Jump to content


Claiming more than 6 years


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5176 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi all

I've just submitted a letter before action to the Co-operative Bank, but I think I may have messed up a bit, and could really do with some advice.

My claim against the Co-op is for a measly £140, as that's all I paid in the last six years (I actually closed my account with them two years ago because of punitive charges - wish I'd known about this then). However, I know that I paid several hundred in charges before this six year cut-off point.

When I sent my SAR, I enclosed a £10 cheque and requested details of my full banking history with them. They cashed my cheque, but only sent six years of statements, not the full history I requested. I'm now at the LBA stage, claiming for charges applied in this six year period.

 

My problem - I've decided that I want to reclaim all charges. My SAR asked for full details, but I didn't follow up that letter after receiving only 6 years of statements. The 40 day period elapsed some weeks ago. Should I send another SAR for the other period? Should I send them another tenner? Should I attempt to include the earlier period in my current claim, or start a separate claim for this period?

 

OK - there's more. I also wrote a SAR to MBNA, my credit card company. They returned my cheque, said they disagreed with the OFT's findings, but 'as a gesture of goodwill' gave me a £30 credit. Again, because of this 6 year statute of limitation, I found that all I could claim for in the last six years was £55 (again, much more than that if you go back longer than 6 years). So this left me with the option of taking them to court for £25, which doesn't seem worth it. Should I send them a fresh SAR and ask again for my full financial history with them?

 

Any advice greatfully received

Phil

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, Phil,

Welcome to the forum.

Please start a thread in your banks forum,title it Philk23 V Co-op Bank;

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=8

I am claiming back further than 6 years.Others have also.I will subscribe to your thread and link you to the relivent laws, which you can use in your case.

 

Please take time to read the faq's

use the template letters.

 

LINKS....

FAQs....

Templates Library....

There is also live chat, visit if you need any quick advice.

Finally good Luck.

Happyolddog.

 

If my advice helps please tip the scales, left.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

How long do banks have to keep details for?

 

 

 

Tuesday April 3, 2007

Guardian Unlimited

 

Q I am trying to trace an old account of my father's, who passed away over 15 years ago. I was wondering how long banks are required to keep account records?

MP

 

 

A The really simple answer here is: forever! Seriously, there is no statute of limitations for how long banks have to retain account monies. Accounts become dormant when banks have reason to believe the accountholder address they hold is no longer current - perhaps because they have had returned post or there has been no activity on the account.

Article continuesarrow9x7.gif

Params.richmedia=yes&spacedesc=mpu&site=Money&navsection=4210&section=110264&country=gbr&rand=2959101

However, dormancy does not mean accountholders - or their beneficiaries - lose their rights to the funds in those accounts. Rendering accounts dormant is part of the banks' move to prevent fraud and money laundering. And it basically states that, after 15 years of non-contact, where it seems unlikely the bank and customer will re-establish contact, any funds in the account should be re-allocated to some form of social fund for community projects. Even then, the banks are required to retain a proportion of these funds, in perpetuity, in case the legal accountholder or their heir seeks to reclaim those funds - because the customer's right to those funds remains protected. In order to trace your late father's account, complete the dormant account form on the British Bankers' Association website. Even if you are unsure of all the details of your father's account, the BBA should be able to help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

Back in April 2007:shock: I copied and saved the following to a word doc for future use...

 

"We think that claimants should consider claiming beyond 6 yrs.

 

Firstly, the charges campaign has been in full swing now for a good year. The banks were well aware of it a year ago and also the OFT report highlighted the law and the bank's obligations - just in case any of them were at all in doubt.

 

To my mind this is good evidence that any bank which continued its charges regime after the date of the first OFT report has been concealing its charges regime and therefore has lost the protection of the Limitation Act.

 

I do not believe that the Limitation Act offers any long-stop mechanism so that if you concealed the facts one year ago then you do not merely accrue an additional year of liability. I think that a single instance of concealment invokes s.32 and the limitation barrier falls away completely.

 

Concealment amounts to a question of the morality of the defendant's action. Once this is established then I do not believe that the courts will strive to give them any help.

I understand from Zootscoot that this view is also confirmed by case-law.

 

In fact it seems even if a concealment has occurred even after the breach in question has occurred, the limitation period still falls away.

 

If the banks want to challenge this then it is up to the claimant to respond at least with the arguments above and then if the bank want to rebut this, they can rebut it with a statement of truth.

I doubt whether any of them would dare. They are already getting in too deep as it is.

A statement of truth which is made knowing that it is false or reckless as to its truth is a contempt of court. I do not believe that the banks would go this far

 

We would urge all claimants to claim as far back as they can.

In the case of the Yorkshire and Clydesdale banks we would suggest that even where claimants have accepted full and final settlements or have accepted compromise settlements that they should now go back for anything outstanding on the basis that the Whistleblower disclosures show that there has been concealment and that any full and final agreements are now vitiated by that concealment.

 

We expect to be giving the same advice in respect of other banks as more information surfaces - as it surely will.

 

However, we consider that beyond 6 years is now just a basic claim.

 

We will be amending templates and so forth in the coming days..."

 

Does anyone know if this was ever done .. ie were templates etc amended as I can't see any reference to it. I have 3 claims on the go. Two of the 3 (one with HBOS one with HSBC) go back more than six years. Both claims have been issued, and both have been acknowledged. Both banks are using lawyers (the HSBC one is in house). If they do put in a defence and argue that part of my claim is out of time/ statute barred does anyone have any advice on how to deal with it?

 

Thanks

 

mariaefg

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...