New Claim - Another Capital One

[bill-k]

From what I understood when I asked and wait for bill on this!!!

 

No 13 is contractual compounded interest but simple (no balances required) and not trying to work out what portion of the interest charged is due to charges. It is purely contractual compound on the penalty charge from the date applied to current date of prelim sending!!

 

Bill am I right?

 

Milly X:)

 

My reasoning for going with 13 too, however did not adjust any formula, left the sheet exactly as it was for true compound interest!

 

Milly X:)

 

Sorry, Milly, I missed your posts above, and in my opinion that is entirely correct.

 

As Sergeant says, though, the bottom line is that we must all try and make our own informed decision, and not be forced into anything. It is indeed our individual choice in the end, as we are the claimants, so we're driving. Sergeant and I are both advising with our own ideas and opinions on this, and Doo must make her own decision. I just want it to be a properly informed one. The more reading up she does, the better.

[thesergeant]

bill-k,

 

The trouble is that I as well as others have concerns re the application of contractual interest. Therefore it becomes a question of what they are willing to let go unchallenged, as in all negotiations it is not necessarily a question of good law, remember Non omne quod licet honestum est, it becomes a question of good poker:D:D

 

The application of contractual interest is guided in part by the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998, which gives the Bank of England + 7%, as a guide. Delving into these areas raises many concerns.

 

I am happy with my route ............. :D

[TANZARELLI]

Sorry, I thought you were using one of Vamps compound interest sheets. What you are doing here is calculating simple interest, not compound. As this is neither statutory nor contractual, I would suggest you re-think this, as you will have no legal basis for your claim.

 

PS - You will also be losing out on some possibly serious dosh !!!!

 

Hi Bill good to see your on the case on this one mate. I did mention the 34.9% APR in an earlier post, I checked this on the Cr@p One out website. Its the rate for the Classic card, Obviuosly the platinum rate is different.

 

Tanz

[bill-k]

I am happy with my route ............. :D

Don't know about the Latin, and I don't like to think of this as gambling !!

 

I prefer to show the banks that I have something that makes sense in court. If they wish to haggle with me from there on down (and so far they always have) - then I'll do that. But I sure will try and get the max rate first. So far, I haven't had to accept anything less than my full claim. I issue my claim with every intention of taking it into court if the bank doesn't pay, hence my desire to get it legally acceptable. I prefer to be in as strong a position as possible when negotiating with these people. No wild cards and no jokers, if you like !!

 

If, however, one is doing one's best to avoid going into court, for whatever reasons one might have, then so be it. Many people are understandably petrified of the SCC, and have visions of bewigged, gowned gents peering down from wood-panelled thrones !! They just don't see it as three bods sat round a table out the back !!

 

Ask for less, and accept less. We must each take our own route, as you say, Sergeant.

[thesergeant]

Bill-k,

 

I think we are on parallel tracks, however yours has the law as black and white - that it isn't. As for the Latin that states that "Not everything that is permitted (lawful) is honest"

 

The problem, is that on many occasions, if you are not willing to compromise then you often lose the whole game.

 

If you believe that the law is not a gamble then you haven't played the game:cool:, I assure you that I have (in different contexts than this forum is concerned with).

 

Maybe, differently than you, I am less than fully confident that compounded contractual interest is absolutely unarguably lawful and that every judge would see it that way.

 

We are though after the same thing and different views are valuable.

 

Lets concentrate on the objectives, those thieving banks :D:D:D

[bill-k]

We are though after the same thing and different views are valuable.

 

Lets concentrate on the objectives, those thieving banks :D:D:D

 

Yes, indeedy, Sarge. Different routes toward the same goal.

[doo]

ok thanks guys for above posts, have spent last day doing lots of sums and reading and it's all making sense now, am not going to send prelim until absolutely ready and happy with my decision because I too will go all the way to court if I have to - so have to be sure of my decision. I believe everyone who claims should inform themselves as much as possible - hence all the questions.

[millymollymoo]

Good on you doo, exactly right and ask as many questions as you like:)

 

Milly X:)

[TANZARELLI]

good to seen your weighing up your options first doo.

[doo]

Tanzarelli, am watching your thread closely, hope it comes to a positive conclusion. Am weighing up about default, when they did this the amount I owed was all charges (all but about £100) so the way I see it is if their charges had not been ridiculously high I would not have defaulted. As you can see by my thread am weighing up what to do about interest, CCI or simple, will ring Cap One today just to double check the APR on my card. Need to get this absolutely right.

[thesergeant]

I have had another look at the issue of "Contractual", (thanks Bill-k, another few hours of my life gone).

 

IMHO I think the problem revolves around the use of "Contractual", this implies a mutual business contract. That I feel causes difficulties in applying that approach to unlawful charges. Although having looked at the Late Payment of Debt Act which I think is the applicable law on this I can see some possible arguments to apply it.

 

A better approach maybe, as visited in other threads, is the argument of misappropriation of funds from our accounts. The banks are applying unlawful penalty charges and removing these from our accounts without authority. In similar circumstances unauthorised borrowing they apply penalty interest. Applying the principle of mutuality and recipocity (ie in fairness) we are entitled to apply similar interest. Using this argument we can apply any "fair" (The judge would ultimately decide if said rate is fair or not) rate we feel is equitable. Whether compounded daily interest would be deemed fair would have to be ultimately tested, if the banks ever went that far.

 

See http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/7252-new-way-looking-interest-38.html for some discussion around the issues.

 

However, of course there is the possibility then that the interest we earn on the penalty charges becomes taxable - arggghhhhhh :(

 

In short - I would stay away from the term "Contractual Interest", I have used this in a recent LBA:

>>>

You have misappropriated funds from my account, under the principle of mutuality and reciprocity I am applying an equivalent interest rate. I calculate that you have taken £685.00 which you have charged me in unlawful late payment and overlimit fees. I expect full settlement of my claim, the balance of which is £685.00, plus interest (34.9% equivalent to your current APR rate for classic card holders) of £982.24; Total owed: £1,667.24. I am enclosing a copy of the schedule of the charges which I am claiming.

>>>

 

 

I do not proclaim to be an expert on this, merely "informed". I would appreciate any views for or against my understanding. At the moment lots of members are using "legalistic" terms, maybe in the belief that because of the "words" they are on solid ground. This may not necessarily be the case.

 

AGAIN - I do not want to put anybody off, I just want to make sure that people are entering into this process to get back what the banks have ( edit) with the right information with which to make their decisions

 

Good luck ........... :grin:8)

[TANZARELLI]

I think the point is that you claim stat in the alternative, then you loose the risk of not getting any interest. Som ehave claimed unauthorised Borring rate then in the alternative authorised rat then in the alternative stat 8% rate. It would then be the banks who would have to risk testing this by going all the way.

[thesergeant]

Tanz,

 

Absolutely, you should set out in the N1, something similar to the rate you are claiming which is likely to be the unauthorised borrowing rate, if that is not found to be applicable the lower authorised borrowing rate, if all that fails then the statutory 8% rate.

[doo]

Yes guys see your points entirely, whatever I decide I shall certainly set out in the alternative stat 8%, certainly want some extra back if it goes to court stage which it obviously will.

[bill-k]

Sorry to shorten your life, Sarge !! I have previously done as Tanz says, and claimed the max rate, rhen lower rates in the alternative.

 

I agree, that just using legal "buzzwords" in itself doesn't impress the Judge (No more than using Latin !!! ) - and that the law is grey - not black & white. But I believe that if we can demonstrate tha twe have done all that a Litigant in Person could reasonably be expected to do, then that puts us at some advantage. Firstly, the bank will see that we do mean business, and are not just sticking our snout in the trough and hoping for a decent gobful with minimal effort. They will not see ours as the badly made case that they are definitely going to take inside and win. And secondly, if it does get inside court, we can show the court that we have made a diligent effort, and put ourselves in a good light.

 

I would also like to say that I find nothing to disagree with in your last but one post at all !!!

 

Praise the Lord.

[TANZARELLI]

Arrh, dont you just love a happy ending. lol

[doo]

Yep don't want the guys falling out - but makes great reading, thanks guys all this input between you all is great - even if my head is spinning.

[TANZARELLI]

Thanks for the click on the scales whoever did. I wish people would put a name. lol

[bill-k]

Thanks for the click on the scales whoever did. I wish people would put a name. lol

Sorry, it wasn't me, mate. That whittles it down to 99,999 I s'pose !!

[doo]

guilty as charged!

[doo]

Back to some serious business. Have rung capital one to check what APR was in place for my card, they gave me two rates - 21.39% and 26.94%. Just wanted it official as I know cap one varies their rates.

[TANZARELLI]

26.94% it is then. Thanks for the click.

[millymollymoo]

Doo how nice,thanks for the click

 

Milly X:)

[doo]

OK, have done spreadsheetm, very impressive set of figures and used cap one's interest they gave me over the phone that relates to my account. Thank you so much for everyones help in relation to spreadsheet and interest charges, millymollymoo you have been a star today.

[TANZARELLI]

It makes it all worthwhile when you see the figues eh!