Almost There

[Bill Lynch]

Hi Guys,

I am at the MCOL stage. My claim is for a total of £826.00 in charges and £128.229 in 8% interest.Two of thse charges are for a total of £50.00 plus £26.82 in 8% interest, making a total of £76.82 and go back over the 6 year limitation of proceedings.My claim has been acknowledged by the Halifax. This morning I received a letter from the Halifax informing me that they intend defending the case, BUT, because it will cost them money to defend it, they are willing, without admission of liability, to reimburse me £750 in respect of the bank charges together with £81.91 in respect of the 8% interest. As regards the charges over the 6 year period, my argument is that if the charges are considered disproportionate within the 6 year period, then surely they must be considered disproportionate outside the 6 year period. Would that argument stand up do you think? They also state that I am not entitled to £122.38 of my claim because they are outside the 6 year period, BUT I am only claiming £76.82 as above!! It all hinges on the 6 year limitation. Have any of you come across this and how have you resolved it please? I would be very grateful for any advice.

[crashbandicoot]

Bill, I have one charge older than 6 yrs, which Halifax have defended in a similar fashion. I haven't said anything further to them, as I will be submitting all my documents for my case in my bundle next week, with info on the limitation act, and my arguments against it. To be fair, since we all know they will fold before the court date, I'm not too worried about it, as even if it does go to court, I'll have it out with them then.

 

There is plenty of info available on the site about getting around the limitation act issue, so have a good search and read for information purposes. For now, just proceed as normal...then use the info you've reseearched on to strengthen your arguments.

 

Here's the link for the limitations act:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/statutes-library/415-limitation-act-1980-a.html

 

This part is particularly interesting which is the stance a lot of people are taking:

 

32.--

• (1) .... where in the case of any action for which a period of limitation is prescribed by this Act, either-
  • (a) the action is based upon the fraud of the defendant; or
    
  • (b) any fact relevant to the plaintiff's right of action has been deliberately concealed from him by the defendant; or
    
  • © the action is for relief from the consequences of a mistake;

  [*]the period of limitation shall not begin to run until the plaintiff has discovered the fraud, concealment or mistake (as the case may be) or could with reasonable diligence have discovered it. ....

  [*](2) For the purposes of subsection (1) above, deliberate commission of a breach of duty in circumstances in which it is unlikely to be discovered for some time amounts to deliberate concealment of the facts involved in that breach of duty. . . .

As far as we're concerned the banks have never revealed the true cost breakdowns of their fees, which suggests concealment. Etc. etc.

[Bill Lynch]

Hi Crash,

Many thanks to you for your trouble and for the valuable advice you have given me. I will proceed with the claim as you suggested and prepare myself for the court case. Good luck with your claim.

[Bill Lynch]

Hi Guys,

In thanking you all for your help, I am annoyed at the arrogance of the Halifax in making me believe that I am in the wrong by stating that I am bound by the account terms and conditions; that because it is going to cost them money to recover their (unlawful) charges they are doing me a favour by offering me monies which are short of what I believe I am entitled to and most of all that I should manage my account or they will close it. I have prepared a response as a result of their arrogant letter which is as follows:

 

"Thank you for your letter of the 9th January in relation to the above claim number. I will deal with the issues as you raised them.

When I opened my account you did not point out to me, and therefore I did not agree, that you would be charging me disproportionately high and unlawful charges, by way of penalty fees in administering my account. At no stage have you provided me with details of the breakdown, relative to the true costs, of those fees. Had you done so, I would most certainly have raised the issue with you at that time.

If the above charges had not been levied on my account, you would not now be facing the costs of having to defend them.

I am willing to accept the £911.91 you have offered me in repayment of charges, interest and court costs, but only as part payment towards the total amount outlined in my claim through the County Court. It is my intention to pursue repayment of the whole amount of £1034.29 through the Court system.

Finally, I acknowledge that I have some responsibility to manage my account. You too have a responsibility to manage my account in a lawful and business like manner. If you continue to unilaterally and unlawfully levy disproportionately high charges against my account, I reserve the right to pursue repayment of these charges. If you act in a lawful and business like manner, I will not need to consider removing my business from your bank or indeed availing myself of any HBOS products.

I would remind you that the 28 days allowed expires on the 21st January 2007"

[crashbandicoot]

Sounds good to me Bill