entering into a contract. The law says that the bank or building society must carry out its business:-

• with reasonable care and skill.

If the service is unsatisfactory you may be entitled to compensation if the contract has been broken. I believe that there has been a breach of contract as I feel your organisation has failed to handle my affairs with reasonable care and skill.

This failure on your behalf has caused me and my family a great deal of hardship. We are left with no means to pay the rent due to the unauthorised amount now outstanding. The incoming amounts due to be deposited into our account next week will only clear the amount outstanding leaving little if any to pay the rent, for housekeeping or utility bills such as gas. I note, and am further infuriated by the fact that on one occasion a decision has been made to pay your organisation £15.10 for contents insurance (direct debit mandate no.*) in addition to charging me for this privilege, another direct debit (mandate no.*) to Southern Electric has been refused on the same day.

 

I ask for a little compassion and request that the benefit amounts totalling £xxxx, debited in order to pay for your default charges, be refunded by return.

 

I am also writing to inform you that I am due to have the following payments made into my account:-

• Tax Credit payment of £xxx on xx/xx/xx
  
• Child Benefit payment of £xxx on x/xx/xx
  
• Incapacity Benefit payment of £xxx on x/xx/xx

Totalling £xxxx,

I wish to use my first right of appropriation for this money, for the following purposes;

Rent £xx

Utilities bills £xx

Housekeeping money £xx

I will withdraw the money on the day that it is deposited for the above use, and I would be grateful if you would ensure that any other payments out of my account do not interfere with this withdrawal.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

 

muggins73

[steven4064]

Muggins

 

Here it is

45. Inalienability

(1) Every assignment of or charge on a tax credit, and every agreement to assign or charge a tax credit, is void; and, on the bankruptcy of a person entitled to a tax credit, the entitlement to the tax credit does not pass to any trustee or other person acting on behalf of his creditors.

(2) In the application of subsection (1) to Scotland-

(a) the reference to assignment is to assignation ("assign" being construed accordingly), and

(b) the reference to the bankruptcy of a person is to the sequestration of his estate or the appointment on his estate of a judicial factor under section 41 of the Solicitors (Scotland) Act 1980 (c. 46).

Leave out the bits about Scotland if they don't apply.

 

Send a similar letter to the two ministers and to your own MP.

 

[muggins73]

Muggins

 

Here it isLeave out the bits about Scotland if they don't apply.

 

Send a similar letter to the two ministers and to your own MP.

 

Steven

 

Thanks kind sir:D

 

Does it read okay? Is there anything you think, apart from the s.45 bit, that I should add or even delete?

 

I know it probably sounds dumb, but how exactly should I enter the s.45 bit?

 

Should it read

Tax Credits Act 2006

45. Inalienability

(1) Every assignment of or charge.....

 

and then Social Security Administration Act 1992

Miscellaneous

Certain benefit to be inalienable **

 

or the other way round?

 

muggs:)

[steven4064]

I think it reads OK. I only wish I could tell you that the bank will read it and give you all your money back and stop charging you. I don't think that will happen - but the letter is important. One day this abuse will stop. But I think it will need a concerted campaign - that's why I suggest you send a copy to your MP and the 2 ministers - let them know there is a widespread problem here ad that the banks are BREAKING THE LAW!!!

[muggins73]

The bottom line is if they choose to ignore my request then I will be forced to start prelim proceedings against them. I've got Natwest, halifax and Lloyds under my belt and there is definately room for more. Of course I'd rather not go sown that route, as we can ill afford it, but needs must.

 

I may take you up on your suggestion and cc my letter to my MP (when I find out who that is:o) and the 2 ministers. You never know, it might just help sway them into action.

 

We live in hope, steven, we live in hope.

 

Again, thanks for taking the time out. I have pipped your scales;)

[steven4064]

Muggins

 

UK Parliament - Find Your MP

 

[muggins73]

Muggins

 

UK Parliament - Find Your MP

 

Steven

 

If this post is helpful, please click the scales

Any opinions are without prejudice & without liability.

Almost everything I know concerning the law I learned from this site

 

Good gracious me, are there no limits to your knowledge:D:D

[steven4064]

Good gracious me, are there no limits to your knowledge:D:D

I know everything that I can find on the Internet

 

Steven

 

If this post is helpful, please click the scales

Any opinions are without prejudice & without liability.

Almost everything I know concerning the law I learned from this site

[muggins73]

I know everything that I can find on the Internet

 

Steven

 

If this post is helpful, please click the scales

Any opinions are without prejudice & without liability.

Almost everything I know concerning the law I learned from this site

 

So the answer is a definate no then:cool:

 

I'm off to bed, hope to catch up with you again soon.

[steven4064]

Petition on Bank Charges and Benefits

 

I have started a petition on the 10 Downing Street site regarding bank charges and benefits. Please pass on the details to as many people as possible on CAG and on your personal e-mail lists. Let's see how many signatures we can get.

 

The text of the petition is

We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to compel the High Street banks to obey the law on state benefits.

 

It is government policy that people on state benefits (income support, tax credits, etc) have their benefit paid into a bank account. All High Street banks impose charges on banking accounts for going overdrawn, not having funds to cover a direct debit,etc. In the case of accounts which have money from state benefits payed into them , such charges are contrary to section 187 of the Social Security Administartion Act 1996 or seection 45 of the Tax Credits Act 2006. However, the High Street banks continue to ignore this legislation. This petition is to request the Prime Minister to compel the High Street banks to obey the law.

The petition can be found at Petition to: compel the High Street banks to obey the law on state benefits.

 

[muggins73]

Petition on Bank Charges and Benefits

 

I have started a petition on the 10 Downing Street site regarding bank charges and benefits. Please pass on the details to as many people as possible on CAG and on your personal e-mail lists. Let's see how many signatures we can get.

 

The text of the petition is The petition can be found at Petition to: compel the High Street banks to obey the law on state benefits.

 

Steven

 

If this post is helpful, please click the scales

Any opinions are without prejudice & without liability.

Almost everything I know concerning the law I learned from this site

 

Thanks steven

 

i have signed the petition and added it to my signature and will advise anyone who'll listen:D

[steven4064]

Thanks Muggins