Wear your Bulletproof vest !

[photoman]

Looking around at all the threads, we have all presumed that we are indeed in the right, because the Banks have still not decided to defend a case in court.

So we presume they are just conceding liability somewhat, and begrudgingly just choosing to settle, because behind closed doors they know they are in the wrong, and know they cannot defend or win.

However the amounts, (although huge to us), are still only a small proportion of what is at stake to them if a case went to court. Regardles of if they actually won or not, they know the publicity would bring an end to their huge annual multi billion pound bonus' from thereon in. So perhaps their rollover attitude is bourne more from plain economics, than a willingness to test the law.

Either way, their strategy so far has been to just seek out new and ever more inventive ways to stall, instill doubt and test each claimants resolve. It is becoming increasingly obvious that these tactics are now being picked up upon and dealt with by ourselves, and indeed even now the courts, so they are slowly running out of options and tactics.

In return, we are growing ever more confident........perhaps a bit over so?

How far can we push them before they decide a case is unavoidable?

If so, we know which cases they would then choose. The ones they think they could have a chance of winning, in the hope they could then maybe set some precedents.

 

And which cases would they be?

The ill prepared

The over confident

The technically flawed

The vexatious

Those unable to justify their claims

 

We all need to be ever more vigilant and prepared. We must research and prepare, in keeping with our own individual cases, rather than just seeking to blindly copy without really understanding.

We must be aware of where this course is likely to take us......but even more so, about where it COULD take us.

It must be emphasised, even more so now, that this is not a quick dive in, copy some templates, post some letters and start looking at some holiday websites !

From the very outset of joining, an understanding of how, why, what, what if, and how do I deal with this one (?), should be drummed into claimants.

 

I would even go so far as to say a minimum membership period or minimum number of posts before you're even allowed near the templates library !!

 

Any comments anyone ??

[Michael Browne]

I agree the maths are hugely in their favour and they could keep going at the present rate virtually indefinitely.

 

And which cases would they be?

The ill prepared

The over confident

The technically flawed

The vexatious

Those unable to justify their claims

 

They could have done this many times already. They're spoilt for choice!!!

 

 

I would even go so far as to say a minimum membership period or minimum number of posts before you're even allowed near the templates library !!

In an ideal world maybe, but this is the internet with Which, BBC, MSE, Penalty Charges and others for people to turn to.

 

Other than that I wholeheartedly agree with you. Is there a holiday website you can particularly reccommend?

[bill-k]

Thank you, Photoman. That to me seems a very well thought out and well-put piece. Yes, we should not only be prepared to explain exactly WHAT we are claiming, but WHY we believe we can claim it.

 

When we first stumble in here, many of us assume that it is, as you imply, a mere cutting & pasting exercise. Some of us will launch an ill-prepared claim, and the banks will pick us off like newly-hatched turtles on the beach. A minimum level of research here does certainly seem like a good idea. Linking access to certain areas to a member's post-count might work, but we might need something a little tougher.

 

I believe you're right - things may get simpler as different techniques become passé, but they may NOT get easier !!

[jonni2bad]

I'm glad to see some thoughtful discussion of the subject here, but just wanted to add a little piece in respect of banks not willing to go to court re' costs etc...

 

In my case v Halifax, I claimed for a refund of charges PLUS a removal of the default notice. Not wanting to slice off on another tangent, I won't go into much details, but essentially they decided to challenge the default issue in court BUT pay up in full for the money claim part.

 

Their choice, you might say, but consider the issue here - they ARE going to attend court, they ARE going to instruct a local legal rep to act on their behalf and to spend (potentially) several hours dealing with it in court. All of this will cost a lot of money - yet to challenge the legality of the charges would only add a VERY small amount extra, so why pay up?

 

Why not use such a circumstance to be the one they defend?

 

Because, I suggest, they DO know it is a lost cause... to the extent that they even managed to get a Judge to agree not to even refer to the charges, in any way shape or form, during my subsequent hearing.

 

All we need to do now is convince the politicians! easy......

[paulwlton]

Well thought out photoman i've stated more than once it's not just a matter of including reference to s32 in your poc that will give you a big pay day.

 

Paul.

[TANZARELLI]

Nice to see some useful discussion matter here photoman. I agree that we all (me included) seem to think its just a case of if you like playing the game, with the banks (which I have to admit I do enjoy), but I have said before that the Banks will at some stage decide in some way to fight back. I'm sure personally that they will have been deep in discussions (ie the top boys) about this issue for quite some time now. We do need to give ourselves a reality check once in a while and reground ourselves if you like. Over confidence could be the route to our downfall on certain claims. However having said all that, I still think we have got them pinned down on the basic claims with the 8% interest additons. It may well be that the more complex BIG claims, possibly like yours are the ones they would start to look at, as it involves limitation, large interest amounts, and could be quite costly. However they would still have to attend to defend these in court, this would mean disclosing their costs etc. Or they may well pay up the charges then as J2B states in relation to his default removal, go at the interest amount as a seperate issue. I/we don't know how these cases will pan out. But one things for sure, it will be interesting to find out and fun watching.

 

Tanz

[daisy_bumbleroot]

Not quite off topic, but going in a slightly different direction...

 

I was walking to work this morning and reflecting on the fact that the bbc programme said that the most they should be charging is about £2.50 (£4 (?) for a cheque).

 

So say in this scenario id been charged £900 (£30 x 30 charges) with £100 interest for arguments sake. Say the banks "yeah, ok, you can have your money back coz its too much" and refund me £1k. Then in a few months down the line when thier people have got themselves together, what if they go "Ah, now i think you find you now owe us £75 (ie £2.50 x 30 charges) plus interest, so pay up else you go to court".

 

I know its less than 10% of what they paid out in the first place, but £75 is still a lot of money to me. Can they do this? Im thinking they could, maybe because it was settled out of court?

[reidnet]

Hi Daisy,

IMHO as the banks are mainly paying back charges and stating as a gesture of goodwill, then I doubt if they could try and charge some of it back at a later date. Its Just the 2 Bank Charges I have had refunded have stated as a gesture of goodwill on them.

 

I cant Agree enough with Photoman re taking your time over claims and getting all your facts and figures watertight before claiming. I have no doubt that one day the banks will totally change tactics and try once again to screw us over.

 

I am currently fighting with GE Money / Purpleloans over Mis Sold PPI, I am in no particular hurry to get this into court and am in fact spending even more time researching the whole issue and it is a amazing what little snippets can be found that can be added into my Statement of Claim.

 

I feel the more work you put into gathering information can only be seen as a good thing when it finally hits the court, at least I feel any Judge would consider the research and time that you have spent on the claim rather than sticking in a claim with ..It was Mis Sold Give me my Money back sort of claim.

 

I have also exhausted the companies internal complaints procedures, along with the FSA, OFT, FISA and the Information Commissioners Office. This again will show that I have at least tried to settle the dispute prior to raising any court action.

GE Money know that I intend to take legal action against them, But it is of course up to me when I decide to submit the action.

 

I have also Involved the Media wherever possible, Not to particuarly help in my fight but to let others out there know and raise awareness to the whole Issues relating to PPI. The more complaints that these companies get regarding this the better, you never know they may eventually sit up and take notice of us little consumers.

 

Before finding this site I know for sure that I would have given up my fight with GE Money by now, But no way now..l know my rights now..lol

 

Sorry for going on a bit.. But cant thank this site and fellow members enough for all the help, advice and encouragement that has pulled me through times when I have thought about throwing in the Towel.

 

Ian

[thecornflake]

Not quite off topic, but going in a slightly different direction...

 

I was walking to work this morning and reflecting on the fact that the bbc programme said that the most they should be charging is about £2.50 (£4 (?) for a cheque).

 

So say in this scenario id been charged £900 (£30 x 30 charges) with £100 interest for arguments sake. Say the banks "yeah, ok, you can have your money back coz its too much" and refund me £1k. Then in a few months down the line when thier people have got themselves together, what if they go "Ah, now i think you find you now owe us £75 (ie £2.50 x 30 charges) plus interest, so pay up else you go to court".

 

I know its less than 10% of what they paid out in the first place, but £75 is still a lot of money to me. Can they do this? Im thinking they could, maybe because it was settled out of court?

 

Good question. As they are choosing to pay a full settlement rather than go to court though, I don't think they can then backtrack and counterclaim, especially after the program aired.

 

Besides, the program itself isn't enough evidence - they would have to prove their costs in order to claim back those £2.50 (it was £4.50 for a bounced cheque) charges.

 

Doing this would also mean they would have to drop all their charges to £2.50 rather than carry on making a fortune out of people too unaware/scared/apathetic to claim their charges back. They are still making all this money as it's only a relatively small amount of people claiming back charges while all the others keep paying them.

[garyhay]

I would love a day in court but doubt that will ever happen.

 

I spent at least a couple of weeks reading posts, going through the documents etc befor I set off on the road to reclaiming and I consider myself to be a good consumer and always fight my corner when I need to (or want to).

 

If too many people just jump in then at sometime I think the banks will start to fight back.

 

I see most of them have now reverted to a £12 charge for Credit Cards but I would still be willing to fight against this as they still need to "PROVE" how they arrived at that cost.

 

Peopl should really hurt the banks and start using Credit Unions who don't operate for profit.

[Javey]

Interesting debate. I think that it's quite clear that the banks have been using charges from those of us who are not so careful (shall we say) in order to bolster their profits. I don't know this but I would imagine that rather than consider them an unexpected bonus they probably plan things on the assumption that they will get this income from a certain percentage of their customers. Maybe it's just me but I didn't notice that my bank was over-keen or quick to inform me that I'd gone overdrawn, and I've never had my switch/maestro card refused.

 

So more and more people claiming is going to affect things somehow undoubtedly. Obviously there's the money that they are having to pay back in the first place, although I know that at the moment it is a mere drop in the ocean, still it's increasing. Also anyone who claims successfully is no longer a cash cow for the banks. I don't know about anyone else but personally I'm determined never to pay any more bank charges so that's another fund that's slowly drying up.

 

What will they do to recoup these lost funds? Well, whilst I do think that there's a danger of being too complacent I don't think that it will come from them challenging individual cases in court. Yes sure if a customer challenges the charges and is not prepared fully and doesn't follow the rules if you -like them- of course they'll defend their case (they'd be daft no to) but I don't think that there will be some kind of mass crackdown. I do think though that the banks are aware of all of the publicity and this website and are looking for ways in which they can change their customer contracts and pricing policies so that the law cannot be easily challenged. I would imagine that changes will start to happen perhaps with new customers in the coming years.

 

It also seems to be the norm in some banks these days to encourage new customers to take up an account with a monthly fee ('you get free travel insurance!'- er yeah thanks) so that's another stealth tax on their customers, they're making up the old money they raked in from charges in new inventive ways. Having said all that I don't think any of us should be over confident and complacent when taking action to reclaim charges with a bank, and nobody should do it unless they are fully prepared, ready and willing to take any case to court.

[Glenn UK]

Seems to me that the problem for the banks is purely economic.

 

They will refund what they have to no more, their strategy right now is to find a replacement for the loss of income that the charges provided.

 

when they have found that strategy and its bringning in the money they will drop their charges.

 

This problem will die a quiet death imho.

 

We will not be able to force them into court and unless a court decides that a claim should be heard in the public interest it wont happen.

 

Where claimants end up in a weak position over interest or defaults, as i have and j2b did, then we will loose out, possibly in court, but not over the lawfulness of charges.

 

On this basis i would suggest as photoman suggests we know our onions and make sure we make our claims and deal with them in such a way as to maximise what we get bacl from the banks/cc companies.

 

Having said that, I will probalby be the one they do decide to take to court and all i have said will prove to be totally wrong

JMHO

 

Glenn

[RedDeath]

Interesting thread photoman.

 

I suppose that at the end of the day it comes down to education. The ones who research their case from the ones who don't. You learn from your mistakes. You raise thoughts and have people bounce their own thoughts back. The very essence of this forum. Not all people are like this though, if anything we are a minority. Something like 4 in 10 people have regular bank charges...how many on this forum? You get the picture.

 

The rest of those people are out there, uneducated and incapable of going through this process. Some people are daunted by the banks, others by the maths, some by the processes and the few that are left are the ones that stand up to defend what is rightfully ours. Some dont have internet access.

 

Regardless, the banks know they are in the wrong. But for every 100 people that have charges, 40 don't know they can claim it back, 30 don't know how, 10 are afraid of the consequences, 10 accept the first intimidation letter and stop, 5 accept the goodwill gesture and 5 get through to claim.

 

By making it difficult they have in effect saved 95 claims. No doubt there will be more in time, but they are running scared, as they are thinking of introducing £10 a month charges for an account (common in Europe). Still I have estimated I spend 1k a year in charges so 120 will be a welcome break.

 

Its places like this forum that allow people to come together and share their information and make for a better case. As for keeping the templates library secret until someone posts enough messages is the most fascist and stupid thing I could hear anyone say.

 

We have the right of information (DPA ring a bell), we have a right to share our thoughts and we have also have the right to keep those thoughts to ourselves and quietly read the posts and forming our own opinions, be it right or wrong. If someone thinks that they can copy a template and send it in as it is, so be it, it is their right to do so. But stopping them from getting the access and education they have come looking for is, well, fascist.

 

Maybe you are afraid that a bank successfully defends a claim, and that it stops others from going through their process. So what? Banks have been defending claims for years. One win to them does not mean that they are right. If anything, lets hope that regardless of claiming money back that they change this system, cause many lives have been destroyed by these bank charges.

 

Sure they are devious, but the thought of imposing control by limiting access to the templates? Putting the idea forward for consensus, and trying to create a divide between the educated/capable from the not so educated is the common factor of many men we have come to loath. Saddam, Hitler, Lenin, Mao all shared the same idea, that they could control information to the masses.

 

The very essence of this forum is to share information. There is even a buddy system. I have spoken to many people, offered my advice and support and taken theirs. I have discussed acts and threads, but really, imposing control on who can read a template is really the most idiotic and fascist remark that I have read in this forum. It really is an unbelievable act to even consider publishing it. Who gives you the right to decide what people can and can not read???

[Garu]

I think he was trying to *increase* education not decrease it, by thinking of ways of getting people to understand concepts before using templates.

 

Maybe, hand in hand, we need to increase the buddy system as someone comes onto the site, and work harder with them to understand all involved before they "copy & paste" and send away the forms.

 

It's a difficult balance, we want to help people, but it would be best (for them, should it come to court, and one day it will) if they understood all involved.

 

The spreadsheets are fantastic, but unless the person that enters their figures understands fully how it works, then how could they defend it in court?

 

(...and if they understand how \ why every formula is entered, they probably could \ should create their own)

 

As we say, the current system works great if the bank just roll over, but we have to get across to new users of the site that *one day* they will defend in court. Better to be prepared for something that doesn't happen than the opposite.

 

Just my 2p...

[reidnet]

I agree Red Death...very well put together Argument there.

 

There are some folks that think it is as easy as sending a letter to the bank and asking for the charges back, we all know its not that simple.

 

Before finding this Site I was quite happy to sit back and let these charges happen, as I did not know any better, Nowadays I know far more about my Consumer Rights (and not just in the case of bank charges) than I ever did. God knows how many hours I have spent reading through various forums and gathering information from here and the Internet. I also respond to many posts where people have asked for help, and If I cannot provide the answer I normally point them in a direction or to someone who may well be able to answer their question.

 

Even if restrictions were put in place to access the templates, would this work..I doubt it.. you always get people that will just simply Jump in with both feet before reading any conditions etc, Its a bit like the Loan & Credit card agreements that we have all signed, and did we read the full agreement before putting pen to paper ?.

 

Ian

[thecornflake]

I think he was trying to *increase* education not decrease it, by thinking of ways of getting people to understand concepts before using templates.

 

Maybe, hand in hand, we need to increase the buddy system as someone comes onto the site, and work harder with them to understand all involved before they "copy & paste" and send away the forms.

 

It's a difficult balance, we want to help people, but it would be best (for them, should it come to court, and one day it will) if they understood all involved.

 

The spreadsheets are fantastic, but unless the person that enters their figures understands fully how it works, then how could they defend it in court?

 

(...and if they understand how \ why every formula is entered, they probably could \ should create their own)

 

As we say, the current system works great if the bank just roll over, but we have to get across to new users of the site that *one day* they will defend in court. Better to be prepared for something that doesn't happen than the opposite.

 

Just my 2p...

 

Exactly my thoughts. I don't see an easy way to help people and at the same time make them understand the finer points by restricting access or the other suggestions raised.

 

I think you either let people use template documents and just make it as obvious as possible in big red letters that they need to know what they're doing or make it so that they have to spend more time learning but then risk them just downloading a letter from somewhere else or not bothering.

 

It's a tricky one. And the person who comes along and just downloads the letters, fills in the spreadsheets and thinks it's going to be a quick way to get some cash will be the one who ends up in court. With a claim over 5k it could be a big problem if it ends up in fast/multi track.

 

However I agree with Glenn that it will not end that spectacularly. The banks can easily afford to just pay off the claims that get past their stalling tactics. Their primary concern as a business is to make money and limit risk, which is exactly what they're doing. Why bother wasting money defending claims when you make a lot more money from one day's charges from people happy to pay them than a few hundred cases where people are actually prepared to go all the way.

 

The OFT will no doubt eventually pass a similar ruling to the credit card one, more people will be happy as their charges have been decreased to say £12, and those of us who know better will carry on claiming them back.

 

The only other option I see is criminal prosecution under the Theft, Fraud or similar acts, or someone managing to force them into court for a large claim.

[Garu]

As a side issue, we talk about a "big" claim most likely to be picked on, but what is big in their eyes? Do we know (no names needed, from survey perhaps?) what the largest claim has been (inc interest)?

[Glenn UK]

i would say big would be c.100k upwards but in truth until the amounts being claimed reach the order of say tens of millions for a single bank then its probably doesnt even appear on their radar as a threat!!

 

The amounts publicised on the forum are in effect less than they spend on paper clips or similar each year i suspect.

 

We are talking about organisations that measure profits in billions of quids i believe, so a few million is small beer.

 

JMHO

 

Glenn

[simonjohn]

i would say big would be c.100k upwards but in truth until the amounts being claimed reach the order of say tens of millions for a single bank then its probably doesnt even appear on their radar as a threat!!

 

The amounts publicised on the forum are in effect less than they spend on paper clips or similar each year i suspect.

 

We are talking about organisations that measure profits in billions of quids i believe, so a few million is small beer.

 

JMHO

 

Glenn

 

 

Considering the foregoing posts, there seems to be a degree of uncertinty that if a particular bank wins any claim against them that it may signal the end of any future claims against them...

 

However this is not the case.

 

The majaroity of claims will be heard in the small claims court, without costs implacations.

 

The banks are relying on the fact that most claimants will not go all the way and may accept a setllement before it reaches final proceedings.

 

For those that have the stomach, to go all the way the Banks usually cave in at the eleventh hour.

 

Ask yourselves why ?.

 

The Banks Know that they are on Shakey ground, while they could win a case here and lose a case there, This does not set a precedent.This is one one of the reasons why they want to Hold everyone, with a strong case, one which the banks can't possibly defend, in limbo with a mercantile court hearing.

 

My view is: when the banks come out all guns blazing, defending each and every case, Then we will Know that we have both rattelled them and that justice will be achievied