Fred_Funk v NatWest

[Fred_Funk]

Guys,

 

Firstly, I'd like to offer my thanks to those responsible for this website and all the extremely helpful information it contains.

 

I've been dipping in and out of the forums for a few weeks now and have reached the stage where I want to move things forward.

 

I've done my best to avail myself of all the advice offered so freely but, be that as it may, there remain a couple of things I'd like to get clear in my head before proceeding. With that in mind, I'd be grateful if there's anyone who can help me with the following...

 

(1) I've just agreed a repayment plan with the NatWest lending centre to reduce my level of borrowing from in excess of £2,000 to within my £1,000 overdraft facility over the course of the next six months.

 

That being the case, and bearing in mind I would estimate I'm owed a sum in the region of 5k, is this 'a good time' to fire off my DPA letter?

 

That's to say, on receipt of my correspondence, is NatWest likely to renege on our agreement and demand immediate repayment of everything I owe them which, clearly, would cause me significant difficulties?

 

(2) Assuming that, ultimately, I succeed in getting my money back is it safe to assume NatWest will, at that point, either remove my overdraft facility or, worse still, close my account? And, if it's the later, what kind of effect might this have on my already poor credit rating?

 

Thanks in anticipation of your help and co-operation.

 

Fred_Funk

[Fred_Funk]

Omega 3,

 

Thanks for your reply which is pretty much the conclusion I reached myself.

 

Rest assured, I have read the FAQ section and do, I think, have a fairly good grasp of all the issues - it's just nice to have a bit of reassurance you're thinking along the right lines when starting out on something like this.

 

One final thing; can anyone provide me with definitive advice as to which NatWest account charges I can and can't hope to get back? Again, I have trawled through all the threads - or, at least, the great majority of them - but have found a variety of different answers.

 

Thanks again.

 

Fred_Funk

[Fred_Funk]

Thanks again Omega 3.

 

Okay, just a couple more questions which, try as I might, I can't find definitive answers to anywhere...

 

(1) I'm still slightly confused by the precise period for which I can seek repayment of my bank charges. I know it's six years, but how exactly is that defined - is it the six years previous to the date of my initial contact with NatWest seeking reimbursement; the six years prior to the landmark OFT ruling; or something else again?

 

(2) I have all my statements going back more than six years and, assuming I can get a definitive answer to the question above, could make a pretty accurate estimate of all the charges I have incurred without making a DPA request. As I see it, the only advantage to be gleaned from going down the DPA route is that NatWest would be obliged to tell me of any manual interventions and, assuming there were none, this would significantly weaken any defence they might subsequently employ.

 

This being the case, is it worth my while pinging off a DPA request, even though I am already in possession of the majority of this information, or do I have nothing to lose from going straight to the second stage?

 

Once again, thanks in anticipation of your help and cooperation!

 

Fred_Funk

[Fred_Funk]

Sorry for bumping this back to the top but I'm still hoping someone will be able to provide me with some definitive answers to questions 1 and 2, above.

 

Thanks in anticipation.

 

Fred_Funk

[Fred_Funk]

Guys,

 

Sorry for starting a new thread - when I already have one devoted to my claim against NatWest - but this is a question to which, I suspect, I am not the only one seeking an answer.

 

What's more, I have trawled all around the site and while I do not doubt it's out there somewhere, I'm buggered if I can find it!

 

Anyway, it's a simple question - at least, it is if you know the answer...

 

From where does the second lot of interest, ie the one you claim only if things go as far as court, derive? And, more to the point, why is it only applicable if things go that far?

 

Like I say, I'm sure there's a (relatively) straight-forward answer but I'm a journalist not an accountant or a legal expert and I'm blowed if I can work it out.

 

As ever, thanks in anticipation,

 

Fred_Funk

 

Mod note: Answered in Spreadsheet with calculation.

[Fred_Funk]

Guys,

 

As ever, your comments would be very much appreciated. Thanks.

 

Fred_Funk

 

 

 

NatWest Customer Relations

Freepost NAT12685

Borehamwood

WD6 1BR

LETTER BEFORE ACTION

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

Account number: XXXXXXXX

Sort code: XX-XX-XX

 

I am writing to request you refund the charges which you have levied from the above account over the last six years.

 

I understand the regime of fees which you have been applying in relation to unpaid direct debits, returned cheques, unarranged borrowing, etc, etc, is unlawful in common law, statute and consumer regulations and unfair according to the Office of Fair Trading report of April 5, 2006.

If you dispute this, then will you please let me have a full breakdown of the costs you have incurred, in order to reassure me that your penalties are justifiable.

 

With this in mind, I must draw your attention to the terms of the contract which we agreed to when I opened my account. It was an implied term of that contract that NatWest would conduct itself lawfully and in a manner which complies with UK law.

 

I calculate that you have taken £X,XXX, as well as a further £XXX in overdraft charges arising as a direct result of these fees. This equates to a total of £X,XXX.

 

Additionally you have entered a default notice against my credit record. This default occurred merely in respect of unlawful charges levied by you or was the result of impecuniosity caused directly by the taking by you of penalty charges which you had applied unlawfully to my account.

 

In addition to full payment of the sum above I require that you remove the default entry from the register. Please note that mere correction or amendment to the entry will not be acceptable.

 

I hope that you will enter into a sincere dialogue with me about this matter and I am writing this letter to you on the assumption that you will choose to do this rather than patronize me with a standard response.

I will give you 14 days to reply to me accepting, unconditionally, my request in principle and letting me know a date by which I will receive payment.

 

If you do not respond, or you do not respond positively, within this time period, I shall send you a letter before action giving you a further 14 days in which to reflect. I believe that these targets are more than sufficient for a large company such as yours, with dedicated staff and departments.

 

After that, there will be no further communication from me and I shall issue a claim at the expiry of the second deadline.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

Fred_Funk

[Fred_Funk]

Vampiress,

 

With the help of your trusty spreadsheet, I'm in the process of calcualting my £XXX. Unfortunately, I'm at work now and don't have my bank statements to hand so I can't enter my interest payments right now.

 

Be that as it may, I've played around with some imaginary figures and think I get the gist of it.

 

Would it be fair to say that if I take my estimate of previous charges to be zero - the reality I'm sure is rather different but I don't want to make this any more complicated than it already is - and assume that I've utilised my £1,000 overdraft facility almost every month then, in the first instance, the interest on penalties will be negligible but, after a while, it may well represent the entire month's charge?

 

I'm not sure whether a default notice has been placed though I've certainly been threatened with one; I was rather depending on NatWest to tell me if this wasn't the case. Moreover, I find it hard to believe my credit rating hasn't suffered as a result of all the charges I've incurred. All the same, do you think I'd be better to leave this bit out for now pending a response to my DPA letter (I've got all my statements, hence the letter before action, but will be sending off a DPA letter for confirmation of any manual intervention or not, as the case may be.

 

And finally... given my penalties amount to £4,135, I reckon there's every chance the additional interest might well push the total figure over the 5k mark. This being the case, and bearing in mind what's been said about the small claims court and costs, would I be best advised to cap my claim at this level?

 

Thanks again.

 

Fred_Funk

[Fred_Funk]

Guys,

 

The clock is finally ticking; having made a few small changes, sent a copy of my letter before action to NatWest Customer Relations in Borehamwood yesterday - by recorded delivery - and also dropped a copy off at my local branch...

 

NatWest Customer Relations

Freepost NAT12685

Borehamwood

WD6 1BR

LETTER BEFORE ACTION

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

Account number: XXXXXXXX

Sort code: XX-XX-XX

I am writing to request you refund the charges which you have levied from the above account over the last six years.

I understand the regime of fees which you have been applying in relation to unpaid direct debits, returned cheques, unarranged borrowing, etc, etc, is unlawful in common law, statute and consumer regulations and unfair according to the Office of Fair Trading report of April 5, 2006.

If you dispute this, then will you please let me have a full breakdown of the costs you have incurred, in order to reassure me that your penalties are fair and just.

 

With this in mind, I must draw your attention to the terms of the contract which we agreed to when I opened my account. It was an implied term of that contract that NatWest would conduct itself lawfully and in a manner which complies with UK law.

 

I calculate that between June 1, 2000 and May 31, 2006, you will have taken £4,165, as well as a further £660.88 in overdraft charges arising as a direct result of these fees – see enclosed. This equates to a total of £4,825.88.

I hope that you will enter into a sincere dialogue with me about this matter and will provide me with something more than your standard response.

I will give you 14 days to reply to me accepting, unconditionally, my request in principle and letting me know a date by which I will receive payment.

 

If you do not respond, or you do not respond positively, within this time period, I shall send you a letter before action giving you a further 14 days in which to reflect. I believe that these targets are more than sufficient for a large company such as yours, with dedicated staff and departments.

After that, there will be no further communication from me and I shall issue a claim at the expiry of the second deadline.

 

Yours faithfully,

Fred Funk

... am now looking forward to receiving the stock response which, of course, I've already told them I will be dissatisfied with, some time over the course of the next two weeks.

In the meantime, any further advice and/or encouragement would, as ever, be gratefully received.

Thanks again to all those who have helped me get this far - especially Vampiress, without whose spreadsheet I wouldn't have known where to start as regards interest charges.

TTFN

Fred_Funk

[Fred_Funk]

Bugger. No one spotted my deliberate mistake!

 

I inadvertently headed my correspondence 'Letter Before Action' when I should, of course, have titled it 'Preliminary Request for Repayment' or something along those lines.

 

I guess this shouldn't pose a problem - especially as I've been so explicit about exactly what it is I'm looking for - but would, nevertheless, appreciate any reassurance anyone is able to offer.

 

Thanks in anticipation,

 

Fred_Funk

[Fred_Funk]

Thanks Vamp. That's what I was hoping.

 

Fred_Funk

[Fred_Funk]

Guys,

 

I got the standard response to my preliminary request for repayment in the post yesterday - save for one thing; it did not contain the following para which, thus far, seemed pretty standard...

 

The OFT has been in contact with us and with seven other major credit card companies to discuss the level of charges on credit cards. It is important that I emphasise these discussions were limited to charges on credit cards only. We will be considering the detailed statement made on 5 April but the OFT on credit card administration charges and we have until 31 May to respond.

 

... given, it would appear, Nat West has made a conscious decision to remove this para from it's standard response what, if anything, can we read into this?

 

Are they on the back foot? Could it be that they've had their knuckles rapped by someone for attempting to mislead their customers? Perhaps someone with a better legal mind than mine might care to comment.

 

Fred_Funk

[Fred_Funk]

As anticipated, I received the following letter from our mutual friend Mr Higley, on Saturday:

 

Thank you for your letter of 25 May 2006 and I apologise for any dissatisfaction caused by the application of charges to your account.

 

We believe that our charges are fair, reasonable and transparent. We consider that the amounts debited to your account have been applied strictly in accordance with your agreement with us and our published tariff, which we are satisfied, complies with all applicable laws and regulations. We are also committed to ensuring the transparency of the information that we give to our customers about the operation of our products.

 

Consequently, againt that background, we must differ with the views that you have expressed and will not be refunding any of the charges applied to your bank account.

 

I am disappointed to note that you are contemplating legal action against the bank. Whilst I hope you will feel able to reconsider, should you decide to go ahead, please ensure that any Proceedings are served on our Registered Office address, which appears at the foot of this letter*

 

I suspect that this is unlikely to be the answer you might have hoped to receive but nonetheless thank you for taking the time and trouble to contact us.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Stuart Higley

Customer Relations

Interesting, if predictable, that though I offered NatWest the opportunity to justify their charges and asked them not fob me off with their standard response, they failed on both counts.

 

Fortunately, they did at least respond promptly which means I can get on and send my LBA.

 

Bring it on!

 

Fred_Funk

[Fred_Funk]

Here's the letter I sent to NatWest today. As ever, I'd be interested in what anyone might have to say...

Dear Stuart Higley

Account number: XXXXXXXX

Sort code: XX-XX-XX

I am writing in response to your letter of May 26, which, I regret, failed to provide me with any reassurance whatsoever that your penalty charges are fair and just.

In light of that, I maintain that the regime of fees you have levied on my account over the last six years is unlawful in common law, statute and consumer regulations and unfair according to the Office of Fair Trading report of April 5, 2006.

With this in mind, I must, once again, draw you attention to the terms of the contract which we agreed to when I opened my account. It was an implied term of that contract that NatWest would conduct itself lawfully and in a manner which complies with UK law.

As I indicated in my previous letter, I calculate that between June 1, 2000, and May 31, 2006, you will have taken £4,165, as well as a further £660.88 in overdraft charges as a direct result of those fees – see enclosed. This equates to a total of £4,825.88.

I require repayment in full of this money. If you do not comply within 14 days then I shall, without further notice, begin a claim against you for the full amount as well as interest and my costs.

Furthermore, I shall submit a complaint to the Office of Fair Trading on the basis that you have failed to comply with its direction of April 5, 2006, and are, therefore, not a 'fit and proper person' to hold a consumer credit licence under the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

Yours faithfully,

Fred_Funk

cc National Westminster Bank Plc, 135 Bishopsgate, London, EC2M 3UR

[Fred_Funk]

Predictably enough, I received the standard response to my leter before action:

 

Dear Fred_Funk,

 

Thank you for your further letter of 29 May 2006.

 

I regret there is little I can add constructively to my last letter and note your proposed course of action. I have alerted our lawyers and litigation department accordingly. May I please remind you that the address to use when initiating legal documents is that of our Registerd Office, below.

 

Thank you for letting me know of your intentions.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Stuart Higley

Customer Relations

 

Anyway, I've registered on the Money Claim website and have begun to fill in my claim but, despite now having spent huge amounts of time reading up on everything, there are a couple places where I'm still more than a little confused and would appreciate some help...

 

The claimant claims interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year from {date when the money became owed to you} to {the date you are issuing the claim} of £ {put the amount} and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of {enter the daily rate of interest}.

 

Tell me, what do I put for the 'from' date? I mean, some of the money has been owed to me for six years and some just for a matter of days. I assume I take June 1, 2000 - the date I used in my preliminary letter and my letter before action - as the date when money became owed to me.

 

As regards the amount, would I be right in thinking I have to use Vampress's second spreadsheet to calculate this? And, that being the case, I then add this to the £4,825.83 I asked for in my leter before action to arrive at the 'amount claimed'. Yes?

 

Okay, so far so good. Unfortunately, this is where, as far as I'm concerned, it begins to get really tricky.

 

I'm not at all sure what else to put in my 'particulars of claim'.

 

I've read BankFodder's advice in the Bank Templates Library but I'm not sure I'm capable of turning it into the requisite legalese.

 

BankFodder advises...

 

Your action is on the grounds that:

You have a contract with the defendant bank dated XXXX and which is conducted on their standard terms and conditions. You are claiming the return of money taken by the defendant in the way of charges over the last xx years plus the interest they have levied on those charges. The bank's 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. You have repeatedly asked the bank to justify their charges but they have declined to do so.

 

Which I've translated to...

 

I have banked with National Westminster Bank Plc, according to its standard terms and conditions, since 1986. I am now claiming the return of money taken by the defendant in the way of charges over the last six years, plus the interest it has levied on these charges. The bank's 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 Contract 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 its charges but it has declined to do so.

 

... will that suffice?!

 

BankFodder also suggests that you should 'lay out your charges'. That being the case, what degree of detail is necessary? Given the lack of space, am I right to assume this can, at this stage, be fairly simplistic?

 

Right, that's enough for now. Thanks in anticipation of your help and co-operation.

 

Fred_Funk

 

 

 

 

 

[Fred_Funk]

barracad,

 

Thanks for that. As I said, I'm not very good on legalese.

 

Still a bit confused as regards the interest. I used Vamp's spreadsheet which gave me £660.88 interest on penalties totalling £4,165.00.

 

My understanding was that this figure, ie £660.88, represents the interest I wouldn't have incurred were it not for the penalties the bank had unlawfully levied.

 

I thought the statutory 8 per cent interest applicable at the court claim stage was something altogether different and, as far as I can ascertain, involved an entirely separate calculation.

 

Once again, any help gratefully receieved! ;-)

 

Fred_Funk

[Fred_Funk]

Vamp,

 

Hi! Yes, that's as I thought - but it's nice to get some reassurance! ;-)

 

My only question now is how do I calculate the 8 per cent? Am I right in thinking I need to use the second page on your wonderful spreadsheet? Unfortunately, I can't get it to open on this PC otherwise I could probably answer that final question myself.

 

Fred_Funk

[Fred_Funk]

Vamp,

 

Thanks again. I think I'm gonna owe you a drink or two by the end of all this.

 

I'm on my mother's rather prehistoric PD and can't open either page at the minute but, no worries, I don't think it'll be a problem once I'm on a rather better machine. I didn't have any problem opening either page before.

 

As regards re-entering my date, won't I have to do that anyway or is there a way of cutting and pasting it from the first page to the second? If so, do, please, advise me accordingly! ;-)

 

Finally, am I right in thinking, it's a fair bet, barring unforeseen complications, that I should, fingers crossed, be paid out within four or five weeks of filing my claim?

 

Thank you, thank you, thank you! ;-)

 

Fred_Funk

[Fred_Funk]

jonni2bad,

 

Hi! And thanks for the help and encouragement.

 

I've filled out my Money Claim form but hadn't submitted it yet as I was waiting for pay day. That said, if you think it lessens the chances of the bank stalling, I shall go to the county court - which, I believe, is in Exeter where I work - and pick up two N1 forms tomorrow.

 

Assuming I do this and, as a result, have a bit more space to play with, is there anything I can usefully ad to my grounds for action - besides, that is, copies of the spreadsheets?

 

Haven't managed to ascertain whether or not I definitely have a default notice on this account so I'm not pursuing it at the moment but, rest assured, will do so just as soon as I'm in possession of an up-to-date credit report.

 

Thanks again.

 

Fred_Funk

[Fred_Funk]

Guys,

 

Hi! And, once again, thanks for all your help; it really is very much appreciated.

 

Anyway, I've read your posts, done my best to take on board everything you've said and, predictably, now have yet more questions! ;-)

 

Firstly, would I be right in thinking that, on balance, it's probably better to submit a hard copy of the N1 form rather than go through MoneyClaim online?

 

It seems to me it is - on the basis that: (1) I've got more room to put my case; and (2) I can attach spreadsheets detailing my calcualtions and, thereby, lessening the bank's opportunities for stalling tactics.

 

Furthermore, are there any obvious disadvantages to pursuing this course of action?

 

Secondly, barracad suggests that should I opt for this route, I should utilise the Particulars of Claim template on my N1 form. Having had a look at this in the bank templates library, am I right in thinking that this is, in essence, an expanded version of what I would otherwise have put on my MoneyClaim form?

 

Thanks again.

 

Fred_Funk

[Fred_Funk]

Hi guys,

 

I'm back again and, as ever, in need of a little help and reassurance, ;-)

 

It's pay day tomorrow and I'll be visiting the court to hand over my claim form and the requesite £120 but, before I do so, I'd be hugely greatful for answers to the following questions:

 

(1) The top box in the claim form says 'In the' to which, I assume, I add 'County Court of Devon'. Yes?!

 

(2) Under Claimant, I take it I give my full name and address. That being the case, do I also give NatWest's full name and address in the Defendant(s) section or do I not need to give their address, given that there's a further box for the Defendant's name and address at the bottom of the first page?

 

(3) My 'Brief details of claim' reads as follows...

 

Claimant has had a contract with the Defendant, which is conducted according to its standard terms and conditions, since 1986. Claimant is claiming the return of money taken by the defendant in the way of charges over the last six years, plus the interest it has levied on these charges. The Defendant's 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 Contract 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. Claimant has repeatedly asked the Defendant to justify its charges but it has declined to do so. Claimant has had a contract with the Defendant, which is conducted according to its standard terms and conditions, since 1986. Claimant is claiming the return of money taken by the defendant in the way of charges over the last six years, plus the interest it has levied on these charges. The Defendant's 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 Contract 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. Claimant has repeatedly asked the Defendant to justify its charges but it has declined to do so. The Claimant claims interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year from June 2000 to June 2006 of £1,166.17 and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of 0.022%.

... does that seem okay? Moreover, do I need to include the final sentence about interest or can I leave that until the next section, entitled 'Value'?

 

(4) Under 'Value' I have the following...

 

The Claimant claims:

a) the return of the amounts debited in respect of charges in the sum of £4,165.00 and the interest charged thereon of £660.88.

b) Court costs

c) Interest pursuant to section 69 County Courts Act as set out on the attached list of charges from June 2000 to June 2006 of £1,166.17 and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of 0.022%.

... is that alright?

 

(5) For the amount claimed, I've added together: the charges of £4,165; the interest charged thereon of £660.88; and £1,166.17 interest pursuant to section 69 of the County Courts Act to get a total of £5,992.05. Am I right to include the £1,166.17 interest pursuant to section 69 of the County Courts Act at this juncture?

 

(6) I've utilised the Bank Templates Library and typed my 'Particulars of Claim' in the relevant space as follows...

 

1. The Claimant has an account XXXXXXXX with the Defendant which was opened on or around July 1985.

2. During the period in which the account has been operating the Defendant debited numerous charges to the account in respect of purported breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant and also charged interest on the charges once applied. The Claimant understands that the Defendant contends that the charges were debited in accordance with the terms of the contract between itself and the Claimant.

3. A list of the charges applied is attached to these particulars of claim.

4. The Claimant contends that:

a) The charges debited to the Account are punitive in nature; are not a genuine pre-estimate of cost incurred by the Defendant; exceed any alleged actual loss to the Defendant in respect of any breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant; and are not intended to represent or related to any alleged actual loss, but instead unduly enrich the Defendant which exercises the contractual term in respect of such charges with a view to profit.

b) The contractual provision that permits the Defendant to levy such charges is unenforceable by virtue of the Unfair Contract Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations (1999), the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and the common law.

5. Accordingly the Claimant claims:

a) the return of the amounts debited in respect of charges in the sum of £4,165 and any interest charged thereon;

b) Court costs;

c) Interest pursuant to section 69 County Courts Act as set out on the attached list of charges or at such rate and for such periods as the court deems just.

... is there anything to be gained from attatching this on a separate sheet, as suggested here http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=681, or is that not necessary?

 

Thanks in anticipation of your help and co-operation!

 

Fred_Funk

[Fred_Funk]

Vamp et al,

 

Thanks again for the help.

 

Visited the court today, with a copies of my N1 form, in order to check one or two things out with a member of the court staff.

 

While the girl who helped me was very friendly, I have to say I wasn't convinced she was the 'sharpest knife in the drawer' and, with that in mind, would welcome the opportunity to check a couple of things here.

 

Firstly, while my charges are just over 4k, my total claim - including interest incurred as a direct result of those charges and the statutory 8% interest applicable at this stage - is now almost 6k. As it was explained to me, this means I will now have to find £250 to submit the claim.

 

Can someone, please, confirm that this is correct and the fact that my charges are only just over 4k (and my charges plus interest incurred as a result of those charges is still less than 5k) is immaterial?!

 

Secondly, that being the case, does this now mean I am outside the realms of the small claims court and, assuming it does, should this be a cause for concern? That's to say, are the bank more likely to proceed to court and, if so, could I be liable for any costs?

 

All advice gratefully received! ;-)

 

Fred_Funk

[Fred_Funk]

jonni2bad,

 

Thanks. That's what I had been led to believe; I even asked the girl if she was sure she was correct and she was adamant she was.

 

In her defence, on leaving, I picked up a copy of the leaflet EX302: How to make a claim. On Page 5 of this it says...

 

The total figure for interest and the amount you are claiming must be entered in the 'Amount claimed' box in the bottom right-hand corner of the claim form. The fee you will have to pay to issue your claim will be based on this figure.

 

That being the case, and my total figure, with interest, being almost 6k it would seem she might be right after all.

 

If that's not the case then can someone, please, point me in the direction of a definitive statement which spells this out in order that I might take it with me when I return to the court tomorrow morning.

 

 

Confused? You bet I am! Help! ;-)

 

Fred_Funk

[Fred_Funk]

Vamp et al,

 

Thanks for that. Can I just confirm, this means the cost of lodging my claim should be the £120 charged for claims of less then 5k as opposed to the £250 charged for claims of more than 5k?!

 

That being the case, what should one make of the piece I've highlighted from Page 5 of the leaflet EX302, which would appear to suggest otherwise.

 

Eternal thanks for all your help.

 

Fred_Funk

[Fred_Funk]

Vamp et al,

 

Hi! When you said the court was wrong, what precisely were you referring to?!

 

Sorry for labouring things - just trying to get this all straight in my head. ;-)

 

Furthermore, if, as you suggest, I'm going to have to pay £250, am I to take it jonni2bad mistaken when he said otherwise?

 

Thanks again and sorry for being such a pain.

 

Fred_Funk

[Fred_Funk]

jonni2bad, Vamp et al,

 

Thanks for all your help. If I understand you correctly, I can proceed via the small claims track - as my claim excluding interest is less than 5k - but I'll have to pay £250 to do so as, conversely, the figure used when determining cost is inclusive of interest.

 

So far so good?! God I hope so! ;-)

 

Okay, assuming that's the case, should I be concerned about costs. I note it says in EX307: The small claims track...

 

If a claim for more than £5,000 is allocated to the small claims track, the winning party will be able to claim costs, including solicitor's costs, against the losing party. These costs cannot, however, be more than would have been awarded if the case had been dealt with in the fast track.

 

... I'm rather hoping that this isn't applicable to my claim as the basic amount is less than 5k. However, it's not clear from EX307 that this is the case.

 

Thanks in anticipation.

 

Fred_Funk