Claiming beyond 6 yrs - important new information!!!

[cred1]

hi,

i have claimed my charges back on a few accounts and got all charges back from the last 6 years, can i claim back more than 6 years from the same account i have already had charges refunded from, as i can remember some of the banks said that i had to agree not to claim again on the same account?

 

thanx

cred1

[thereshope!]

Hi

I was sent the 'diary notes' of my NATWEST account dating back to 1990,however no statements.

 

I would have thought that if transcripts of my phonecalls and copies of letters are archived,then it would be reasonable to expect statements to be available ?

[Glenn UK]

Cave vs Robinson April 2002

 

Lord Millet said

 

25. In my opinion, section 32 deprives a defendant of a limitation defence in two situations: (i) where he takes active steps to conceal his own breach of duty after he has become aware of it; and (ii) where he is guilty of deliberate wrongdoing and conceals or fails to disclose it in circumstances where it is unlikely to be discovered for some time. But it does not deprive a defendant of a limitation defence where he is charged with negligence if, being unaware of his error or that he has failed to take proper care, there has been nothing for him to disclose.

 

 

FWIW I have already claimed back from 1997 against abbey and ther specifically stated they would not defend the charges pre six years old.

 

Cant say it will always be the same though.

 

Glenn

[Guest bong]

Hi

I was sent the 'diary notes' of my NATWEST account dating back to 1990,however no statements.

 

I would have thought that if transcripts of my phonecalls and copies of letters are archived,then it would be reasonable to expect statements to be available ?

 

see here thereshope (and there is hope:D ) http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/80683-please-post-how-far.html#post715506

[Keez]

Hi, I have not as yet attempted to recover my charges, but have recenlty been served by a county court over the recovery of my debt to my old bank Nat West, would I able to request in the county court that the bank should be asked to produce my statements as far back as possible and should I seek legal help and advice on this matter. If I can go back further than the six years or make a request whilst in court would this be accepted??

[HydraUK]

What about the doctrine of Laches, though?

[noomill060]

When I started college in 1985 I opened an account with Barclays (this bank was viewed as politically unsound by the Student Union at the time, because of Barclays support for their apartheid government of South Africa)

 

Anyway- they were giving Barclaycards to anyone who asked, so I grabbed one.

 

Ran up massive debt and got lots of charges and eventually paid off the lot in 1987 and never used it again.

 

Reapplied in 1999 and the letter they sent with the new card said "Welcome back Noomill060!" - with a credit limit far higher than you would expect if you were a new customer.

 

They clearly remembered me, so its fairly clear that they do hold records for far longer than the magic 6 years.

[noomill060]

The Doctrine of Larches?

 

Wasn't that a 4th century essay by a rather repressed Bishop of Damascus, chastising his congragation for their continued worship of trees?

[noomill060]

keez- send Nat West the current Subject Access Request template, suitably modified for your own circumstances, this will put the debt in dispute and should prevent any further action being taken.

 

You must also write to the court telling them that the debt is in dispute as you believe it contains unlawful penalty charges and that you intend to claim back all unlawfully applied charges and interest levied upon them.

[noomill060]

And keez- Just so we can start to help you, it would be best of you started a thread of your own (keez v Nat West) so that we know whats happening in your case and where to find you.

 

You are among friends here.

[Enron]

Would this have any relevence, House of Lords case:

 

Swiss Re Public Web Site

 

Also remember reading another Lords case whereby it was outlined that the limitations act should only run from the time the claimant becomes aware of the offence carried out.

[wsm36]

Ok this still hasn't been answered yet, does this apply in Scotland?, we are getting screwed on 3 fronts here,

 

1: the 5 year limitation

2: the £750 small claims limit

3: the banks, of course

[paulwlton]

What about the doctrine of Laches, though?

 

Myself, Glenn uk, and others have debated the equitable Doctrine of Laches in certain threads and we are of the opinion that Laches can only be used if the banks have been prejudiced by our delay in making a claim. Clearly they haven't.

 

Paul

[BankFodder]

There are many other reasons as well why laches woudn't apply.

Foremost is the fact that if you want to rely upon Equitable doctrines, you must yourself have acted in utmost good faith.

I doubt whether this can be said of the banks.

[BankFodder]

Ok this still hasn't been answered yet, does this apply in Scotland?, we are getting screwed on 3 fronts here,

 

1: the 5 year limitation

2: the £750 small claims limit

3: the banks, of course

On the 5 yr limit, you are actually doing very well.

The Scottish limit runs from the date upon which you should reasonably known about the breach - meaning the unlawfulness of the charges.

There is a long stop of 20 yrs but this is of no relevance to most people

[TANZARELLI]

Cave vs Robinson April 2002

 

Lord Millet said

 

 

 

 

FWIW I have already claimed back from 1997 against abbey and ther specifically stated they would not defend the charges pre six years old.

 

Cant say it will always be the same though.

 

Glenn

 

Do you have a link for this case Glenn??

[zootscoot]

Cave v Robinson:

 

Cave v. Robinson Jarvis & Rolf [2002] UKHL 18 (25th April, 2002)

[hayes]

Would this claiming further than six years apply to business accounts too? the HSBC almost put me out of business, I have all my bank statements from the start of my business.

[oneofakind]

For the benefit of myself, and maybe more than a few others, could someone explain 'laches' please?

 

D. :confused:

[Glenn UK]

Laches (equity) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

extracted from the above

 

Laches is an equitable defense, or doctrine, in an action at law. The person invoking laches is asserting that an opposing party has "slept on its rights", and that, as a result of this delay, that other party is no longer entitled to its original claim. Put another way, failure to assert one’s rights in a timely manner can result in claims being barred by laches. Laches is a form of estoppel for delay. In Latin,

Vigilantibus non dormientibus æquitas subvenit. Equity aids the vigilant, not the negligent (that is, those who sleep on their rights). In most contexts, an essential element of laches is the requirement that the party invoking the doctrine have changed its position as a result of the delay. In other words, the defendant is in a worse position now, than the defendant was at the time the claim should have been brought. For example, the delay in asserting the claim may have caused a great increase in the potential damages to be awarded; or assets that could earlier have been used to satisfy the claim may have been distributed in the meantime; or the property in question may already have been sold; or evidence or testimony may no longer be available to defend against the claim.

[7givenchy]

Would anyone know how long the royal bank of scotland and halifax keep our account records for? If this all works out then like a previous member to this thread my life would change considerably. They have taken that much money from me in the past whilst bringing up a family.

 

In July of last year I requested statments for the previous 10 years

from HBOS.

[7givenchy]

I currently have a small claims action beyond 6 years against HBOS.

They lodged a defence that the claim was time barred. At the recent third hearing HBOS failed to attend. The Sheriff said legally he was required to allow them the chance to defend the action as they had previously lodged a defence. The hearing is set for the 14 May

[patrisha11]

Hi,

As i previously stated I applied for and received 10years worth of statements in Jul 06. That must be a prescedent of some sort...

 

They have offerred £917.00 from £2079.00 I have just swent refusal of settlement e-mail and letter today, Will start court proceedings in 14 days time...

 

Patrisha11

[oneofakind]

Thanks, Glenn.

 

So, the Bank's defence would be that we, the consumers, failed to exercise the rights that the Bank still insists we don't have ??

 

Interesting defensive strategy.

[kashie]

I'm already in the middle of a claim with barclays, does this mean that I can send in a request using the original template asking for 12 years instead of 6 years statements?