Bilgeman v natwest ** WON **

[Bilgeman]

Most of the information on here is at worst useful and at best stunningly brilliant

 

 

there are a couple of points that worry me about going ahead and threatening court action.

 

 

When I phoned the Financial Ombudsman they told me that they thought the bank was acting within its rights to make their charges.

No mention of them being unfair or excessive.

 

 

Also I looked on Lloyds TSB's site this morning and they clearly state their charges on the pre-application page for current accounts.

 

 

Surely if they were aware these charges were illegal/unenforceable they'd keep quiet about it at least until you'd opened your account? Anyone got any thoughts about this?

 

Cheers

 

Andy

[Bilgeman]

Thanks for the replies. As I said, I'm a newbie. i've now read the FAQs and will avoid repeating any of them in the forums

[HD]

Hi Andy,

 

The Ombudsman has said that it will not rule on the legallity of charges and is only there to deal with service issues.

 

LTSB will obviously try to tell you that they are legal.

 

If you want to reassure yourself look at the OFT report on credit card charges and see what a government department thinks of the legallity of penalty charges.

 

You are right to want to be certain in your own mind about the merits of your case.

 

Read around this site and other impartial sites to reassure yourself that the bank charges are penalty charges and therefore illegal.

 

LTSB will try their hardest to persuade you otherwise so make sure you are certain in your own head before setting out to get your money back

[Bilgeman]

Thanks a lot. Very helpful

[Bookworm]

Read around this site and other impartial sites [...]

 

Er, we're anything but impartial here, actually .

 

In fact, we're 100%, totally, completely, utterly and without a doubt biased towards justice, lawfulness and the pursuit of happiness (well, ok, I made up the last bit, but it DOES make ME happy to get my money back!)

 

That very bias is what makes this site so successful!!!

[HD]

Er, we're anything but impartial here, actually .

 

In fact, we're 100%, totally, completely, utterly and without a doubt biased towards justice, lawfulness and the pursuit of happiness (well, ok, I made up the last bit, but it DOES make ME happy to get my money back!)

 

That very bias is what makes this site so successful!!!

Like I said impartial.No vested interest except ensuring justice for all:D

[vogelrok]

im in the same boat, i sent mine the same way as everyone else, informed the company that is working for barclays, wescot credit, also informed the bank. check my threads, think you will find im in much the same boat.

when you send off your DPA request make sure you mention the resolvance loan statements aswell. they are holding out on mine and giving me the run around thinking i wouldnt claim.

 

good luck, even if it clears my debts i will be happy.

[Bilgeman]

Sorry if this subject has been posted before. I've looked through the forum but couldn't see anything.

 

If the bank bounces one of my cheques as a direct result of a previous charge (not if it's due to insufficient funds on my part), and the payee then applies their own charge to my account (£20 to cover costs for example), what is the likelihood of getting that money back from the bank, either voluntarily (hmm!) or later in court? Just wondering if anyone's tried this.

[ispartacus75]

I have been loking at this as I have paid a doorstep loan company by cheque a few teimes and if the cheque bounces they have added an 'admin' charge. It started at £5 and has risen to £15.

 

As far as I can tell you would have to go after the company to get that charge back as the bank didnt levy it, the company did. But I would imagine that it is just the same process as getting it back from the banks.

[Bilgeman]

Hi Folks, hope we all had a good Easter despite the best efforts of the blood-sucking corporations.

 

Before I send this letter off to NatWest, just wondering if anyone has any thoughts about the content. Thanks:-

 

 

I refer you to a letter I have received from Mr Ian Marshall, Manager of NatWest Newtown Branch dated 12 April 2006 in response to a letter which I had delivered there as the most convenient branch at the time. The envelope carried a request for it to be forwarded to Customer Services but apparently it was opened in Newtown branch by someone to whom it was not addressed.

Reading the reply, which I am sure you will have on file, it seems that you are, either deliberately or unprofessionally, missing the point.

I have it on good authority that the regime of 'fees' which you have been applying to my account in relation to direct debit/standing order refusals, exceeding overdraft limits and so forth are unlawful at Common Law, Statute and recent Consumer regulations.

 

I would draw your attention to the terms of the contract which you agreed to at the time that I opened my account. It is an implied term of that contract that you would conduct yourselves lawfully and in a manner which complies with UK law.

I would also draw your attention to the fact that the most recent spate of charges stems from an initial return of two items on 27 March 2006 (as below)

27 Mar 2006

CHG

UNPAID ITEM(S) , D/D 28.00, AXA SUN LIFE , D/D 20.00, AXA SUN LIFE

-

76.00

 

which I attempted to recall on that morning. I was told that the items would be recalled. I was NOT told that I would still be charged and, as I had done the same on previous occasions and not been charged, was somewhat surprised to see these charges applied the next day.

To date you have removed what amounts to a almost a full week’s wages from my account.

I am frankly shocked that you have operated my account in this way as I had always reposed confidence in your integrity and expertise as my fiduciary.

 

I am not, therefore, coming cap in hand, begging you to return my money as one of your meaningless ‘ gestures of goodwill’. This is not your money in the first place and such arrogance only serves to add to the insulting and dismissive manner in which you continue to behave.

I calculate that you have taken £414.00 plus any overdraft interest for the sum which you have taken. This does not include any amounts which may have been taken further back than 10 January 2006 which is as far back as my online statement shows. I also claim repayment of any sums taken from my account before this date. I am not willing to accept a partial refund.

 

I require repayment in full of this money. If you do not comply fully within 14 days then I shall consider a claim against you for the full amount plus interest plus my costs and without further notice.

At this stage I have not included any costs incurred as a result of items being returned, neither am I claiming compensation for embarrassment, inconvenience or staining of my character.

Please do not telephone in reply to this letter. All correspondence concerning this matter should be in writing so that I have a record in the event that this matter cannot be resolved.

Furthermore, any moves toward closing my account or restricting services as a result of this letter will be looked on in a very poor light and will be referred to during any action taken to recover this debt.

 

 

 

 

Yours faithfully,

etc

 

 

[Spiceskull]

I like it - a lot - but if it was my letter I would reconsider the bits in red:

 

Hi Folks, hope we all had a good Easter despite the best efforts of the blood-sucking corporations.

 

Before I send this letter off to NatWest, just wondering if anyone has any thoughts about the content. Thanks:-

 

 

I refer you to a letter I have received from Mr Ian Marshall, Manager of NatWest Newtown Branch dated 12 April 2006 in response to a letter which I had delivered there as the most convenient branch at the time. The envelope carried a request for it to be forwarded to Customer Services but apparently it was opened in Newtown branch by someone to whom it was not addressed.

Reading the reply, which I am sure you will have on file, it seems that you are, either deliberately or unprofessionally, missing the point.

I have it on good authority that the regime of 'fees' which you have been applying to my account in relation to direct debit/standing order refusals, exceeding overdraft limits and so forth are unlawful at Common Law, Statute and recent Consumer regulations.

 

I would draw your attention to the terms of the contract which you agreed to at the time that I opened my account. It is an implied term of that contract that you would conduct yourselves lawfully and in a manner which complies with UK law.

I would also draw your attention to the fact that the most recent spate of charges stems from an initial return of two items on 27 March 2006 (as below)

27 Mar 2006

CHG

UNPAID ITEM(S) , D/D 28.00, AXA SUN LIFE , D/D 20.00, AXA SUN LIFE

-

76.00

 

which I attempted to recall on that morning. I was told that the items would be recalled. I was NOT told that I would still be charged and, as I had done the same on previous occasions and not been charged, was somewhat surprised to see these charges applied the next day.

To date you have removed what amounts to a almost a full week’s wages from my account.

I am frankly shocked that you have operated my account in this way as I had always reposed confidence in your integrity and expertise as my fiduciary.

 

I am not, therefore, coming cap in hand, begging you to return my money as one of your meaningless ‘ gestures of goodwill’. This is not your money in the first place and such arrogance only serves to add to the insulting and dismissive manner in which you continue to behave.

I calculate that you have taken £414.00 plus any overdraft interest for the sum which you have taken. This does not include any amounts which may have been taken further back than 10 January 2006 which is as far back as my online statement shows. I also claim repayment of any sums taken from my account before this date. I am not willing to accept a partial refund.

 

I require repayment in full of this money. If you do not comply fully within 14 days then I shall consider a claim against you for the full amount plus interest plus my costs and without further notice.

At this stage I have not included any costs incurred as a result of items being returned, neither am I claiming compensation for embarrassment, inconvenience or staining of my character.

Please do not telephone in reply to this letter. All correspondence concerning this matter should be in writing so that I have a record in the event that this matter cannot be resolved.

Furthermore, any moves toward closing my account or restricting services as a result of this letter will be looked on in a very poor light and will be referred to during any action taken to recover this debt.

 

 

 

 

Yours faithfully,

etc

 

 

[Neo]

Yes, change the considering and tell them how it is, define your own timelines. But I like it otherwise

[Bilgeman]

Thanks, Both, I did wonder about that. Best not let the weasely toilet-drinkers have any excuse for prevaricating, eh? Any more observations eagerly awaited....

[Spiceskull]

It's fine - just don't use words like 'consider' - it sounds undecisive. As Neo says, tell it to the bank like it is: it's your money, they will pay and if they don't then you will take them to court. Good luck.

[Bilgeman]

Probably someone has raised this before but I was thinking about the banks' claims that their charges are fair. Well, even in the fantasy land they exist in, if they were once long ago, they have continued to rise far in excess of inflation so how do they make sense of that and how well would it hold up in court? Sorry I haven't put that very professionally but I think you can get the gist of what I mean. And I'm not a professional.

[Seminole]

Staff costs go up by more than inflation?

 

In any event, it doesn't matter. The charges bear no relationship to cost. They are penalties and unlawful.

[Bilgeman]

Absolutely. My point is they were always illegal so increasing them by more than the rate of inflation should make them even more illegal than they already were. Hypothetical, I know, but even more unjust than before.

[Seminole]

Please be aware that these charges are unlawful and not illegal. There is a subtle but important difference in meaning.

 

I'm not sure that there are degrees of unlawfulness as such. There are definately degrees of disporortionality and I suppose that to the extent that the increases make their charges more disproportionate to cost, then the chances of winning become greater.

 

I'm in a pedantic mood this morning.

[Bilgeman]

Sorry if this subject has been addressed before. Couldn't find it anywhere. If it has, perhaps someone would be kind enough to post a link.

 

I'm a self-employed courier with a rapidly deteriorating bike. I work under contract for one company and my money is paid into my bank weekly (mandatory). Running costs escalate all the time as you can imagine. I have to have access to funds to keep the old heap on the road. The point is, the most recent spate of charges I've incurred will almost swallow up next weeks' money leaving me with none to cover the above. I'm in the processs of opening a basic account with another bank but until then my money will automatically go into the existing one so next week and the following week's money will yet again go towards paying Natwest directors' golf club fees.

 

What I would like to know is, if this renders me unable to work and earn money, would I be able to claim for loss of earnings and any other inconvenience resulting directly from unlawful charges? Or even, maybe?? If I cannot pay my tax on time purely because of these charges, can I make them liable for any fines and overdue charges the IR might impose? If anyone out there has any experience it would be useful to know so I can compose aletter to the lovely people at Natwest informing them of the likelihood of court action to recover several weeks' money and anything else I can think of.

 

Have a good Sunday:)

[Spiceskull]

Have you discussed the situation with your bank? If not, then the answer to:

What I would like to know is, if this renders me unable to work and earn money, would I be able to claim for loss of earnings and any other inconvenience resulting directly from unlawful charges?

...would be an EMPHATIC no. If the bank is unaware of your situation, then there is no way that they could be held liable for anything resulting from that situation.

 

This is not to suggest that them knowing would make them liable, but they might be slightly more helpful if they knew the areas that you needed help with. My first suggestion would be to speak to them ASAP, to outline the difficulties you are in, and to see if they can cut you a little slack.

 

Good luck, and keep us posted.

[Bilgeman]

Thanks for the reply. I've already tried talking to them (branch and customer services). The overall impression I got was:- not our problem. Tough luck. However, I will give it another shot tomorrow.

[Spiceskull]

Have you got another bank account, one that you could use instead? If so, it may be worth having your wages paid into this instead. There are many threads discussing the merits of different parachute accounts - just do a search on 'parachute'

 

Good luck.

[Bilgeman]

That's the first thing I'm going to do tomorrow. Should have done it before but that's another lesson learnt!

[alanfromderby]

I presume you will then be claiming the unlawful charges back.

[Bilgeman]

I've alreday started the ball rolling and given them notice to that effect so it may be a litle too late to start appealing to their 'better nature' any case