Barclaycard Late Payment charges - Over 6 years ago...

[Blagton]

Hi All,

 

First off I have made a similar post in the NatWest sections too – hope that's OK and not seen as a duplicate post ?

 

I know, I know – much written already but I have spent the last few days reading through the many threads on here and elsewhere to try and get my head around things !

 

As with others who have have “left it late” why I have never got on with this earlier I don't know.......anyway...

 

My enquiry just relates to Late Payment charges only.

 

I have a Barclaycard VISA and Mastercard that go back some years when Barclays gave you just Barclaycard VISA and other banks Access.

 

From late 90's to mid 2000's all four cards had fluctuating and at times high balances that resulted in quite (ahem) a bit of interest together with late payment charges varying from, initially £10, £15, £18, £20 and then back to allegedly “acceptable” £12.

 

Most of these charges were made over 6 years ago.

 

From mid 2008 all card balances were cleared and have since been operated without any late payment or interest charges.

 

I have all my original statements going back over this and earlier periods so have documentary evidence.

 

There is nearly £850 in total late payment charges, of which £250 or so is over the "£12 figure".

 

So I guess my questions based around “Can I still claim ?” are:

 

2. Should I claim for the charges only even though most are over 6 years. I have seen some mention on other forums that over 6 years and its Statute Barred and cannot be claimed whereas on here I see some that have had success.

 

2. If I was to claim should it be for all the charges and add interest (compound) – if so at what rate (Statement ?) and to what date - my claim date or when the balances were cleared ?

 

3. Should I just claim for the charges over the complete period but only those over £12 ? Plus interest ?

 

4. Not bother too late

 

 

Thanks very much in advance for any info/input.

 

Blagton.

[slick132]

Hi Blagton,

 

Firstly, what you should claim is the full amount of every charge, not just the excess over £12. Although the OFT set the charge ceiling at £12, the lawfulness of the charges was never tested. We maintain that the penalty charges are unlawful and should be repaid in full.

 

Secondly, if ALL of the charges were over 6 years old, I would have suggested that you consider the matter very carefully before proceeding. This is because you'd have to use s.32 Limitation Act for ALL the charges.

 

However, if SOME of the charges are still "in date", I believe this gives the WHOLE of your claim a better chance of success with Barclays.

 

Read the advice given here a few days back - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?377595-Barclaycard-Help-Required&p=4094045&viewfull=1#post4094045

 

You should read the Interest Tutorial here to see how and why you should claim interest in restitution - http://www.consumerwiki.co.uk/index.php/Interest_Tutorial

 

Open this spreadsheet but change the interest rate to 24.9% - http://www.shweb.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/interestcalcs.xls Then enter all your charges data onto the spready.

 

Once you've done this, please confirm the approx totals for :-

 

1. Charges older than 6 years.

 

2. Charges within the last 6 years.

 

3. Interest at 24.9% on all the charges as per the spready.

 

[Blagton]

Hi SLick,

 

Many thanks for the quick reply - appreciated.

 

Hi Blagton,

 

Firstly, what you should claim is the full amount of every charge, not just the excess over £12. Although the OFT set the charge ceiling at £12, the lawfulness of the charges was never tested. We maintain that the penalty charges are unlawful and should be repaid in full.

 

Secondly, if ALL of the charges were over 6 years old, I would have suggested that you consider the matter very carefully before proceeding. This is because you'd have to use s.32 Limitation Act for ALL the charges.

 

OK, I guess I should read something like this thread on s.32 then ?

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?248391-S.32-Limitation-Act-and-Bank-Charges

 

 

However, if SOME of the charges are still "in date", I believe this gives the WHOLE of your claim a better chance of success with Barclays.

 

Yes, there are some, albeit just a few within the last 6 years.

 

 

Read the advice given here a few days back - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?377595-Barclaycard-Help-Required&p=4094045&viewfull=1#post4094045

 

You should read the Interest Tutorial here to see how and why you should claim interest in restitution - http://www.consumerwiki.co.uk/index.php/Interest_Tutorial

 

 

Yup, will do.

 

 

Open this spreadsheet but change the interest rate to 24.9% - http://www.shweb.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/interestcalcs.xls Then enter all your charges data onto the spready.

 

Once you've done this, please confirm the approx totals for :-

 

1. Charges older than 6 years.

 

2. Charges within the last 6 years.

 

3. Interest at 24.9% on all the charges as per the spready.

 

 

 

Barclaycard VISA

1. Total Charges Over 6 years 194.00

2. Total Charges within 6 years 48.00

3. Interest at 24.9% to date 1,885.22

 

 

Barclaycard Mastercard

1. Total Charges Over 6 years 546.00

2. Total Charges within 6 years 48.00

3. Interest at 24.9% to date 4,652.26

 

In each case I have a charge of 20.00 in September 1998 which is shown on my Statements as "Out of Order fee".

 

Would your suggestions/advice with regard Barclaycard be extended and be the same for NatWest.

 

Your thoughts very much appreciated.

 

Thanks

Blagton.

[slick132]

Hi Blagton,

 

The "Out of Order" fee is a penalty and should be reclaimed.

 

My experience does not extend to similar claims with NatWest. Each bank tends to have their own Modus Operandi and you should be guided by threads in the NatWest forum for that claim.

 

The total of the 2 claims comes to approx £7,375 so, if the claims were run at the same time, BC would seek to have both heard together as one claim. That would put the claim up into the Fast Track bracket which brings an increased risk of exposure to costs if the claim was successfully defended by Barclays. However, you could seek to have the claim kept on the Small Claims Track because the issues are relatively simple. There's also the possibility that the Small Claims limit will be increased to £10K but that may be too late to help you here.

 

Barclays tend to defend cases initially but then negotiate a settlement before a final hearing. But you must not rely on that happening and should only proceed with your claim if you're prepared to see it through to a final hearing and argue your case before a judge.

 

They will always refuse to settle a claim which includes interest in restitution and/or charges older than 6 years. They only negotiate when court proceedings have been lodged against them and a hearing date is looming.

 

The choice on starting the claim is really your decision and nobody else can make it for you. Weigh up the pros and cons, the likely spend on court fees (initial Claim Fee, Allocation Fee, Hearing Fees) and decide if the possible gain is worth the cost of proceeding.

 

If it goes to court, it's down to the judge on the day and how well you argue your case for s.32 Limitation Act.

 

But, as I've already said, Barclays have tended to settle cases before a final hearing.

 

Go through the BC **WON with int't in restitution** threads here - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/forumdisplay.php?97-Barclays-BCard-and-Woolwich-successes

 

[Blagton]

Evening (well morning) Slick,

 

Many thanks again for your time in replying.

 

Hi Blagton,

 

The "Out of Order" fee is a penalty and should be reclaimed.

 

My experience does not extend to similar claims with NatWest. Each bank tends to have their own Modus Operandi and you should be guided by threads in the NatWest forum for that claim.

 

OK, noted. Ta.

 

 

The total of the 2 claims comes to approx £7,375 so, if the claims were run at the same time, BC would seek to have both heard together as one claim. That would put the claim up into the Fast Track bracket which brings an increased risk of exposure to costs if the claim was successfully defended by Barclays. However, you could seek to have the claim kept on the Small Claims Track because the issues are relatively simple. There's also the possibility that the Small Claims limit will be increased to £10K but that may be too late to help you here.

 

 

Mmm...OK. I've used the Small Claims in the past (unrelated issues) and don't really have an issue with the thought of going down that route but any advise/info on what additional costs might be incurred if it got to the stage of “Fast Track”.

 

I see mention of “£545 Fast-track” hearing fee !

 

I take it even if it was a case of me “seeking to keep in Small Claims” that would not be my decision ?

 

 

 

Barclays tend to defend cases initially but then negotiate a settlement before a final hearing. But you must not rely on that happening and should only proceed with your claim if you're prepared to see it through to a final hearing and argue your case before a judge.

 

They will always refuse to settle a claim which includes interest in restitution and/or charges older than 6 years. They only negotiate when court proceedings have been lodged against them and a hearing date is looming.

 

The choice on starting the claim is really your decision and nobody else can make it for you. Weigh up the pros and cons, the likely spend on court fees (initial Claim Fee, Allocation Fee, Hearing Fees) and decide if the possible gain is worth the cost of proceeding.

 

I guess if I could just get back the Late Payment charges alone via Small Claims it would be worth it. Would you expect them to defend a little more vigorously due the majority of the charges being 6 years+

 

 

If it goes to court, it's down to the judge on the day and how well you argue your case for s.32 Limitation Act.

 

But, as I've already said, Barclays have tended to settle cases before a final hearing.

 

Go through the BC **WON with int't in restitution** threads here - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/forumdisplay.php?97-Barclays-BCard-and-Woolwich-successes

 

 

 

OK, I guess I need to try and gen up a lot more on the s.32 thing [daunting]....I take it “the penalties are unfair, excessive and unlawful” not always good enough !

 

 

Again, thanks.

(I may be back - sorry !)

Blagton

Edited January 11, 2013 by Blagton
Poor C&P on original thread + new comments added.

[slick132]

Hi Blagton,

 

Allocation is down to the judge but, if both parties agree to SCT, that would be influential. However, the bank's sol'rs will be happy to see the case go to the Fast Track so you're exposed to a greater costs risk if you lost. See more here - http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part26#IDA5GTBB

 

If you were just to claim back the late fees without interest in restitution, Barclays will refuse to pay on the basis that the charges are Statute Barred. You will therefore be forced to take court action...............

 

.............. and, if you're taking court action, you may as well make it worth your while by claiming the Int't in Rest'n.

 

Edited January 11, 2013 by slick132
correct link added

[Blagton]

Howdo,

 

Hi Blagton,

 

Allocation is down to the judge but, if both parties agree to SCT, that would be influential. However, the bank's sol'rs will be happy to see the case go to the Fast Track so you're exposed to a greater costs risk if you lost. See more here - http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part26#IDA5GTBB

 

 

....don't seem to have approval to view that page

 

 

 

If you were just to claim back the late fees without interest in restitution, Barclays will refuse to pay on the basis that the charges are Statute Barred. You will therefore be forced to take court action...............

 

.............. and, if you're taking court action, you may as well make it worth your while by claiming the Int't in Rest'n.

 

 

Mmm...argh....what to do !

 

I don't (can't afford) really want to risk facing the chance of increased costs if I were to "loose" if I don't have the where with all to finish the job of successfully (in my favour) especially of the odds of success are reduced due to the relatively small amount being charged within the last 6 years.

 

S.32 doesn't seem to be something a non legal person can always make much sense of - other than not having all my original Statements until recently I wasn't really aware of the total charges going back over 6 years – I guess that alone wouldn't stand up as a reason for extending the “6 years timer” ?

 

Unanswerable question I know but what chances of Barclaycard actually putting up strong defence rather than making an offer at some point before it gets to that point or indeed a judge favouring their defence. Thats the call I know !

 

As an additional thought do Barclaycard take a stance against customers who recover charges by closing their accounts and/or reducing credit available ?

 

Many thanks again Slick

Blagton.

Edited January 11, 2013 by slick132
added correct link in first quote

[slick132]

Hi Blagton,

 

Sorry, the link I posted above was the wrong one but it's now been replaced with the right one linking you to the CPR about allocation of claims.

 

We can't make the decision for you - you must decide based on all the info you have available.

 

Personally, I think the risk of losing is outweighed by the potential gain if you win. My opinion is also based on the likelihood of Barclays settling your claim before a final court hearing.

 

However, it is YOU who would have to pay out the court fees. Also, if you lost, there's a chance of costs being awarded against you.

 

Regarding your final question, Barclays do not, in my experience or opinion, have a habit of closing a/c's or withdrawing facilities in retaliation.