Jump to content


Help! Refused to offer any money!


Ollie25
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5509 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi I have just had a letter from Barclays stating they are not willing to refund me any of the £980 they have taken form me in charges. Just wondered if anyone could help with what I do now as I was prepared to refuse first offer and this has threw me completely and now unsure of next step. Please help!!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes standard stuff your way is now forward to send the next letter.14 days timescale on that one too.

Barclays have a problem answering letters in fact I had one recently saying they were sorry I was not happy with my charges...........My claim was issued in court 3 months ago !!!

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

dont ignore it, was the letter you got inresponse to your initial letter, if so, send the lba, give them two weeks and then if no response issue proceedings against them. good luck

 

So, in other words, sticking to the original schedule you laid down, as if the letter had never arrived. Looks rather like ignoring it to me :)

 

Clearly you don't cut short whatever timescale you have laid down (you asked them to reply positively within 14 days - they have as yet failed to do so). Also, while anything over 7 days is a reasonable interval (I personally use 10), you also shouldn't reduce the period of the LBA if you already stated 14 in the prelim.

HSBCLloyds TSBcontractual interestNew Tax Creditscoming for you?NTL/Virgin Media

 

Never give in ... Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy. Churchill, 1941

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, in other words, sticking to the original schedule you laid down, as if the letter had never arrived. Looks rather like ignoring it to me :)

 

Clearly you don't cut short whatever timescale you have laid down (you asked them to reply positively within 14 days - they have as yet failed to do so). Also, while anything over 7 days is a reasonable interval (I personally use 10), you also shouldn't reduce the period of the LBA if you already stated 14 in the prelim.

 

Yes you do cut short the timescale as this letter is the reply, this ends the previous time scale and when you issue the LBA a new 14 day period begins, thus you have not ignored the letter you recieved, dont listen to bad info. stick to your timescales and any response ends the previous time scale. remember to keep copies of all the correspondence you send and send it recorded where possible

why would you ignore the letter anyway as it is a response to the claim, a refusal is a standard response to the first letter so why would you wait the rest of the 14 days out for another letter that isnt going to arrive.

Please dont give bad info out as people are relying on good info

TOTALLY debt free as of 2007, Fantastic,

Link to post
Share on other sites

Baconbuttyman,

 

I think meagain means to carry on with the original timescale. Theres no need to be so shirty!!

04 Nov 06 - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) letter sent

16 Nov 06 - Statements received - £2685.00 of illegal charges incurred

17 Nov 06 - PAR (Preliminary Approach for Repayment) letter sent

01 Dec 06 - Received Stalling letter from Barclays

02 Dec 06 - LBA (Letter Before Action) sent

18 Dec 06 - Claim filed with MCOL

20 Dec 06 - Settlement Rejection letter sent

03 Jan 07 - Claim acknowleged by Barclays

22 Jan 07 - Claim defended by Barclays

 

 

You wanna know how you do it? Here's how, they pull a knife, you pull a gun. He sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue!

 

Please click the scales at the bottom left if you find my advice useful. However, the advice I give is only my opinion based on my experience, I am not trained in Law!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see both points of view here but don't necessarily agree with one of them. I didn't read post #2 by meagain in the same way as baconbuttyman. The trouble with one-line answers though is that they are sometimes ambiguous.

 

I understood meagain to say "continue with your schedule as laid down in your letter as if the letter of response had never arrived" thereby waiting to the end of the 14 days then sending off the LBA. There's nothing wrong with this. It's not bad advice. That's what I and vast majority of other claimants did because they were given 14 days to positively respond. They still have the remainder of that 14 days to do so. OK, we know that they won't but that's what they were given by the Claimant in the first place. This timescale is accepted by the Courts.

 

I wouldn't wish to be the Claim that the Judge picked out to make an example of. Let's face it, for the sake of a few days, do you want to risk it?

 

Remember too that the Banks could turn around and plead with the Judge that they weren't given enough time. The Court sets a date to look at this accusation, thereby prolonging things even further.

 

Now, there are two schools of thought about what bbman has suggested. Yes, they have responded negatively to the prelim letter - albeit earlier than the 14 days given to them - and this WOULD seem like the catalyst to send the LBA straight away. My personal thoughts are laid out in the above paragraph.

 

Lets hope that the Judges don't pull the rug from beneath someone because in their haste, in the opinion of the Court, the defendant was not given adequate time to respond. I have always advised new Claimants not to cut corners - and I stick to that principle.

  • Haha 1

To follow my case progress, click here to see where I'm at right now.

 

Welshman

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see both points of view here but don't necessarily agree with one of them. I didn't read post #2 by meagain in the same way as baconbuttyman. The trouble with one-line answers though is that they are sometimes ambiguous.

 

I understood meagain to say "continue with your schedule as laid down in your letter as if the letter of response had never arrived" thereby waiting to the end of the 14 days then sending off the LBA. There's nothing wrong with this. It's not bad advice. That's what I and vast majority of other claimants did because they were given 14 days to positively respond. They still have the remainder of that 14 days to do so. OK, we know that they won't but that's what they were given by the Claimant in the first place. This timescale is accepted by the Courts.

 

I wouldn't wish to be the Claim that the Judge picked out to make an example of. Let's face it, for the sake of a few days, do you want to risk it?

 

Remember too that the Banks could turn around and plead with the Judge that they weren't given enough time. The Court sets a date to look at this accusation, thereby prolonging things even further.

 

Now, there are two schools of thought about what bbman has suggested. Yes, they have responded negatively to the prelim letter - albeit earlier than the 14 days given to them - and this WOULD seem like the catalyst to send the LBA straight away. My personal thoughts are laid out in the above paragraph.

 

Lets hope that the Judges don't pull the rug from beneath someone because in their haste, in the opinion of the Court, the defendant was not given adequate time to respond. I have always advised new Claimants not to cut corners - and I stick to that principle.

 

oh well, merry xmas and goodwill to all lol

TOTALLY debt free as of 2007, Fantastic,

Link to post
Share on other sites

You have given them n days to offer you your money back. A refusal to offer is clearly not an offer. The bank are trying to scare you into folding - ignore it and let the original deadline stand, then go with the LBA. As Welshman says, there are some corners you just do not cut.

HSBCLloyds TSBcontractual interestNew Tax Creditscoming for you?NTL/Virgin Media

 

Never give in ... Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy. Churchill, 1941

Link to post
Share on other sites

i am not saying he was made an offer, the general unwritten rule is if you send your initial letter and when they respond with a letter refusing to refund your money, even if its after a week of sending it initially, then that is the end of the period pertaining to the initial letter, you are then able to send the LBA. This is not cutting corners but accepting their response as an answer to your initial letter, then why would you wait another 7 days for a response that has already arrived. that is the time to send the LBA

TOTALLY debt free as of 2007, Fantastic,

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said, there are two schools of thought. They've both been aired here in this thread. Let each individual make their own mind up as to which way they want to go but ..... whichever way that is, lets just get on with pointing the accusing finger at the instigators of all this - THE BANKS.

To follow my case progress, click here to see where I'm at right now.

 

Welshman

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...