Claiming beyond 6 yrs - important new information!!!

[Celicaman]

Yes you can, i think as long as you did not sign the 'full and final claim' letter from bank, you can file a second claim and as long as you have the statements to back up your claim.

 

I have one at MCOL nearing the end for 6 years worth and am going to start claim now going back to 1993, and luckily for me they have also recently charged me for going OD again, so i can claim that with the old claim, this will help my claim because the bank cannot ask for it to be thrown out on the time limitations excuse as some of the claim will be recent.

 

 

I also have claims for 3 business accounts pre 6 years that i am currently working on, but need to make sure got all correct info as i know first refusal on all them will be the time limitations excuse, so i am trying to find out how to word the letters to rebuke this before they even start.

Good luck

[Celicaman]

Probably the same way that they have told us for years that what they are charging us is legal & correct, and we beleive them so we allow them to charge what they want, if we sign the declaration, WE believe we have no rights to do anything else, so we dont, its more miss leading again isnt it

[Celicaman]

Disgruntled,

We are in same boat Re charges over 6 years and new charges and i have MCOL claim in against HSBC.

I am relibly informed by Bong that its better to leave the existing claim in to run its course and start new claim for over 6 years and latest together.

Also as one of the claims is Post 6 years, there is less chance of the court not accepting it due to the limitations act.

Im still working on how to word initial letter template for this claim as well because i know they will send straight back saying cant claim more than 6 years etc.

Actually it will more than likeley say 'you cant claim at all, our charges are fair blah blah blah and even if you could claim, you couldnt go past 6 years.......'

Wrong answer !!!!!

Let us know how you get on

[Celicaman]

Hi

Have you checked out bongs claim, 13 years worth........ inspiring

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/hsbc-bank/76820-calling-all-hsbc-claimants.html#post671596

 

and

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/lloydstsb-successes/26172-mindzai-lucid-lloyds-tsb.html

 

another pioneer, and one to follow, both have helped inspire me to start 20 year claims ( actually just finished doing spreadsheet, i am totally pink eyed now , hell its 11pm and the bar just opening )

 

CM

[Celicaman]

Sorry second thread is contractual interest not claim over 6 years, but there are others

[Celicaman]

i thought we just used the current bank rate for CI.

I have claims going back to 1990 as well and was using 18.3% HSBC current OD interest rate

1990 rates would be high as mortgage rates then were something like 15% hate or actually love to think what that would do to the amount claimed on CI

Could you clarify Zootscoot

[Celicaman]

Does anyone know if this applies to charges on Business accounts. Barclays' charges (many of them their fault because they were posting our deposits to the wrong account) caused our buiness to fail in the 1990s - would love to get something back from them!

 

Hi Gran, Business claims are a little different in the wording of the LBA, Pre lim and court claims, only in as such certain terms are not the same ( IE consumer laws etc)

As a business i hope you still have your statements and any summary of charges sheets ( my bank is HSBC and may differ from yours), if you do start to look at doing a spreadsheet of the charges.

It all seems very comlex, but persevere, the more you read the more you learn that its not that hard to see it all through to the end, and getting your money back.

there are something like 150 thousand members of CAG and many of us will help you, we dont all know it all, but there is always somebody somewhere that can help fill in the blanks.

 

CM

[Celicaman]

Hi Gran, you have a fight on hands here.

All of the banks at this point are only supplying copies of statements going back 6 years,with the excuse they are not legally bound to supply/ keep anything older, its all total rubbish of course, but its getting the info out of them.

Would your accountant have copies. I take it all the old business books have been disposed of;

wish i could give brighter news, but without copies/ proof of charges, you dont have much if anything to put a claim in.

Really hope you can find something

Kind regards & wishes

 

CM

[Celicaman]

Has anyone had any success with claiming beyond the 6 years?

 

Hi have a read of Bongs claim

 

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/80486-claiming-beyond-6-yrs-new-post.html

 

You need to word claim to get Limitations act removed/discounted

 

CM

[Celicaman]

Sorry celicaman but the link goes full circle and back to here!

 

 

I just knew we would end up chasing our tails one day LOL

 

sorry bout that try this one

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/hsbc-bank/33005-bong-hsbc-contractual-interest.html

 

that looks much better

 

CM

[Celicaman]

Hi Concensus of opinion seem to be keep claim together, pre 6 years and post 6 years.

If you only had Pre six years, there is more chance you could lose on the 6 year limitations act, with post 6 years together with post 6 years, it cant be thrown out of court on those grounds.

if yiou are going to claim for the pre years, make sure you learn your arguments for disposing with the limitations act

Not sure on other stuff as time for bed.

Will try to follow thread later

 

CM

[Celicaman]

I only have pre 6 years for Barclays Businesss account. Is it worth having a go anyway - am I right in thinking the most we can lose is our £10 S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) and the MCOL fee' date=' or am I talking rubbish? I don't have the statements but from memory we were getting charges on a daily basis so the claim must be worth thousands. Don't want to start something and end up having to fork out for legal representation or paying costs of their legal fees.[/quote']

 

Hi Gran. I take it you do not have any of your business books / accounts anymore, as i think it is going to be almost impossible to get copies of statements back from the bank. THey are all saying they dont have them past 6 years , which frankly we all know is a load of tosh.

You can try with a SARS request and they may well send your £10 back.

If you did get to claim stage, and it is in the small claims court (under £5K ), the only risk is the fee that you have to pay and that is determined by the amount of the claim. a £1500 claim costs £120. Not sure how high it goes for higher claims.They cannot claim back the costs against you for their legal fees or representation.

This is the beauty of small claims, it allows for the small fish to claim against large corps without risk of being hit with large legal bills if they lost.

But first you need statements, get those and then see where to go next.

Does your accountant not have copies. Are they not filed away somewhere. Some people keep the statements even when the main accounts are destroyed .Try to think of anywhere they might be.

Good luck

CM

[Celicaman]

Well done skeggs, you have achieved the impossible, maybe you could give some help to garys gran in how to get them from barclays.

There is no other risk than what you have already stated as i presume would still be small claims and even if over 5K it goes fast track and can be asked to be still classified as small claims, cant remember how, but read up on fast track f it applies to you.

As for can you claim, i suppose it depends if you signed the acceptance and how it was worded, you will have to look at that.

 

Limitations act is another thing, but can be got past. Have a look in the claiming past yrs threads, and Bongs claim (13 years), looking for items ref limitations act S32 part 2 (B) and ©

also i think its....... was going to say consumer regs, but actually its something else because post 1997 i think ( not up on that bit , better check before using it )

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/80486-claiming-beyond-6-yrs.html#post712882

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/hsbc-bank/33005-bong-hsbc-contractual-interest.html

 

You may want to consider Claiming CI, but read up on it a lot before you go for that, but acheivable if you go that way. ( will be a bit longer to wait as they do like to fight about it before giving it up lol)

Do you have any new charges you could add to either or both of your claims, it is better if you have as the whole claim has less chance of being thrown out as it would wholly pre 6 years, there is no reason why it should anyway, just adds extra weight to your claim.

 

Hope that helps, Good luck

CM

[Celicaman]

Hi, My claim is due to go to mercantile in leeds on 28th june, It is for about 7 yrs with A&L. I do'nt have to do a bundle...but A&L have put in their case management sheet that it should be struck out due to the SOLA. Any advice would be great...does anyone know of any cases that have got to court that are pre6yrs?

Jenny

 

Hi

Firstly confused why you dont need to do a bundle ?, even for a hearing you need bundle, how else will you defend the banks action above.

 

Dont know of any that actually got to court, but see bongs thread, she got back 13 years worth and won.

You need to read up on the SOLA and find s32 part 2 (B) & © and use that to defend them trying to get it struck out

also there is something in the UTCCR somewhere, just cant remember where at moment

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/hsbc-bank/33005-bong-hsbc-contractual-interest.html

 

Bongs claim was against HSBC but a lot of the stuff is relevant to any claim, have a read

 

CM

[Celicaman]

Hi JB,

i have a notice of allocation/directions hearing in July, and rang court to find out i still need bundle for that. But if thats what they have told you, then fine.

 

SOLA 32.--

• (1) .... where in the case of any action for which a period of limitation is prescribed by this Act, either-
  • (a) the action is based upon the fraud of the defendant; or
    
  • (b) any fact relevant to the plaintiff's right of action has been deliberately concealed from him by the defendant; or
    
  • © the action is for relief from the consequences of a mistake;

  [*]the period of limitation shall not begin to run until the plaintiff has discovered the fraud, concealment or mistake (as the case may be) or could with reasonable diligence have discovered it. ....

In your defence, you could argue that you only became aware of the unlawful act during the whistleblower programme on BBC on 21 March 2007 and the OFT report of 5 April 2006.

 

The fact that the banks have continued to conceal the actual damage caused by claimant's breach of contract means that they cannot rely on the Limitation Act 1980. Therefore their reliance on the Limitation Act 1980 is null and void.

(2) For the purposes of subsection (1) above, deliberate commission of a breach of duty in circumstances in which it is unlikely to be discovered for some time amounts to deliberate concealment of the facts involved in that breach of duty. . . . (5) Sections 14A and 14B of this Act shall not apply to any action to which subsection (1)(b) above applies (and accordingly the period of limitation referred to in that sub-section, in any case to which either of those sections would otherwise apply, is the period applicable under section 2 of this Act).

 

The fact that the banks have continued to conceal the actual damage caused by claimant's breach of contract means that they cannot rely on the Limitation Act 1980. Therefore their reliance on the Limitation Act 1980 is null and void. (Quote taken from bankfodder post)

[Celicaman]

This is all part of dirty tactics by the banks, if you were not Part Of CAG, this would all frighten you and me ino backing off.

Because only part of your claim is alledgedly protected by SOLA, it would be less likely to be thrown out anyway compared to a full pre 6 year claim.

Dont know how you reply to this, I take it you have to fill a form in.

in reply.

I suppose you would say that you will be relying on the SOLA parts 32 parts 1, A, B & C and part 2 A & B and also the relevant part from the UTCCR to stating the part about when the unlawful acts came to light. and then the part about the banks continuing to conceal their charges etc to Null & void.

I doubt at this point that you have to actually quote the acts, its more about what you will be using to substantiate your claim.

See how fast they run then

 

Hope that helps

CM

[Celicaman]

Good luck with theses cases. I am watching and learning!!

 

Hey Kenny, Dont follow me im Lost Too LOL

 

Any advise given here is totally fictional and bares no resemblence to any person living here or in my head, i think ?

[Celicaman]

Hers the UTCCR bit that is needed

Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regs. 1999

 

INDICATIVE AND NON-EXHAUSTIVE LIST OF TERMS WHICH MAY BE REGARDED AS UNFAIR

 

 

1. Terms which have the object or effect of-

 

excluding or limiting the legal liability of a seller or supplier in the event of the death of a consumer or personal injury to the latter resulting from an act or omission of that seller or supplier;

 

(b) inappropriately excluding or limiting the legal rights of the consumer vis-à-vis the seller or supplier or another party in the event of total or partial non-performance or inadequate performance by the seller or supplier of any of the contractual obligations, including the option of offsetting a debt owed to the seller or supplier against any claim which the consumer may have against him;

 

© making an agreement binding on the consumer whereas provision of services by the seller or supplier is subject to a condition whose realisation depends on his own will alone;

 

(d) permitting the seller or supplier to retain sums paid by the consumer where the latter decides not to conclude or perform the contract, without providing for the consumer to receive compensation of an equivalent amount from the seller or supplier where the latter is the party cancelling the contract;

 

(e) requiring any consumer who fails to fulfil his obligation to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation;

If its for a bundle then i think you need the whole document, but that is the part that is relevant to claims

CM

[Celicaman]

Forgot to add,

although the letters have different job titles under the signature, the signature is all of the same font and obviously printed which proves lack of manual intervention, so how can they justify £15 for admin charge for the letter...GC

 

Hey GC

Are you allowed to use copies of other peoples letters in Court (if it ever got there) as proof on non manual intervention ?

 

CM

[Celicaman]

By people refering to it as 'pre 6 year' case would I be right in assuming it is best to get the initial 6 year claim out of the way first and approach the next as a seperate matter, rather than doing it all at once?

 

Hi Wayne

No it is best to claim all in one claim. Keep your pre 6 year claim intact with the rest of your claim. You will have to use the limitations act S32 and i think its the utcr 1977 to argue your claim and it may take a little longer.

The reason for not seperating the claim is if a court looks at pre 6 years Only, its harder to argue it and possably get it thrown out if not presented correctly, added with post 6 year charges, it cant be thrown out even if not presented correctly as your other charges claims are safe if you follow the correct procedures.

good luck

 

Celicaman

[Celicaman]

Lizzyd

If you intend to claim your pre 6 years charges, i would keep your claim intact with the post 6 yr charges.

If you claim pre 6 years on their own, it could be thrown out if the bank argue the limitations restictions. When it is together with post 6 years they cant apply to have claim struck out for limitations reasons as part of it is within those and the court wont break the claim up into seperate areas.

 

Celicaman

[Celicaman]

Can anybody help me! I want to complete the N1 this weekend.

 

I do have Bongs, but as this was some time ago is there anything else that has become current that I should be aware of. Also, was there a case recently that lost with contracual interest?

 

I am looking for a POC for 6 years plus...... has anybody got an upto date version that I could look at please.......I have a case with the Halifax going back 10 years and most of the charges are in excess of 6 years.

 

Also, what is the situation with Contractial & or Compound Interest being claimed and can this be sucessfull with claims over 6 years. or is it best to stick with Stat 8%.

 

Thanks

ds

 

THe case that was lost was where they were claiming CI with a claim of charges, the court case date was set, and at some point before, the bank offered full refund plus Stat 8% interest,

Instead of accepting that as full payment, the claimant proceeded to court for the CI part of the claim only, and lost on that basis, also tried appeal and that failed.

Problem was that to claim CI without the charges was never looking good, because the bank had settled & paid the charges plus stat, so in court the bank did not have to argue about the actual charges, they only had to argue against the CI.

Even if a full claim ever got to court, you would still have to argue for the CI if you won the charges part, thats why you put in the N1 the various bits about if the court does not agree with CI, then you claim stat s69.

 

You can still try CI, but you need to know your stuff, It is a game of chicken and the banks will do all they can to get you to drop it (including some dirty tactics) but you may get more back than with stat claim.

Just Remember, IF the bank offer full refund plus stat, Accept it and bow out, its still a win.

 

Celicaman

[Celicaman]

Just came across this forum. I'm in the process of claiming back bank charges. I've already had an offer of £3.5k from HSBC, but they've struck out a couple of the entries as they claim they're over 6 years old. They weren't when I started the claim though!

 

I've written back to decline the offer as it's now in the court system anyway, but have a question:

 

How do I get these entries kept within my original claim?

 

Any help or advice welcome....

 

TIA

 

You will need to use S32 part 2 (B) & © of the limitations act, to prove your claim.

Basically the bank levied unlawfull charges and either concealed them on purpose or applied them not knowing they were unlawfull ( we all have our own opinions on that one LOL) it was not until the oft report in april 2006 that the charges were highlighted as unlawfull, so it was only then that you and i could act and claim them back as they were unlawfull. Because of the concealment, you could not act on it earlier, therefore the 6 year limitations act does not apply.

 

thats my basic understanding.

Read up on it more, it is acheivable, let the bank get on with its arguments, throw in about the above ,

as oneofakind says , 'just continue with your claim as it is... it's not up to the bank to decide what's valid and what's not!!!!'

They are not going to step foot in a court to argue the point, but you need to know and understand enough on the off chance you end up in front of a judge for a hearing etc.

 

My own claim, i expected them to knock 2 charges off as jan/feb 01 but they paid them, prob not worth the time to not pay them. was only £57 worth of the claim.

 

If ive been of help, please click on freakyleakys scales, hes welsh, so he thinks we should feel sorry for him and he needs the numbers LOL

 

Celicaman

[Celicaman]

Hi there,

 

I have a court date for my claim against Barclays (what was Woolwich) in August. This is for the 6 years.

 

I would have liked to have requested statements further back than this but as this was my first claim didnt have the courage to do so, & I guess needed to see how I got on with this one.

 

CAG has given me so much confidence its wonderful!

 

I am now wondering whether I should attempt to claim further back than the 6 years now, as I had a very harsh couple of years from 1999-2001, & would so like to claim the horrific amount of charges they took from me at this time.

 

Where do I stand?

 

Many, many thanks.

Electric

 

if you can get the statements , go for it

 

CM

[Celicaman]

Zootscoot, As i understood it, in the alternative to s32 pt1 (b) actual concealment, then © it could be a mistaken concealment on behalf of the banks unknowingly levying charges to our accounts for charges they believed to be lawfull,

and

it could be that we mistakingly allowed the banks to take unlawfull charges from our accounts as we belived them to be lawfull.

and that because either or both parties where mistaken, then the limitations bar did not come into force as neither party would be able to reasonably uncover this until the oFT report 2006

:-?

 

Zoot scoot, Please clarify as to what we should be using.

 

Celicaman