reload v Lloyds - FULL SETTLEMENT OFFERED!!!

[reload]

Excellent website, plenty of useful information - although I have to admit at struggling to find the FAQ threads at first, because of the large volume of announcements. Didn't have my thinking head on straight away, and mistook the announcements for the FAQs!

 

Anyway, have read a variety of the threads now, and am preparing to post my own claim too.

 

Fiddling about with Lloyds online banking however, I discovered it is possible to search for all of your previous Charges (Which unfortunately includes fees). It may be worth posting this information elsewhere, but:

 

Log in to your Lloyds Internet Banking account, and select the Bank account which you wish to search as you would normally.

 

Select "Statement" from the left hand menu.

 

From the drop-down menu at the top of your statement, select "Search Your Statements" and click "Go".

 

This next is a bit tedious. The site only permits you to search your statements from 01-07-2002 onwards, and only in +3 month intervals (So you need to do multiple searches, and copy/paste your results into a spreadsheet). However, adjust the search fields so they appear like the following:

 

 

Click "Search", and the next page will display a list of your charges from the period 01-07-2002 up till 31-09-2002.

 

NB: THIS ALSO INCLUDES YOUR ACCOUNT FEES AND OVERDRAFT INTEREST WHICH YOU SHOULD REMOVE MANUALLY, AS NECESSARY.

 

You can then use a simple Excel spreadsheet to total up the 'charges' as necessary. Saves you a bit of legwork.

 

Hope this info is useful to others, and good luck with your claims. Will be interested to see how mine comes out

[reload]

Hmmm, after totting it all up seems I'm owed £2225. This should be fun.

[reload]

... and sent my preliminary approach for repayment first class recorded for the sum of £2225. This is only for the last 4 years, and I haven't included the 8% which we seem to be entitled to as well - I'm wondering whether they might note this and settle a bit more rapidly.

[reload]

Dont think you add 8% interest untill you get to court claim.Good luck and keep us posted.

 

After further reading - fair point

 

Just checked Royal Mail online tracking and my letter is recorded as delivered from Birmingham depot. Here goes!

[reload]

Apologies for the self-bumpage, but opened a Natwest Step account as a parachute this morning - should get the letters to sign etc in the next couple of days. Will keep updating this for my own benefit as it seems most people do

[reload]

Blimey - got in from work this evening to find this on my doorstep. Quite impressive turnaround, even though it is a delaying letter:

 

Dear Mr reload,

 

I am just writing to let you know that we've recieved your complain - and to say how sorry I am to learn that you're unhappy with us.

 

You have my assurance that one of our assistant managers will investigate the concerns you have rasied with us - this may take a little time but I would expect our enquiries to be complete within the coming 2 weeks. We will then be able to respond in full to your complaint and at that stage, I hope, resolve matters between us.

 

In case you haven't recieved a copy of our leaflet called 'How to voice your concerns' I've enclosed one with my letter (They didn't, actually!). This tells you all you need to know about resolving your complaint with us.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

 

 

David Just

Assistant Manager

 

So, as I suppose this letter is dated 04/05/2006 this means I can assume they recieved the letter then, and give them 14 days from then till I post off the LBA

[reload]

137 views and only two responses that weren't me - lol

[reload]

Got this back today. Seems to be the standard reply letter, as far as I can tell:

 

Dear Mr Hibbert,

 

Re: Account Charges for Overdraft Excesses and Returned Items

 

Thank you for taking the time to contact us about your account.

 

I understand that

 

• You feel that the charges you have incurred are unlawful.
  
• You are unhappy with the amount of charges you have incurred as a result of being overdrawn and from returned items.
  
• You have requested that all charges incurred should be refunded for the past 4 years totalling £2225.00.
  

 

When you became a customer, we gave you details of any charge for the day to day running of your account. Details of our charges are also available from our branch staff, telephone helpline or our website.

 

For the vast majority of our customers banking with us can be completely free as charges are not made for services such as debit cards, cash machine withdrawals, balance requests, statements, cheque books and Internet banking. We also do not charge for processing Direct Debits and Standing Orders when they are paid through our customers' accounts.

 

One of the few services we apply charges for are when a customer does not have enough money in their account to meet payments they have requested us to make. If customers think they may exceed any limit they have, we urge them to contact us to discuss their requirements. Any requests for further lending are then assessed in line with our usual credit policy. Similarly, when we return an item, we are preventing a customer from exceeding their limit, and again as we explain clearly to our customers, this process incurs a charge.

 

Typically, we do not levy customers an excess overdraft fee the first time they go overdrawn without an agreement, as long as it hasn't happened in the past twelve months and we limit excess fees to a maximum of three occurances in any one month.

 

As a business we are entitled to set charges to cover additional work. These charges are not hidden and are notified in the guide to banking charges leaflet we produce. We advise our customers to ensure cleared funds are available in their accounts to meet payments due. You will also note that in the front of each cheque book we request that funds are available before cheques are issued.

 

You incurred charges because you did not ensure funds were available in your account to cover the payments set up by you. It is your responsibility to operate your account within any agreed limits and within the terms and conditions.

 

You accepted these terms when you opened your account and when you agreed your overdraft (I don't have one?). We did not agree to pay your account in excess of the amount agreeed without charges being made.

 

Accordingly, I am unable to agree with your request to refund these charges. We do expect your account to be run in line with the terms and conditions of its operation. This means that you must ensure that cleared funds are deposited into the account the working day before any payments are due. If you do not feel you will be able to run your account in accordance with the terms and conditions, we may have to consider withdrawing certain facilities, such as any debit cards, overdrafts and chequebooks. Alternatively, you may wish to consider alternative banking arrangements.

 

If you are unhappy with my decision and feel that you have something to add which might change the outcome, please get in touch. If we cannot agree on a solution at that point, I will help you refer your complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service for independent arbitration.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

 

Chris Dunnett

Assistant Manager

 

Interesting that given the content of the template preliminary approach letter, at no point does the bank try to defend the charges as lawful. Neither does it attempt to defend the charges as proportional to their expenses. Could this angle be taken in a small claims court defense, I wonder?

[reload]

Aye, looks it - given that most of our letters are pretty much identical template letters in any case, they're probably doing the exact same thing to us

[reload]

Apparently it's now straight to LBA without waiting for the 14 days to expire, as they've acknowledged the case

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=6461

[reload]

Got this back today. Bog standard 'Really, we mean it - sod off!' letter.

 

Dear reload,

 

Thank you for your letter dated 8 May 2006. I am sorry to hear that you have not been happy with my response to date.

 

Unfortunately there is little I am able to add to my letter dated 5 May 2006 and I am only able to refer you back to the terms and conditions of your account, althuogh I do respect you opinion about our charges.

 

This letter is the bank's final response, which means that if you remain dissatisfied you may refer your complain to the Financial Ombudsman Service. If you decide to pursue your complaint through the Financial Ombudsman Service you must do so within 6 months from the date of this letter. I have enclosed a leaflet, which outlines how to contact them.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

David Just

Assistant Manager

 

 

Moneyclaim will be filed on 22/05/06. Oh, another letter through today telling me my parachute account is now open

[reload]

Apologies for the self-bump, but 3 days to go

 

Quite looking forward to visiting the Moneyclaim website on Monday.

[reload]

Moneyclaim filed.

 

I have a contract with Lloyds TSB Bank PLC, conducted on their standard terms and conditions. I am claiming return of money taken by the defendant in the way of charges over the last 4 years, totaling £2225. The 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. I have repeatedly asked the bank to justify their charges but they have declined to do so. I claim interest under section 69 of the county court act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year from (01/07/2002) to (22/05/2006) of £328.11 and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of 8%. I therefore claim a total of £2553.11 (£2225 + £328.11 interest).

[reload]

Got my Notice of Issue back from Northampton County Court today, with claim number and the rest of the details. Deemed to be served on 28th of May, and Lloyds now have until the 11th of June to reply.

 

Do I need to PM Bankfodder/Dave with the claim number etc?

[reload]

Hi wowser

 

Victim no longer, eh?

 

Not sure which of my posts on this thread you were replying to, but the order I went was:

 

1) Preliminary Approach Letter.

- replies from Lloyds 2 days later

2) Letter Before Action (Optional to wait 14 days before sending this - if you get a negative response it is reasonable to say you can go straight on with this step).

- reply from Lloyds 2 days later

3) Moneyclaim filed 14 days after Letter Before Action.

 

Hope that helps

[reload]

Well, Lloyds have acknowledged my claim. 27 days and counting

[reload]

Hi Bookworm - Vamp's already done it for me

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=8508

[reload]

Acknowledgement of Service letter recieved yesterday - Lloyds intend to defend the claim in full, as usual. Honest, Judge!

 

:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[reload]

Just reading through various threads about filing for judgement where the bank have not raised the defense in time... I have to admit to being a little baffled on the dates.

 

My claim was deemed as served on the 28th of May. Am I right in thinking that:

 

Bank has 14 days from Notification of Service date to acknowledge. Acknowledgement of Service gives them another 28 days from the date acknowledged? (In my case, the 1st of June acknowledged, defense due by 28th)

 

Or:

 

Bank has 14 days from Notification of Service date to acknowledge. Bank gets a further 14 days from the original deadline? (In my case, 11th of June final acknowledgement deadline, 25th of June defense due)

 

The former was what I was working with in mind. If the latter, then I ain't complaining - just means I get my money back all the sooner

[reload]

Eeeeeexxxxxcellent, Smithers!

[reload]

Buggers. Get home from a night and a half, and find Martineau Johnson's defense on my doorstep to deflate me. Will type it up in full when I don't have around 4 hours till I need to be awake again...

[reload]

Okay, came in today to an Allocation Questionnaire already - along with a copy of the Lloyd's defense from the County Court. Looks like the same old identical defense from Lloyds, so I guess it's now a case of waiting to hear from Martineau Johnson again with a settlement offer. AQ is due to be returned by the 9th of July.

 

Claim No. 6 QZ 32972

 

IN THE NORTHAMPTON COUNTY COURT

 

BETWEEN:

 

reload

Claimant

 

and

 

LLOYDS TSB BANK PLC

Defendant

 

---------

DEFENCE

---------

 

1. The Defendant Lloyds TSB Bank plc (the Bank) is a bank. It is admitted that the Claimant has been a customer of the Bank at all material times.

 

2. By opening an account with the Bank, the customer enters into a commercial arrangement with the Bank for the provision of banking services. The Bank is entitled, as part of the arrangement, to charge for those services. At account opening a customer is provided with details of the Bank's charges, currently in a leaflet a guide to our banking charges. By using the account, the customer acknowledges that the charges are incorporated into the contract. For personal customers, a number of services are provided for free, notwithstanding that they are an expense to the Bank. Such services presently include, but are not limited to, providing;

 

chrques

bank statements

the facility to make payments by direct debit and standing order

debit cards

ATMs (cash machines).

 

3. By maintaining the account in credit, or within any limit agreed with the Bank, the customer may avoid most if not all charges. If the customer fails to ensure that there are sufficient cleared funds in the account to cover payments, whether by cheque, debit card, standing order or direct debit, the customer makes a request for a payment to be made from the Bank's own funds. If the Bank makes payment, or returns the payment, it provides a service as specified in the leaflet and mkaes a charge in accordance with the terms of the contract. On page 1 of the leaflet, the Bank explains that "there are normally no charges for everyday banking at Lloyds TSB when your account is in credit.

 

When you use and agreed overdraft, there is no monthly fee and we only charge interest on the amount you are overdrawn each day. Where you go overdrawn without an agreement or where you use special services, such as copy statements, we will make a charge. This guide explains how these charges work, and when they will apply.

 

If you want to use a service that we haven't listed, we'll tell you the cost that service before you give us the go-ahead".

 

4. There is no breach of contract, the charge cannot therefore be a penalty, consequently there is no requirement that the charge be a pre-estimate of the Bank's loss.

 

5. The customer is given advance warning of charges being imposed; statements show the charges, if any, the customer has incurred during the course of a month, and which will appear as debits on the following month's statement. Customers are warned by letter when they go overdrawn or over their agreed limit without arrangement with the Bank. If the customer fails to remedy the position, and payments such as standing orders and direct debits are refused then again the customer is warned by letter.

 

6. The charges are fair and reasonable, and it is denied that they are unlawful.

 

7. The customer is notified of the charges in plain intelligible language at the conclusion of the contract, and on each monthly statement. The charges are terms which relate to the price payable by the customer for a service provided by the Bank, and pursuant to Regulation 6 of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999, are not subject to the assessment of fairness.

 

8. It is denied that s15 of the Supply of Goods and Services Act applies to this claim, since the Bank provides details of all charges which are incorporated into the contract as pleaded in paragraph 2 above.

 

9. In the premises:

 

9.1 the charges are for banking services, and are not damages nor a penalty;

 

9.2 the Bank is entitled by contract to impose the charges, which are fair and reasonable;

 

9.3 it is denied that the charges are unlawful or contravene any statute or regulation.

 

10. The Claimant's claim is denied in its entirety. It is further denied that the Claimant is entiteld to the sum claimed or to any sum from the Bank .

 

Statement of Truth

 

The Defendant believes that the facts stated in this Defence are true. I am duly authorised by the Defendant to sign this statement.

 

Signed Heather Leeson

Full name: HEATHER LEESON Partner in Martineau Johnson.

 

Served 19 June 2006 by Martineau Johnson of 78 Cannon Street, London EC4N 6NQ:

Telephone 0870 763 2000: Fax 020 7618 8130 : Reference HZL/TPE/LL751154. Solicitors for the Defendant

[reload]

Have filled out my Allocation Questionnaire - unfortunately it was an N149. I've put this in Section G, and would appreciate any comments

 

May require the use of a CD player if transcript of an interview is disputed. In particular - former Lloyds TSB Bank plc "Head of Personal Banking" Peter McNamara (BBC Radio 2004). A breakdown of costs involved in calculating these penalty charges has been requested for purposes of compliance with the "Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982" s. 15, should these unlawful penalty charges (Ref: Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 and Unfair (Contracts) Terms Act 1977) be defended as a service charge. Lloyds have failed to provide this.

 

Taking the "Well, if it's a service charge and it's reasonable and within the law, then bloody well prove it to us!" argument. Hope it makes sense, had to squeeze it in as my handwriting is quite large and chunky (although perfectly legible, I much prefer typing over handwriting these days!)

[reload]

Hi tonkabella,

 

Well, in the post above yours you can see what I've put on the AQ

 

Strictly speaking, it isn't even necessary to put that much information. You can quite easily return the AQ by putting 'None' in that section. Likewise, you do not have to return any documentation at the AQ stage.

 

There is a guide to completion of the allocation questionnaire in the bank templates library - hope it helps!

[reload]

Just had a very interesting conversation with one of the solicitors from Martineau Johnson. Guy's name was Tom something, unfortunately I couldn't record the conversation as they called me on my mobile at work. I did telephone them last night, and had to leave a message with this guy's secretary.

 

Anyway, it was a fairly frank discussion. I started off by informing Tom I was aware that in a lot of other similar cases Lloyds had settled before the Allocation Questionnaire had been returned. I started off by saying I didn't want to appear arrogant or overconfident, but I was curious as to whether they would be willing to offer me a settlement before I had to return the AQ. The initial question was when my AQ was due to be returned - I told him the 9th, but truthfully that I pass my local county court every day to and from work, so would most likely hand it in on the 8th.

 

Tom went on to say that he obviously couldn't discuss other cases with me, but I was entirely correct in that in other cases a settlement offer has been made. I then mentioned that as the AQ deadline is getting close, and that I was happy to agree to an early settlement, would he be willing to comment as to whether Lloyds would be able to offer me the same before the AQ incurred another £100 in costs to them in a final settlement?

 

I nearly chuckled at his response, as he very almost slipped up - but then covered his tracks. Along the lines of "Well, I can certainly get in touch with my client and find out whether they want to offer a settlement, and when they do... oh, sorry, when or if they do, we can get a letter in the post to you - if they're agreeable you may receive a letter say... tomorrow morning?"

 

Obviously, this is nothing concrete - a lot of indefinite conjunctions and adverbs were used, but fingers crossed!