Bilgeman v natwest ** WON **

[Bilgeman]

Does anyone think there's any point in sending the following to the bank as a follow-up to my initial letter demanding repayment of charges? Interested to know your opinions.

 

Cheers

 

Andy

 

 

 

 

Re: Peripheral Effects of your Unfair Charges to my Account

'Further to my two previous letters regarding the unlawful charges you have applied to my current account recently I am giving you notice that I will be referring to the following matters if and when you force me to take this matter to court. I feel that whether or not a court feels it fitting to award costs etc for the following, it might at least be interested in the results your actions and subsequent intransigence have had upon a customer and his family.

• I am a self-employed motorcycle courier who requires weekly funds to maintain my vehicle and purchase petrol to keep it on the road. Your actions have meant that my week’s wages are likely to be swallowed up in repaying your charges and, as I have no further overdraft facility, I will be unable to work to earn money to get me out of this situation. I will not be able to replace tyres, brakes and so on when they wear out and will eventually have to give up work. This will cause hardship not only for me but for my family who rely on my income to keep a roof over their heads and food in the fridge. I have mentioned this fact to bank staff in telephone calls and it has made no difference.

• I have an agreement with the Inland Revenue to make weekly payments which I will be unable to honour due to your charges. If I cannot make these payment I will be taken to court.

• My mother is currently ill in hospital in Liverpool. I need to be able to travel to visit her when she goes home. Again, your charges will make this more difficult.

• You returned a cheque in favour of BT last week. If I do not honour the bill this relates to the phone will be cut off.

Finally, on a more personal level, it is my son’s 21st birthday today and your charges mean I cannot give him a suitable present.

All the charges you have made stem from the initial two which were applied to the direct debits you returned despite my telephoning to cancel. I expect these charges to be returned to me without further delay.

Please be in no doubt that I am aware these charges are unlawful, excessive and unenforceable as they do not reflect the true costs incurred by you with regard to the matters to which they allude and that that I will continue to take steps to recover what is rightfully mine and will certainly present the above and any further hardship suffered for consideration in Court.'

[Robertxc]

Not really. You're not arguing about the circumstances in which the charges were made, you're arguing that the charges themselves are unlawful. If you send this letter you're giving them an excellent opportunity to enter into a long debate with you about stuff which is absolutely irrelelvent to your case.

 

If you've already sent a letter demanding your money back you should either do an LBA or go directly to court, which will tell them everything they need to know about your position.

[colour-me-happy]

I think it is too personal.... if it was me I would just get really annoyed by the fact that they don't care that your mother is in hospital or that it's your sons 21st birthday when they respond with their "couldn't give a xxxx attitude" keep it clinical!

[lee6370]

I can understand you wanting them to know the effect their actions have had, but they don't care and it will only drag matters out.

[Bilgeman]

Sensible answers. I'll stick to the point.

 

Thanks

[lookinforinfo]

On the other hand.......I did see a comment on a financial debate on tv that said that banks were supposed to exercise restraint on levying charges on customers

who were suffering hardship. Yeah right.

 

As, I assume, your claim against your bank is still some time away from settlement, perhaps you could amend the letter, explaining the hardshp they are causing you. And reminding them of their obligation not to apply over- punitive charges in cases such as yours. For instance, as they know you are claiming their charges back, could they not take future charges from your account pending the Court case. Instead they could post them to a suspense account until the matter between you is resolved.

Even a partial respite on your charges could help. Otherwise, open another bank account, or get your company to pay you by cheque that you can cash at your

companys bank.

[Bookworm]

And another thing (or 2):

 

You already have a running thread about this. Please do not start a new thread for each query you have relating to the same claim.

 

Also, can you please tell us which bank so we can move your threads to the relevant forum? It is increasingly obvious that this should NOT be in "general".

[Bilgeman]

Sorry, I posted in General because I thought it could be relevant to any bank rather than just Natwest which it actually involves.

[Bilgeman]

Got my reply (and cheque) back from initial approach. Text of letter as follows (Standard??):-

 

'DATA PROTECTION ACT

 

We refer to your letter of 18 April in which you have requested certain information under the terms of the Data Protection Act ("the DPA)" (Punctuation!!!)

 

Please be aware that the Bank is not under an obligation to present information according to any particular format. Therefore, your request to assemble of schedule of charges is turned aside (***************!). You may of course obtain this data from copy statements (don't worry, you bastards, I will) and these will be supplied to you shortly without charge on this occasion. In the circumstances you cheque is returned herewith.

 

As regards your mention of "manual intervention", the DPA does not oblige the Bank to comment about internal policies and procedures. Furthermore, in the context of managing transactions arising from out of order accounts, the Bank does not hold the information you have requested in a form that would be covered by the DPA (convenient). Whilst aggregated information is retained for statistical purposes, this would not constitute "personal data" under the DPA and therefore would not be covered by a s.7 DPA subject access request.

 

Notwithstanding the above, the Bank is of course entirely willing to supply the general information that should be disclosed to the DPA. To inititiate the process Barclays will require payment of a £10 fee per individual which should be provided by cheque, payable to Barclays plc (precisely what the returned cheque was), directly to this department. Upon payment of the fee(s) the relevant information will be supplied as promptly as possible.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Peter Townsend

Manager, Barclays Data Protection'

 

 

Time for the next stage.....

[Bilgeman]

Phoned regarding the letter I sent (as above). Basically, 'we're in the right. OFT agree with us. Don't care if you can't work, lose you job, house, family, life. **** off, Peasant'.

 

Right!.

 

Onward..............

[Azazal23]

Can you claim compensation for expenses , loss of time, and ebarassment - of so how would you calculate

[fallen404]

Loss of time - if you work, calculate however many hours of your time spent at your overtime or time and a half rate, really, unless you've got a fairly hefty salary. Expenses would be costs incurred (travel, phone calls, food up to a value of about £3.00 a day, etc) whilst dealing with them. Embarassment: Difficult, but probably depends what kind of a value you put on your good character, as well as secondary charges from various organisations whom you've been unable to honour your debts to.

[Bilgeman]

What i find increasingly worrying and annoying is their insistence on claiming to be acting lawfully and within 'OFT guidelines' even after you've told them you know they aren't and you know what you're talking about. More rhetoric designed to make a small percentage give up and not bother each time.

[Bilgeman]

Well, here we go. Got a letter this morning claiming charges to be fair, transparent and within all guidelines BUT with a 'goodwill offer' providing I sign an agreement that it will be in full and final settlement. Why would they do that if they were within their rights??? The offer amounts to about a quarter of what they owe me. I am going to write back saying that will do for starters but I don't accept it's full and final and will continue to pursue them for the rest, and any further charges they might impose.

[Bilgeman]

The text of the letter I received is as follows:-

 

Thank you for your letter of 6th May 2006 and I apologise for any dissatisfaction caused by the application of charges to your account.

 

We believe that our charges are fair, reasonable and transparent. We consider that the amounts debited to your account have been applied strictly in accordance with your agreement with us and our published tariff, which we are satisfied, complies with all applicable laws and regulations. We are also committed to ensuring the transparency of the information that we give to our customers about the operation of our products.

 

(No mention of OFT being in touch regarding charges relating to credit cards only as in several other standard letters I've seen)

 

Against that background, we must differ to (why don't they employ people who have basic grammar skills? They could use the money embezelled from customers who don't know they can claim it back to pay them?) the views expressed in your letter.

 

However, we have taken the oportunity to review the charges applied to your account and as an exceptional matter we are prepared to refund £184.00 as a gesture of goodwill. Acceptance by you of this payment will be in full and final settlement of all claims you may have rleating to our charges (yeah, right!) and strictly on the basis that you agree not to disclose to any third party (Aha!!!) the fact of, or any details relating to, this payment (Good job I'm not accepting it then, innit?).

 

If you agree to accept my offer on this basis, please sign and return the copy of this letter in the enclosed prepaid envelope. Once returned (Grammar), arrangemtns will be made immediately to credit your account.

 

However, our Terms & Conditions will continue to apply and any charges that accrue int the future must stand.

 

Thank you again for taking the trouble to write (????!!!!!!) and I hope that your concern is resolved to your satisfaction.

 

Yours sincerely

 

(not Stuart Higley)

 

Nrs Sue Crompeotn (Anyone know this name?)

 

 

 

I will post my intended reply below when I've calmed down enough to edit out the expletives and accusations of theft, embezzlement and corporate burglary.

[Bilgeman]

Here's a rough for the letter I intend to send in response to NatWest's derisiory offer. A bit of editing to be done yet and possibly more to add but I would love to hear anyone's thoughts on it so far. Do you think I'm painting myself into a corner? What happens if, after all this, we're all wrong and the charges are deemed to be fair? Arrgh! I know it's unlikely but this is a rat-infested business and I imagine somebody on a golf course somewhere will come up with something before long. Hope not. Anyway, here goes:-

 

Thank you for your letter of 11 May 2006.

You have asked me to accept less than 25% of the funds you have unlawfully removed from my account in a manner which suggests you imagine you are doing me some sort of a favour. Why would I do that? How much more insult do you intend to add before you admit that you are in the wrong and give me back every penny of my money? How would you respond if I were to levy unlawful charges on you in respect of this unauthorised loan you have seen fit to award yourselves?

I require full and immediate payment without any further posturing and arrogance. Any future denials and demands will be seen as prevarication and delaying tactics and will be treated as such and referred to in the case I shall argue in Court.

The bank's charges are a disproportionate penalty and therefore unenforceable as they are contrary to common law. Further, as a disproportionate penalty they are invalid under the Unfair (Contracts) Terms Act 1977 s.4 and under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. Para.8 and sch.2(1)(e). In the event that the charges are not a penalty then they are unreasonable within the meaning of the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 s.15.

Additionally it has now been confirmed that your particularly high level of penalties are considered to be unfair per se by the OFT, who reported on the 5th April 2006, and are therefore presumed to be unlawful in the absence of specific proof to the contrary.

You now owe me £800. Please pay it back now.

I will give you 14 days from the date you receive this recorded delivery letter to reply to me unconditionally accepting my request and letting me know a date by which I will receive payment.

If you do not respond positively within this time period, I shall send you a letter before action giving you a further 14 days in which to reflect. I believe that these targets are more than sufficient for a large company such as yours with dedicated staff and departments.

 

After that will be no further communication from me and I shall issue a claim at the expiry of the second deadline.

[Bilgeman]

Sending this today. Anybody got any thoughts at all???

[dinghy]

If it's any help... It looks good to me.

[Bilgeman]

Thanks for that. I've added a few more bits. Somebody please tell me when I've gone too far.

 

 

Thank you for your letter of 11 May 2006.

You have asked me to accept less than 25% of the funds you have unlawfully removed from my account in a manner which suggests you imagine you are doing me some sort of a favour. Why would I do that? How much more insult do you intend to add before you admit that you are in the wrong and give me back every penny of my money? How would you respond if I were to levy unlawful charges on you in respect of this unauthorised loan you have seen fit to award yourselves? Why, if you were within the Law as you suggest, would you offer me even a partial refund? And please do not use the words 'gesture of goodwill' again as the echo from the emptiness of the previous instance has still not subsided.

There are two possible reasons I can see for your reply, each as worrying as the other. First, that a huge financial organisation is unaware of the Law regarding a fundamental part of its daily procedure. I think this very unlikely. Second, and far more likely, you are aware of the Law yet choose to ignore it in the face of overwhelming evidence and precedence, preferring to inflict hardship and suffering on your customers until the very last possible minute. Either way it is totally unacceptable.

I require full and immediate payment with no further posturing and arrogance. Any future denials and demands will be seen as prevarication and delaying tactics and will be treated as such and referred to in the case I shall argue in Court. I will also refer to the financial hardships outlined in my previous letter and the fact that I have been forced to miss payments on three life insurance policies risking losing the lump sums payable on maturity.

The bank's charges are a disproportionate penalty and therefore unenforceable as they are contrary to common law. Further, as a disproportionate penalty they are invalid under the Unfair (Contracts) Terms Act 1977 s.4 and under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. Para.8 and sch.2(1)(e). In the event that the charges are not a penalty then they are unreasonable within the meaning of the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 s.15.

Additionally it has now been confirmed that your particularly high level of penalties are considered to be unfair per se by the OFT, who reported on the 5th April 2006, and are therefore presumed to be unlawful in the absence of specific proof to the contrary. I would ask that, if you continue to stand by your claim that the charges are a true reflection of costs incurred, you provide me with a breakdown of those charges detailing how it can cost £38 to post a letter. I understand that the whole process in automated so the argument that it has to cover staff wages is tenuous to say the least. If it is so, would you please give me a job at the rate of £38 for ten seconds’ work?

I would draw your attention to the various websites devoted to this business, particularly The Consumer Action Group. You might be aware that this group is sponsored and supported by Martin Lewis on his Money Saving Expert website. I don’t need to remind you how well-respected in the financial world are both Mr Lewis and his site. I welcome your thoughts on the possibility that all these knowledgeable people are misguided and the information and case histories therein untrue or made up. Again, please put your views in writing so I can pass them on to the site administrators.

I will give you 14 days from the date you receive this recorded delivery letter to reply to me unconditionally accepting my request and letting me know a date by which I will receive payment.

If you do not respond positively within this time period, I shall send you a letter before action giving you a further 14 days in which to reflect. I believe that these targets are more than sufficient for a large company such as yours with dedicated staff and departments.

 

After that will be no further communication from me and I shall issue a claim at the expiry of the second deadline.

[dinghy]

It may go a little further than I would but...

 

It may be worth marking it 'Without Prejudice' just to ensure you don't alienate the judge/magistrate if this comes up in court !

[Bilgeman]

Good idea. Cheers

[fallen404]

They actually send you letters then? I just get £38 taken out of my account.

[Spiceskull]

My brutal and honest opinion:

Dear Sir,

 

Your offer for partial settlement to my claim is not satisfactory. I will therefore proceed with my timetable, and shall be raising a claim in the court on [DATE].

 

Yours faithfully,

 

Mr Bilge.

They are trying to spin you around - DON'T let them. If they don't want to go to court they will cough up before you raise the claim.

 

Good luck.

[Bilgeman]

Bah!

 

You're right of course. How I wish there was a way to let the scurrilous toerags know what I'm thinking without having to play into their hands. Still, if there's a brain cell among them they probably have a fairly good idea already.

[Spiceskull]

It's not that there is anything wrong with your letter - indeed I like to write verbose letters myself. However, the point I make is that you have asked for a full refund, they have said no, and you now need to tell it like it is: offer is derisory, see you in court.

 

However, once you have raised your claim, it is likely that they will still continue to apply penalty charges (nay, they will definitely apply them). As these are likely to be in the region of £50, you can save all the 'juicy' letters for the smaller amounts. I have plenty of examples in my own threads, but for now you just need to focus on getting the larger sum refunded.

 

Additionally, you will then be able to make reference to the bank's earlier capitulation, and will have plenty of extra morsels to be that much more creative (and mischievous...)

 

Bon chance.