Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I would suggest that you stop trying to rely on legal theory – as you understand it. Firstly, because we are dealing with practical/pragmatic situations and at a low value level where these arguments tend not to work. Secondly, because you clearly have misunderstood the assessment of quantum where there are breaches of obligations. The formula that you have cited above is the method of loss calculation in torts. In contract it is entirely different. The law of obligations generally attempts to remedy the breach. This means that in tort, damages seek to put you into the position you would have been in had the breach not occurred. In other words it returns you to your starting position – point zero. Contract damages attend put you into the position that you would have been had the breach not occurred but this is not your starting position, contract damages assume that the agreement in dispute had actually been carried out. This puts you into your final position. You sold an item for £XXX. Your expectation was that you your item would be correctly delivered and that you would be the beneficiary of £XXX. Your expectation loss is the amount that you sold the item for and that is all you are entitled to recover. If you want, you can try to sue for the larger sum – and we will help you. But if they ask for evidence of the value of the item as it was sold then I can almost guarantee that either you will be obliged to settle for the lesser sum – or else a judge will give you judgement but for the lesser sum. This will put you to the position that you would have been had there been no breach of contract. I understand from you now that when you dispatch the item you declared the retail cost to you and not your expected benefit of £XXX. To claim for the retail value in the circumstances would offend the rules relating to betterment. If you want to do it then we will help you – but don't be surprised if you take a tumble.  
    • I was caught speeding 3 times in the same week, on the same road. All times were 8-12mph higher than the limit. I was offered the course for the first offense and I now need to accept the other 2 offenses. I just want to be ready for what might come. Will I get the £100 fine and 3 points for each of them or do I face something more severe?  These are my only offenses in 8 years of driving.
    • I'll get my letter drafted this evening. Its an item I sold, which I'm also concerned about, as whilst I don't have my original purchase receipt (the best I have is my credit card statement showing a purchase from Car Audio Centre), I do unfortunately have the eBay listing where I sold it for much less. But as I said before this is now a question of compensation: true compensation would seek to put me back into the position I was in before the loss ie: that title would remain with me until my buyer has accepted this, and so compensation should be that which would be needed to replace the lost item. But in the world of instant electronic payment, it could be argued that as I had already been paid, the title to the goods had already transferred, and I was required to refund the buyer after the loss. And so, despite my declared value being the retail price - that which is needed to return me to my pre-sales position, the compensatory value should be the value I sold it for, which being a second-hand item from a private seller is lower. I still believe that I should be claiming for the item's full value, rather than how much I sold it for, as this is the same for insurance: we don't insure the value we paid, but rather the value of the item to put us back into the position we would be in if we ever needed to claim. Its for the loss adjuster to argue the toss
    • amusing that 'bad economic judgement on behalf of prior party ISN'T a major reason to wingers to move to deform yet immigration is, where record levels of such has been driven by the right wings terrible brexit and the later incompetent dog whistle 'proposals largely driven to whistle to the right wingnuts Just seems to confirm the are clueless numpties 'wetting their own shoes   Has farage bought a property in Clacton yet?   yet concern for the NHS is listed as a major issue even by those saying they are moving to deform  
    • Also, have you told us how much you paid for this vehicle? Are there any other expenses you have incurred – insurance, inspections et cetera? How far away from the dealership do you live?
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

Contractual Interest.....now i'm confused.


RobberBank
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6312 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

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Don't panic, bill-k is checking the spreadsheet as we speak!!

IF MY COMMENTS HAVE HELPED PLEASE CLICK MY SCALES

 

Don't be like the banks - give a little back

 

 

:D NAT WEST - WON - £4282.36:D

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm back.....and i lost on tie break, so i'm REALLY in a bad mood now!!!:mad:

 

I must confess to having asked some questions earlier and once i'd posted them, Bill-k had already replied to some of them.....so sorry Bill-K......i'm just so far ahead of myself.

 

BUT......it's nice to see it wasnt ME who was going mad and it not working. I'm currently preparing a large portion of humble pie for anyone who cares to take some.....no names mentioned of course!!!!!!!!:D

 

I'll look forward to the resolution of 'The Case of the Missing Calculation'!!!!

 

In the meantime i'm looking forward to sending the charges of £3879 and possible £3743 in contractual interest @ 29.5%.

 

Seems like a fair deal if you ask me......after all, i've had to put up with threats from Apes and Angels! worse thing is.....it's Angels money........but it's MY HOUSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!:p

WON £4000 v NAT WEST

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't panic, bill-k is checking the spreadsheet as we speak!!

Sorry guys - my fault for rushing stuff. Who was it I told to slow down to a gallop ? !!! :D

 

This one should work !!!

 

http://upload2.net/page/download/DyIbFYODcvDdunV/05+Throughout_claim_with_compounded_contractual_interest.xls.html

 

I'll answer the other posts ASAP, now !!

 

Has my @$$ been well & truly kicked !!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry guys - my fault for rushing stuff. Who was it I told to slow down to a gallop ? !!! :D

 

This one should work !!!

 

http://upload2.net/page/download/DyIbFYODcvDdunV/05+Throughout_claim_with_compounded_contractual_interest.xls.html

 

I'll answer the other posts ASAP, now !!

 

Has my @$$ been well & truly kicked !!!

 

1) ME

2) My darling littleangel will have to download on my behalf

3) Get to it!

4) Pie on its way!:p

WON £4000 v NAT WEST

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK - RB - Please pass me a large slice of that pie, mate. The new one should work. At least it did last time I tried it !!

 

Thanks for helping out there Bobbair. That's a nice fast link you got there, too !! I'll have to find my own webspace sometime !!

 

As I think you realised later, it only calculates simple interest, and not compound, but thanks for stepping in there.

 

Hopefully, we're back to business as usual now, then. I better check the other threads and see who else I've wound up, now !!! :-|

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah realised it was wrong after i posted it, have changed the file now (fixed it using your formula!) in case anyone downloads it in error!

 

What you reckon is best interest rate to apply for contractual interest? 8% The bank's standard overdraft rate? The bank's standard unauthorised borrowing rate? (things could get interesting using that last one!!!!!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I always recommend claiming ALL THREE !!

 

I know that sounds stupid, but it is generally recommended that when we file our claim with the court, we claim alternatives. This allows us to claim the max (unauthorised) rate primarily, but allows fallback positions of the lower (authorised) rate, and then the Statutory 8% rate.

 

I have been working on a spready that shows all three, as I believe BF has asked Vamp to do one. I've got a "prototype" which I have based on one of Vamp's Google spreadies.

 

http://upload2.net/page/download/KH5DXXfx6GF1KzW/Copy+of+16_Throughout_claim_with_compounded_contractual_interest.xls.html

 

It is always recommended to only show the primary (max) claim to the bank (ie., with the prelim & LBA), and submit the three rates only when one submits a claim to court.

 

HTH, mate,

 

Bill.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at my (or littleangels actually!) claim it makes a massive difference.

 

If i was to claim just the charges, and miracle upon miracle, they just paid up, it'd be £3879.

 

If it they didnt, and it went to court and i got the statutory 8% it'd be £4895.

 

If i charged the agreed borrowing rate of around 15% it'd be £5774.

 

If i charged the Unarranged Borrow rate of around 29.5% it'd be £7622.

 

I know which one i'm going for.

 

Does anyone have any views on charging say a compromise rate of 25% because we dont actually have the actual rate of interest for some periods, and saying it's a compromise rate in the 2nd letter?

WON £4000 v NAT WEST

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, thank **ck for that - I really couldn't face any more of that bl**dy pie RB !!

 

Post up a sample line of your spready. Use the oldest charge - we need to know: the amount, the date, and the interest rate, and the interest the spready calculated on it. Just as a check.

 

No - do NOT use any rates other than those used contractually. You claim lower rates in the alternative, and only when you submit the claim to court.

 

As I said, use just the current published rates - there is no need to look for older rates. There will be plenty of scope for accepting less than you claimed for, believe me, they will make sure of that !!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers bud.

 

The pie always tastes fine....it's the after taste thats bitter! Ha ha

 

Tell me where you hang out.........there'll be a donation to the site for sure, a repayment of my loan to littleangel and a bunch of banana's for your good self at the end of all this.

 

Well 2 out of 3 are certs..........!!!!!!!!!!:(

WON £4000 v NAT WEST

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 out of three included the banana's and the donation.........i know my place!!!!!

 

Ok, so now the examples:

 

06/06/01 CHQ RTN FEE £30....Interest @ 29.69% (Current Rate) = £49.57

12/06/01 CARD MISUSE FEE £75....Interest @ 29.69% = £123.57

 

I've used the basic spreadsheet and added a couple of columns and then calculated the interest as follows: (£30*0.00081)*Days_Since_Offence

 

0.00081 is the current rate of interest (29.69%) divided by 365 to give the daily rate.

 

The letter to Nat West will have the basic spreadsheet attached plus the new column and will look like this:

 

In Respect Of.........Amount....Date Incurred....Interest Accrued

CHQ RTN FEE...........£30.00......06/06/01.............£49.57

CARD MISUSE FEE.....£75.00......12/06/01.............£123.57

UNPAID D/D FEE........£30.00.......14/06/01............£49.38

 

......and then totals at the end.

 

Amazing to see the interest on each individual fee....the second of those being unbelievable!

 

Any comments....suggestions.....or opinions???

 

Be gentle with me....it's saturday morning.....the morning after the night before!:o

WON £4000 v NAT WEST

Link to post
Share on other sites

Errr... I would suggest you try Bill-k's sheet that he has posted..... your second £75 charge would have earned some £317 interest using that method!! :D

 

I will do.....i hadnt had a chance to download Bill-k's as mine is a work system which blocks internet downloads. Littleangel is on the case for me.

 

I assume thats the difference between a basic interest rate and a compound one......and if it is, it's gonna be big!

WON £4000 v NAT WEST

Link to post
Share on other sites

OH BLIMEY............using bill-k's SS the numbers are.....wait for it...... £3879 in charges.......and.............

 

£7121.68 in interest!!!!

 

So..... On 6/6/01 a CHQ RTN FEE of £30 gives £127.58 IN INTEREST

 

This means a major court case no doubt.

WON £4000 v NAT WEST

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, i'm ready to rock n roll on his one but there seems to be a number of different letters which i could use....does anyone have one which details the claim including contractual interest etc etc.

 

I've also read that it may be worth putting in the lower rate as a fall back. Is this correct?

WON £4000 v NAT WEST

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm using the prelim template from here, amended for the contractual interest element as follows:

 

What I require

I calculate that you have taken £3879.00 plus I have also included the amount I calculate in compound interest at your published Unarranged Borrowing rate of 29.69% totalling £7121.68. The total amount I am claiming from you is £11000.68. I enclose a schedule of the charges which I am claiming with this letter.

Can anyone who's better than i confirm that this would be ok before i post it to Bishopsgate?

  • Haha 1

WON £4000 v NAT WEST

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry been away - apparently there's life outside of CAG !!! :D

 

Thanks again Bobbair - yes, that's right RB. £127.58 on the first charge, £317.02 on the second, and £126.55 on the third.

 

Yes, also right, RB. I always recommend claiming the max rate primarily, but if/when you have to claim in court, you claim the lower and Statutory rates "in the alternative."

 

This gives you a legally-respected fallback.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is fine, you just need to make them aware exactly what your claiming with regards to charges and interest right from the start, and you've more than covered that.

 

I see Bill has managed to get you sorted......top man (or should I say gorilla)....lmao!!!

IF MY COMMENTS HAVE HELPED PLEASE CLICK MY SCALES

 

Don't be like the banks - give a little back

 

 

:D NAT WEST - WON - £4282.36:D

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You're all top apes in my book.

 

Once i get hold of something, nothing gets in my way.....i think i'd best eat drink and sleep now,.....oh yeah, and there's littleangel to sort out........and there was me thinking my reward would be in heaven......!!!;)

WON £4000 v NAT WEST

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, looks OK to me, mate. Just one thing - that's a fair sized claim. Is it all within the past 6 years, or do some charges go back further ?

 

Oh, and Josamolly - sorry to ignore your question !!

 

The spready is fine for calculating contractual interest on both credit card and current accounts. The difference between the two is only when you use them to claim the actual individual apportionments of interest actually charged on each penalty. You will need the correct sheet if you are doing that, but it depends on your circumstances. It can be very time-consuming for very little gain.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Stop interrupting....RB's here with me now!:D :o :oops:

 

It's all within the last 6 years, the first being 6/6/01. The claim's for £3875.....the interest is £7k+

 

I know this goes beyond the small claims level but we'll cross that bridge when we get to it.

 

Thanks for all your help with this.......up to.....and from....now!!!:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...