Fred_Funk v NatWest

[bram stoker 554]

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.Fred_Funk

Hi Fred,

You are correct. You claim the penalties, the interest charged on penalties, and then, on top of all of that you claim the 8%.

 

Make sense?

[Fred_Funk 72]

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

[bram stoker 554]

Yes, it's the second page. why can't you open it? This seems odd. I can send you an updated spreadsheet if you PM me your email address, but you'll have to re-enter your data. Yeuck.

[Fred_Funk 72]

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

[bram stoker 554]

Fred,

You can buy me a drink anytime hun, hell, I'm quite pashishted as I type.

 

The details from the first page link into the second, so you don't need to worry about re-entering data.

 

How long till you get your money. Hmmmmm. Can't say. The banks have now started to get wise and use new tactics and tricks. Believe you are right. I do. Fight it out correctly, and you'll get it. PM me if things go wildly astray from the norm on the site. I'll fight with you.

 

Don't worry, we are all charged unfairly, and will be recompensated.

 

Good luck.

PM me your email if you prefer.

[jonni2bad 1,817]

Hi Fred

 

I've only just picked up on this thread after speaking to Vamps.

 

If you haven't already submitted your claim through MoneyClaim online, you might wish to consider doing it in person at your local County Court. This gives you more space for wording your claim and you can also include a copy of the spreadsheet which might be useful given some banks current position on this matter (stalling proceedings because they don't have a breakdown, even though they could get their own!).

 

If doing this, you need to submit 2 duplicate N1 forms and spreadsheets, one for the court and one for the bank.

 

It also gives you an opportunity to see what a Court looks like, speak to staff etc and generally feel more comfortable about the possibility of having to attend one.

 

I also note from earlier posts that you had considered the removal of a default notice as part of your claim - have you decided to drop this? If so, you can always deal with it separately afterwards, or you can still add details at this stage. The wording has to be quite specific, as I'm just finding out for myself, but we could guide you through it.

 

Default removals are somewhat based on the levels of charges imposed at the time of issue v the amount in debt, so this is very important if you wish to persue it.

 

In my case, £700 default v £2000 in charges would show that the default was made up entirely of unlawful charges.

 

Someone with a £2000 default v £700 in charges would have difficulty persuading a judge that it was imposed incorrectly.

 

Best of luck, you're in good hands here!

[Fred_Funk 72]

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

[barracad 1,917]

There is a PDF version of the N1 Claim Form on this site in the library with the other templates. There is also an example Particulars of Claim you can use for the N1 form.

[Fred_Funk 72]

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

[bram stoker 554]

Yes, yes, yes.

 

I can't see any disadvantage except the walk from your pc to the court to file the form.

 

Lead the way, Fred.

[Fred_Funk 72]

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

[bram stoker 554]

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

 

If that's the name of the court. Is it not County Court of Exeter?

 

(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?

 

Full name and address in the top box - your local branch's address.

 

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

 

... 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'?

 

Could be much much briefer. All this is in the particulars.

 

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

 

... is that alright?

 

Cool.

 

(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?

 

Yes.

 

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

 

 

... 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?

 

Not necessary.

 

 

 

Fattie is raising his claim today and I'm off with him to court at lunchtime to help him do so. Big day all round.

 

Good luck.

[bram stoker 554]

Just discovered you do need to complete the address box at the bottom of the page as well as at the top. Can't see the point in this but never mind.

 

I'll update Fattie's thread later this evening, should be worth a laugh. Will be looking out to see how your day went Fred.

[Fred_Funk 72]

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

[jonni2bad 1,817]

It seems as though you did indeed pick a blunt one Fred.

 

Totals (for the point of view of determining track) are based on charges total only and exclude interest and costs.

 

The only time that interest would be included is where you were claiming more than 8% (i.e. contractual interest).

 

You should phone the court in the morning as get someone there to confirm this, and to point that member of staff to the nearest guide book.....

[Fred_Funk 72]

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

[bram stoker 554]

I have been informed...

 

The 8% is subject to cpr 26.

The court is wrong and you should phone them and ask them in that case what is the meaning of cpr 26.8 (2) - then listen to the confused silence.

The courts are not noted for their efficiency or their high level of staff training.

 

Hope this helps. It means your payment is based on the total including the 8%, but the claim is still within the small claims court procedure.

 

Vamp.

[Fred_Funk 72]

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

[bram stoker 554]

Sorry Fred, as I said before, I believe your payment is based on the total including the 8%. So the higher amount of £250.

[Fred_Funk 72]

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

[jonni2bad 1,817]

Hi Fred

 

Sorry that this has caused confusion. I stated that the totals for determining track would be excluding interest, so this should still be small claims track. However, I had also wrongly presumed it would be the case for court fees too.

 

Vamp has now checked and the court fee will be £250 (although fully reclaimable).

[Fred_Funk 72]

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

[Fred_Funk 72]

Guys

 

I'm on the point of putting in a claim against NatWest for unlawful bank charges, as well as contractual interest (compounded) under the principle of mutuality and reciprocity.

 

I've sent of my prelim letter and my LBA - both of which went unanswered - and am now ready to submit my court claim.

 

I understand, I think, the pros and cons of asking for contractual interest (compounded) having spent many hours reading around the forum. However, I'm desperately trying to find a copy of someone else's Particulars of Claim for while I think I've got my head around all the arguments, I'm not great at writing in legal jargon.

 

Now, I know that someone on here someone who's gone for contractual interest (compounded) must have posted a copy of their Particualrs of Claim but I'm buggered if I can find 'em - and, yes, I have tried using the search facility.

 

If anyone can pint me in the right direction - ideally with a link - it would be very much appreciated.

 

Thanks in anticipation

 

Fred_Funk

[Bankershost 1]

Hi Fred.

 

I'm just a beginner too but this is an outline of my recently submitted POC which I poached from somewhere on this forum:

 

Particulars of Claim

 

1. The Claimant has a Nationwide Flex Account: ************* ("the Account") with the Defendant. The Flex account was opened on or around **/**/****.

 

2. The Accounts are governed by the Defendant’s Personal Banking Terms and Conditions (“the contract”)

 

3. During the period in which the Account has been operating the Defendant has debited numerous charges to the Accounts in respect of purported breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant and also charged interest on the charges once applied.

 

4. The Claimant understands that the Defendant contends that the charges were debited in accordance with the terms of the contracts between itself and the Claimant.

 

5. A schedule of charges are attached to these particulars of claim.

 

6. The Claimant will further rely on the Office of Fair Trading’s (“the OFT”) statement of 5th April 2006 concerning default charges in credit card contracts, as the OFT’s recommendations regarding standard default terms in credit card contracts have wider implications, as regards bank current Account agreements.

 

7. The Claimant thus contends that:

a) The charges debited to the Accounts:

i) are punitive in nature;

ii) are not a genuine pre-estimate of cost incurred by the Defendant;

iii) exceed any alleged actual loss to the Defendant in respect of any breaches of contract

on the part of the Claimant;

iv) are not intended to represent or relate 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) Further to 7.a), the charges debited to the Accounts are penalties rather than liquidated damages. A charge is held to be a penalty if the sum stipulated for is extravagant and unconscionable in amount in comparison to the greatest loss that could conceivably be proved to have followed from the breach. A penalty clause is void in its entirety and unenforceable. The precedent for this was Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v New Garage and Motor Co Ltd [1915] AC 79, along with Murray v Leisure Play [2005] EWCA Civ 963. It was held that a contractual party can only recover damages for an actual loss or liquidated losses. It is clear that these charges do not reflect any actual and or real loss

 

c) 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.

 

d) In the alternative to 7.a), b) and c), if the Court finds that the charges are not a penalty, then the Claimant contends that they are unreasonable within the meaning of s.15 Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982

 

8. Contractual Interest

a) The Claimant claims compound interest on the amounts claimed under the principle of mutuality and reciprocity in the contract between the Claimant and the Defendant, using the rate and method specified in the said contract, and as is applied by the Defendant to monies it is owed.

 

b) The Claimant’s grounds for seeking restitution of the compounded contractual rate of interest is that the Defendant would be unjustly enriched if the Claimant's entitlement was limited to the statutory rate of interest in that the Defendant has had use of the sums and would have used these sums to re-lend at commercial compounded rates.

 

c) The Claimant contends that the taking of unlawful penalties from the Claimant’s Accounts is unauthorised borrowing by the Defendant. Therefore, under the principle of mutuality and reciprocity in the contract between the Claimant and the Defendant, in the first instance the Claimant has calculated compound interest at the Defendant’s current unauthorised overdraft rate of **%.

 

d) A list of charges, interest calculated and rate used are attached to these Particulars of Claim.

 

9. Accordingly, the Claimant claims:

a) The return of the amounts debited between **/**/**** and **/**/**** in respect of charges and interest charged thereon in the sum of £****

 

b) The removal of the default applied to the Claimants Credit file by ******. Under section 14 of the Data Protection Act 1998, a Court has the authority to order the removal of inaccurate data. It is my belief that ****** entered details of this default solely due to the level of unlawful charges imposed on my bank account prior to *****, specifically that the default amount was the sum of £**** and the level of unlawful charges was £****.

 

Further, under section 13 of the Data Protection Act, it is possible to claim for compensation for failure to comply with the requirements of section 14. Whilst not part of my existing claim, I shall retain the right of further action under this clause in the future, should I see fit.

 

c) All applicable Court fees

 

d) Contractual interest at an annual **.**% compounded daily from the date of each transaction to **/**/**** of £****, as detailed in the list of charges attached hereto, and also interest at the same rate, from this date, up to the date of judgment or earlier payment, at a daily rate of £****.

 

Statement of Truth

 

Dated this 23rd March 2007.

I believe that the contents of these particulars of claim are true.

 

Signed:

Hope that this is of some use to you and good luck!

 

[Fred_Funk 72]

Bankershost

 

Thanks for sharing your Particulars of Claim. Since posting yesterday, I've stumbled across the POCs used by Midzai and Lucid - who were also claiming contractual interest (compounded).

 

I've pasted theirs below and would be intersted in the opinion of you and others as to which is most appropriate.

 

Thanks in anticipation

 

Fred_Funk

 

Originally Posted by Mindzai & Lucid (Particulars of Claim)

 

1. The Claimants have a joint account xxxxxxxx ("the Account") with the Defendant which was opened on or around [DATE].

 

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 Claimants and also charged interest on the charges once applied. The Claimants understand that the Defendant contends that the charges were debited in accordance with the terms of the contract between itself and the Claimants.

 

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

 

4. The Claimants contend that:

 

a) The charges debited to the Account, as outlined in the attached schedule, 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 Claimants; 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. In the event that the charges are not a penalty, they are unreasonable under The Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 section 15. The Defendant has declined to justify the charges.

 

b) The contractual provision that permits the Defendant to levy such charges is unenforceable by virtue of The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations (1999) paragraph 8 and schedule 2(1)(e), The Unfair Contracts Terms Act 1977 section 4 and the common law.

 

5. Accordingly the Claimants claim:

 

a) the return of the amounts debited in respect of charges in the sum of £1162 and interest charged thereon in the sum of £138.23;

 

b) Court costs;

 

c) the additional costs incurred by the Claimants in the writing and sending of letters to the Defendant pursuant to this claim in the sum of £18, as set out in the attached list of costs.

 

d) the Claimants claim contractual interest at a rate of 29.85% per annum, from the date of each transaction to 7th September 2006, which is £285.11, as set out in the attached list of charges. The Claimants further claim interest, on the resulting total of £1585.34, at the same rate up to the date of judgement or earlier payment, at a daily rate of £1.30 per day.

 

The account’s Terms and Conditions specify the interest payable on unauthorised drawings from the account. The Claimants hold that this applies to unauthorised drawings by the Defendant as well as to unauthorised drawings by the Claimants. Should the court deem this incorrect, the Claimants claim the rate to be justified under the principle of mutuality and reciprocity, and is based on the Defendant’s unauthorised overdraft interest rate that would be applied under the terms of the above mentioned account.

 

Should the court find that this interest rate is not applicable, then in the alternative the Claimants claim contractual interest at a rate of 18.2%, from the date of each transaction to 7th September 2006, which is £170.43, as set out in the attached list of charges. The Claimants further claims interest, on the resulting total of £1470.67, at the same rate up to the date of judgement or earlier payment, at a daily rate of £0.73 per day.

 

The account’s Terms and Conditions specify the interest payable on authorised drawings from the account. The Claimants hold that this applies to authorised drawings by the Defendant as well as to authorised drawings by the Claimants. Should the court deem this incorrect, the Claimants claim the rate to be justified under the principle of mutuality and reciprocity, and is based on the Defendant’s authorised overdraft interest rate that would be applied under the terms of the above mentioned account.

 

Should the court find that this interest rate is not applicable, then in the alternative the Claimants claim interest under Section 69 of the County Court Act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum calculated from 3rd November 2003 to 7th September 2006, which is £72.82 and continuing until payment or the date of judgement at a daily rate of £0.28.

 

We believe that the contents of these particulars of claim are true.