A New Way of Looking at Interest- 1st successful Claim - N'wide

[Spiceskull]

Hi Looking,

 

I think Alan has picked up on the other, rather more compelling argument. Cumulative penalty charges over the years have put him in the position that he is being charged interest on his account (an unnecessary overdraft) as well as on penalty charges. In this it could well be argued that he can claim the higher rate on ALL interest charges, not just the pro-rata penalty element.

 

Again, this argument is discussed elsewhere, and again, the application of the formulae will depend on the unique nature of each account. For example, this argument will not work on immature accounts (those that are less than six years old)

 

It really is a case of applying dilligence to whatever calculations you use, being able to explain and justify your calculations, and then letting the bank argue the toss. If they believe the calculations to be wrong, then the onus will be on them to demonstrate where your calculations are in error.

[Spiceskull]

This is the point of the "mutuality" and "reciprocity" issue. Their contract to the customer does put these responsibilities onto the customer - the argument is that it should apply in reverse.

I agree with this point entirely - in taking the money they are effectively borrowing the money as unauthorised. Therefore the unauthorised borrowing rate should apply. However, only charging the bank the authorised borrowing rate is an excellent way of demonstrating 'goodwill...'

[Spiceskull]

If it's not the bank, it's the bloody taxman!

[Spiceskull]

I can see it now -

 

"Inland Revenue taken to court over 'unlawful tax charges'"

Unfortunately nothing the IR does would ever be judged unlawful - incompetent perhaps, and even maybe ignorant, but not unlawful If you want a good example of this, check out the Mapeley Steps fiasco...

[Spiceskull]

That is a very good substitution: misappropriation of funds has a certain 'shady dealing' feel to it...thanks.

[Spiceskull]

Hi AC

As I have been unsuccessful at opening the Excel spreadsheet, I went about the laborious task of working out the interest by hand with the help of my ancient calculator!

Was this problem due to you not having Excel, or was the problem with the spreadsheet itself?

Maybe, I am dumb but surely it makes 'common sense' to add the separate amounts of interest to each dated fine/penalty on the claim form, prior to adding the County Court 8%

 

The bank has charged the interest in relation to the fine, which would not have been taken had the fine not been levied in the first place.

You cannot charge the bank's interest rate PLUS the 8% APR. The logic is this:

 

By not charging their rate, and therefore the bank holding your money for free over the years, the court allows you 8% as a way of realising some of the money you would have otherwise earned if the bank had not misappropriated your funds to start with

 

By charging their rate, if the court allows your claim to go through, then you will have been deemed to have recovered your money AND the money you would otherwise have earned. As such, there is no outstanding 'debt' by the bank to which the 8% applies...effectively you have recovered what you could have got if the bank had not misappropriated your funds...

 

I hope this makes sense...

[Spiceskull]

Hi Lee,

 

When I said you can charge either the s.69 8% APR OR the banks rate, I meant that you apply one of these rates to everything you are claiming. This is 'penalty charges' and 'penalty interest charges'

 

Sorry if that bit wasn't clear. The 'penalty interest' that the bank has charged you is a fixed amount, removed from the account on a fixed date. This info is usually visible on your statements.

 

This is why the wording of the refund request is '...I calculate...charges...and penalty interest...' You then claim interest from the 'date of offence' to 'today' for each individual itemised charge, using one or the other of the two rates mentioned above.

 

I hope that clears up the confusion...

[Spiceskull]

Re: Excel spreadsheet- I have tried numerous times to open the Excel spreadsheet but my quite modern computer will not open the programme. I have only got Adobe Acrobat.

The spreadsheet will not open in Acrobat - you need an application that will open office documents.

 

It appears you do not have Excel, so you need to either use a machine that does have it, or you can install Open Office instead.

 

If you click this link Open Office - you will be able to download a copy, and if you click this link Spreadsheet you can download a spreadsheet that will work with Open Office.

 

If you have problems with either, PM me...

[Spiceskull]

Spiceskull, sorry, yes i see what you mean now.

S'cool - it's my own fault for not explaining myself fully - no need to apologise...

[Spiceskull]

Only real issue is that you can't claim BOTH rates of interest - it is either the contractual rate OR the s.69 rate (8% APR)...

 

Sorry - just noticed that you claimed either/or...not both. Oooops!

[Spiceskull]

There are three rates of interest: s.69 (8% APR), Authorised contractual rate (between 10% and 20%) and Unauthorised contractual rate (usually above 20%)

 

For my big claim, going back to 1982, I am going to use the authorised contractual rate, as that is the only published rate I can find.

 

I think the unauthorised rate would be pushing your luck, because whilst the bank may have taken your money without your authorisation, they could argue that you weren't providing them with a service.

 

However, the 16% you suggest is perfectly reasonable, and you could reasonably have been expected to pay this rate if you were borrowing from the bank for a long time. The judge is also likely to see this as reasonable rather than greedy, and you are therefore more likely to win with this rate.

 

There is still a risk that the bank will try to contest this, especially from a contract perspective, but as a few people are trying the "mutuality and reciprocity" argument there will be planty of feedback to rely on by the time it gets to court.

 

Good luck.

[Spiceskull]

In my opinion, it is unreasonable to assert that you as an individual could command an APR of 16% or anything like, as you do not possess the investment power of a financial institution.

I have to say that it is a fair argument, and more so when you consider that we, as customers, do not hold a consumer credit licence.

 

However, the bank, in being granted the licence and all other privileges, is duty bound to act lawfully. By not doing so, it is breaching the very terms of contract it sets, and therefore the mutuality and reciprocity comes in to force when dealing with those breaches.

 

The argument is not that we are lending money to the banks at 16%, but that the breaches and penalties are applied at this rate...

 

To be honest, I expect the bank to argue more about my estimated charges than about the interest rates...

[Spiceskull]

But looked at another way - if I owed the bank £1,000, and they took me to court to recover it, what interest rate would they claim? You ban bet your bottom dollar it would not be 8% - they would claim a higher rate, and say that losses they incurred justified this...

[Spiceskull]

and I am confident that you will prevail!

That makes two of us...now all that remains to be done is for me to shift my butt, and actually get down to writing those letters...

[Spiceskull]

2) is it possible to scan and OCR into a spreadsheet? if so, please tell me how

It is possible - I know I used to do it with TextBridge Pro.

 

When scanning you usually have a few options: image, newspaper article, letter, table etc, and it is table that you want.

 

I think that once the scan has taken place, instead of RTF the file can be saved as CSV, and hence a spreadsheet.

 

I remember thatthe process was a bugger to get used to, but once familiar, it was relatively straight forward. My only suggestion is to scan and CHECK everything...don't assume that OCR will recognise everything on a statement.

 

Good luck.

[Spiceskull]

The £5K limit applies to your claim (charges plus charges interest, plus contractual interest if you are going down that route)

 

s.69 interest is not includd in the £5K limit, but you cannot charge s.69 PLUS contractual - it is one or the other...

[Spiceskull]

Whilst waiting for an answer I rang my local county court and the man there said the £5k limit was including the 8% interest. This is getting very confusing.

We are checking this now...the status has been that the s.69 was NOT included as part of the claim limit of £5K, and this has been what people have been applying to date. However, interest claimed directly in your claim (such as contractual interest) IS included in the limit.

 

When are you raising your claim?

[Spiceskull]

The £5K limit applies to the claim only. In most cases this will be penalty charges and penalty interest (where it is applied and claimed for)

 

Court costs and s.69 interest (8% APR) are NOT included in the £5K limit...this is covered in the Civil Procedure Rules [26.8 (2)] here