Claiming beyond 6 yrs - important new information!!!

[superclio]

superclio- do you have a friend or family living in England or Wales whose address you could give as a forwarding address?

 

If so, you could use www.moneyclaimonline.gov.uk , courtesy of Her Majesty's Government.

 

Yes, I could possibly use a friend's address. It wouldn't make any difference then that the address for MCOL was different to that on my bank statements? (Which is my US address.)

[oneofakind]

Doesn't make any difference what address you use.

 

doing your 6yr claim now, and another claim later is no problem either.

 

[disgruntled2007]

Disgruntled

Could you please post the wording of your S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) non compliance court claim.

I am looking to file one too, and looking for help with the wording.

thanks

I used the template from the templates library, virtually word for word, just changed a few points of grammar to suit my style of writing...

[Glenn UK]

 

If I go ahead with my current claim for the last 6 years (£991 including interest) would that jeopardize my chances of claiming for more than that at a later date?

 

Not in theory although imho it is best to claim for all charges in one claim, if not you may end up in court fighitng simply over the limitations act and unless you are confident this is not the preferred route.

 

There are strategies to avoid this by keeping the claim together for both pre and post six year charges which makes life potentially easier for you.

 

JMHO

 

Glenn

[thetenter]

Having already sent off the SAR I used a template from another site but only asked for the last six years.........can I now sent a covering letter asking for them to disregard the first and I now want all my info from the date the account was opened,as I haven't yet received anything?

Thx.

[Aoife]

Hi, Is this the wording i need to add for my POC for pre six years? Do you think its worth mentioning s32 or not and if so where can i find some wording on it....

c) The defendant concealed the nature of their charges and lead the claimant to mistakenly continue to pay the unlawful charges believing that they were lawful.

 

d) The claimants right of action has been deliberately concealed from her by the defendant.

 

e) The defendant continues to conceal both the nature of their unlawful charges and account holders rights to recover unlawful charges.

Regards

Aoife

[TheNorthernWarrior]

Hi can anyone tell me if this applies to the Northern as well? I know we can claim as far back as 1999, and I only found that out after claiming from 2000 in November 2006. If so, it would be brill, but at the moment I am still pursuing my 2nd claim and this time my court date is 25th May.

nervous.

[superclio]

Not in theory although imho it is best to claim for all charges in one claim, if not you may end up in court fighitng simply over the limitations act and unless you are confident this is not the preferred route.

 

There are strategies to avoid this by keeping the claim together for both pre and post six year charges which makes life potentially easier for you.

 

JMHO

 

Glenn

 

Glenn,

what are the strategies? I'm thinking it's too difficult to get my other statements unless I fly back (which I can't afford right now) and it seems there is no way Abbey will come up with more than 6 years worth, so I think I have to go ahead with the one claim now. Then whenever I go back (hopefully in the next 12 months) I will try a claim for the pre 6 years worth. Did you just mean keep it as one claim is the best solution? Or is there a strategy as you mentioned?

[zootscoot]

Hi, Is this the wording i need to add for my POC for pre six years? Do you think its worth mentioning s32 or not and if so where can i find some wording on it....

 

c) The defendant concealed the nature of their charges and lead the claimant to mistakenly continue to pay the unlawful charges believing that they were lawful.

 

d) The claimants right of action has been deliberately concealed from her by the defendant.

 

e) The defendant continues to conceal both the nature of their unlawful charges and account holders rights to recover unlawful charges.

 

Regards

Aoife

 

No you need to state that they concealed the cost of dealing with your breaches of contract. There is no need to show the concealment lead to the mistake thay are alternative arguments and not linked. The concealment must relate to facts and not law.

 

Perhaps something on the lines of:

 

In so far as any charges relating to the period before xx/xx/xxxx, the claimant wishes to invoke s.32 of the Limitation Act 1980.

 

The Defendant deliberately concealed the true cost of adminstering the contractual breaches committed by the Claimant and thus an essential fact relevant to the Claimant's right of action was concealed.

 

Alternatively the Claimant paid the charges in the belief that they reflected the true cost of administering the contractual breaches.

 

The Claimant has now discovered, following revelations relating to a similar organisation, that the true costs are likely to be much lower and have thus been concealed and continue to be concealed by the Defendant and that the belief held by Claimant was in fact mistaken.

 

It is thus submitted that in accordance with s.32(1)(b), s32(1)© and s.32(2) that the time period for the purposes of the Limitation Act does not begin to run until my reasonable discovery. This was the 21st March 2007 when the revelations were made public.

[noomill060]

nervous- The Limitation Act 1980 applies in Northern Ireland just as it does in any other part of the UK.

[noomill060]

I will soon be chasing the Northern Bank for charges and compounded contractual interest dating back to 1988.

[zootscoot]

nervous- The Limitation Act 1980 applies in Northern Ireland just as it does in any other part of the UK.

 

...Except Scotland

[Glenn UK]

Glenn,

what are the strategies? I'm thinking it's too difficult to get my other statements unless I fly back (which I can't afford right now) and it seems there is no way Abbey will come up with more than 6 years worth, so I think I have to go ahead with the one claim now. Then whenever I go back (hopefully in the next 12 months) I will try a claim for the pre 6 years worth. Did you just mean keep it as one claim is the best solution? Or is there a strategy as you mentioned?

 

Primarily keep the claim intact ie chsarges both pre and post six years, any defaults and interest so that after allocaiton if they want to argue about anyhting then its all or nothing.

 

HTH

 

Glenn

[TANZARELLI]

 

No you need to state that they concealed the cost of dealing with your breaches of contract. There is no need to show the concealment lead to the mistake thay are alternative arguments and not linked. The concealment must relate to facts and not law.

 

Perhaps something on the lines of:

 

In so far as any charges relating to the period before xx/xx/xxxx, the claimant wishes to invoke s.32 of the Limitation Act 1980.

 

The Defendant deliberately concealed the true cost of adminstering the contractual breaches committed by the Claimant and thus an essential fact relevant to the Claimant's right of action was concealed.

 

Alternatively the Claimant paid the charges in the belief that they reflected the true cost of administering the contractual breaches.

 

The Claimant has now discovered, following revelations relating to a similar organisation, that the true costs are likely to be much lower and have thus been concealed and continue to be concealed by the Defendant and that the belief held by Claimant was in fact mistaken.

 

It is thus submitted that in accordance with s.32(1)(b), s32(1)© and s.32(2) that the time period for the purposes of the Limitation Act does not begin to run until my reasonable discovery. This was the 21st March 2007 when the revelations were made public.

 

I like that Zootscoot, would it be worth adding this into POC or waiting to a later stage of developments:

 

"If the charges are time barred by virtue of Section 5 of the Limitation Act (1980) then I contend that the Defendant has concealed, and continues to conceal that the charges debited are unlawful. If this is not the case, and the Defendant truly believes that these charges are lawful, then I contend that the Defendant is mistaken. As I only became aware during March 2006 that the charges debited were unlawful, then section 32(1)(b), or section 32(1)©, of the Limitation Act 1980 should apply, and the charges debited are therefore within the primary limitation period."

 

 

Or is this repeating the above a bit?

 

Tanz

[bandonbhoy]

Zoot,

 

You advise us that the limitations act does not apply in Scotland.So if bank/credit card company has office in England(whether head or not) can you request those data about your account prior ro the six year period?

Another aspect is that when we send off SAR and comply with our requirements, doesnt the bank be bound to send all detaila that they have on you to you. I am thinking that most take notes wen you phone and send them letters. Within an organisation thye allocate information about you to an employee. The item that has caused your request is given a number, and officer who deals with it, and his report on that matter. So it would be helpful to have all the inofrmation that the bank has on oneself.

Views?

[Lewt]

Hi i m wanting to take hsbc for over 6 years and dont know where to tart where can i find this SAR letter? thanks

[Perseus]

Hi Lewt

 

Here's the link for the SAR letter.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/516-1-data-protection-act.html

You might want to adjust/edit to suit your personal circumstances, or include phrases like ' Further, I wish to receive copies of any/all logs/transcripts/copy letters you hold regarding me. I require disclosure of all information for the entire history of my financial relationship with you.'

 

etc etc

You could change what would suit you, any queries - just ask.

 

Regards

Perseus

[Aoife]

Hi Zoot, thanks so much for your help. Sorry to be a bit slow - but what document are you reffering to dated 21 March 2006?????

 

Aoife

[Glenn UK]

I like that Zootscoot, would it be worth adding this into POC or waiting to a later stage of developments:

 

"If the charges are time barred by virtue of Section 5 of the Limitation Act (1980) then I contend that the Defendant has concealed, and continues to conceal that the charges debited are unlawful. If this is not the case, and the Defendant truly believes that these charges are lawful, then I contend that the Defendant is mistaken.The mistake reffered to in Sec 32 is your mistake in paying the charge not theirs in levying it. As I only became aware during March 2006 that the charges debited were unlawful, then section 32(1)(b), or section 32(1)©, of the Limitation Act 1980 should apply, and the charges debited are therefore within the primary limitation period." The date you became aware of the unlawfulness is not the issue, its the fact they had concealed the unlawfulness of the charges and the fact you had made a mistake which gives rise to the use of Sec 32. It is the date you knew about this that is the effective date from which your 6 year peiord starts running.

 

 

Or is this repeating the above a bit?

 

Tanz

 

JMHO

 

Glenn

[Guest bong]

Hi Zoot, thanks so much for your help. Sorry to be a bit slow - but what document are you reffering to dated 21 March 2006?????

 

Aoife

 

Aoife that should be 21 March 2007 and I think that was the date of Whistleblower.

[Glenn UK]

Zoot,

 

You advise us that the limitations act does not apply in Scotland.So if bank/credit card company has office in England(whether head or not) can you request those data about your account prior ro the six year period? The limitations Act and the six year period have nothing to do with data protection act. If you ask for all your data then they have to send it under the Data Protection Act.

Another aspect is that when we send off S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) and comply with our requirements, doesnt the bank be bound to send all detaila that they have on you to you. No, you can elect to ask for limited data and this is what i believe the S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) template from the site does. The 1st paragraph asks for transaction and charge data, the second paragraph supports the 1st paragraph and asks for details of manual intervention. Some have said that the site template entitles you to all your data, I disagree and think a court would take the same view, if you want it all change the SAR to make it clear and then you wont have a problem. I am thinking that most take notes wen you phone and send them letters. Within an organisation thye allocate information about you to an employee. The item that has caused your request is given a number, and officer who deals with it, and his report on that matter. So it would be helpful to have all the inofrmation that the bank has on oneself.

Views?

 

If you want the bank to supply ALL the data they hold on you then i suggest you amend the template to make that clear.

 

JMHO

 

Glenn

[zootscoot]

I like that Zootscoot, would it be worth adding this into POC or waiting to a later stage of developments:

 

"If the charges are time barred by virtue of Section 5 of the Limitation Act (1980) then I contend that the Defendant has concealed, and continues to conceal that the charges debited are unlawful. If this is not the case, and the Defendant truly believes that these charges are lawful, then I contend that the Defendant is mistaken. As I only became aware during March 2006 that the charges debited were unlawful, then section 32(1)(b), or section 32(1)©, of the Limitation Act 1980 should apply, and the charges debited are therefore within the primary limitation period."

 

 

Or is this repeating the above a bit?

 

Tanz

 

The concealment under s.32 (1) (b) must relate to the facts not the law. You can not therefore claim that they concealed that the charges were unlawful.

 

They concealed the cost of administering the account for breaches of contract which prevented you from being able to determine if the charges were lawful. Which is a concealment of a fact relevant to your right of action. They can not conceal the law from you as this is in the public domain.

 

In relation to mistake under s.32(1)©, it must be the claimant who is mistaken not the defendant.

 

You need to make reference to the Limitation Act in your POC otherwise the defendant is likely to go straight for strike out for the charges outside the six year period.

[chrishoar]

Hi, I have just managed to get back £4110 from Barclays bank and am now interested in challenging them regarding fees that are beyond 6 years ago. Does anyone have any difinitive text I could use firstly in a letter to them secondly when taking them to court.

I understand its relating to the limitations act but am not sure how to word it.....I have already sent for information regarding the amount owed to Barclays but am keen to get my head around the whole thing.

 

Secondly I would just like to say thank you to everyone on here, your posts been an invaluable asset to me both with respect to what I need to do but also giving me confidence in the face of the banks threatening behaviour....

[GRIFF27]

Has anybody been successful claiming beyond 6 years, NatWest are telling me they only hold records for 7 yeats then they are destroyed. Where do I go from here?

[lickthewallfatboy]

Has anybody been successful claiming beyond 6 years, NatWest are telling me they only hold records for 7 yeats then they are destroyed. Where do I go from here?

 

total nonsense of course!!Ask them for a certificate of destruction covering all your data