Hippo v NatWest

[Micky the Hippo]

when they asked me what it concerned I said 'bank charges'

 

are you suggesting they ignore anyone that says that?

 

[Parkvale]

Mickey thats why your a pink hippo and they live in bank charge never never land.

[fendyweather]

Lol Lol. Loving that post, and Micky, loving the adorable pink hippo. All the best. Fendy xxxx

[Micky the Hippo]

hey fendy

 

LBAs in a few days, B and NW

 

tricksy CI arguments and all that

 

stand by

 

 

and no, customer care did not call me back

[Micky the Hippo]

nothing from them

 

LBA in the Rec post tomorrow morning

[hedgey06]

Go get 'em micky........... good luck!!! Fingers crossed for a payout at LBA stage! xxx:p

[Micky the Hippo]

indeed

 

suspect it's the long haul with the CI heavy claim that it is, the charges are old and the interest huge

 

be around in a few weeks time when I start getting to the trickier stuff

[hedgey06]

Hmmm......... think the contractual issue (going off other threads) may drag it out a bit! But at the end of the day, you know what to expect - so it's onwards and upwards as our parkie would say! Every letter you send to them is one step closer to the big fat cheque at the end - so keep at it and you'll soon have your charges back! xxx

[Micky the Hippo]

yep, ta

 

rock solid at the mo

 

save the words of encouragement nearer the d day when sir might start to flounder/wobble/doubt

 

[Micky the Hippo]

as an aside, I received a set of 6 year statements for one of my Natwest accounts with no covering letter last night

 

I can only assume that was in response to my second SAR acknowledging I had the last six years statements and asking for statements for both accounts for the years pre-dating the last six years

 

sigh

 

MCOL this weekend I think, time to start cribbing and splicing

[Micky the Hippo]

right, my slightly fancy Ni was too big for MCOl and indeed too big for the N1 so it's taken over a week of my limited time to make up the correct headers and footers for the attachments (thanks to the lady wife who's a barrister )

 

anyhow here it be, basically nicked from someone else with an extra para from someone else again, feels good to me, send it tomorrow or the day after

 

I've used their latest even higher authorised rate of interest, sums have been ished in case, I've flung in the extras to try and and big up the claim for the CI

 

any and all feedback gratefully recieved

 

..................

1. The Claimant has two bank accounts, numbers xxx and xxx (“the Account”), maintained at the Defendant’s xxx Branch (xxx)

 

2. The Account is 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 Account in respect of purported breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant and also charged overdraft 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 contract between itself and the Claimant.

 

5. A schedule of the charges is attached to these particulars of claim (Appendix 1).

 

6. The Claimant will rely on the Competition Commission’s report entitled “Northern Irish Personal Banking,” published on 20th October, 2006, as evidence that the Defendant is aware that the income derived from its default charges is calculated to generate material profits and is not merely a means of recouping losses incurred in relation to Account defaults.

7. 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.

 

8. The Claimant thus contends that:

a) The charges debited to the Account:

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 8.a), the charges debited to the Account 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.

 

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 8.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

e) 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 the Claimant contends that the Defendant is mistaken. As the Claimant only became aware during August 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.

 

 

9. 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 Account 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 originally charged by the defendant, being 29.5%.

 

d) In the alternative to 9.c), should the taking of unlawful penalties from the Claimant’s Account not be deemed to be unauthorised borrowing by the Defendant, then, under the principle of mutuality and reciprocity in the contract between the Claimant and the Defendant, the Claimant has calculated compound interest at the Defendant’s authorised borrowing rate, being 19.41%.

 

e) In the alternative to 9.c) and d), if the Court decides that the Claimant is not entitled to the contractual rate of interest under the principle of mutuality and reciprocity in the contract between the Claimant and the Defendant, then the Claimant has calculated interest under section 69 County Courts Act (1984) at the rate of 8% a year

 

f) Details of interest calculated & rates used are attached to these Particulars of Claim (Appendix 1) as follows:

Column1 – Compound interest calculated daily at an annual rate of 29.5%

Column 2 – Compound interest calculated daily at an annual rate of 19.41%

Column 3 – Simple interest under s.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at an annual rate of 8.00%

 

10. Accordingly, the Claimant claims:

a) The return of the amounts debited between 20/02/01 and 30/05/07 in respect of charges and the interest charged as a result of those charges in the sum of £1000ish

 

b) All applicable Court fees

 

c) Contractual interest at an annual 29.50 % compounded daily from the date of each transaction to 30/05/07 of £2,000ish, and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of £0.82

 

d) In the alternative to 10.c), Contractual interest at an annual rate of 19.41% compounded daily from the date of each transaction to 30/05/07 of £1,000ish and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgement or earlier payment at a daily rate of £0.56

 

e) In the alternative to 10.c) and d), interest under section 69 County Courts Act (1984) at the rate of 8% a year, from the date of each transaction to 30/05/07 of £300, and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgement or earlier payment at a daily rate of £0.25

[Micky the Hippo]

I'm taking that deathly silence as the thumbs up

 

A couple of tweaks, a dapper legalese covering letter from the wife, double triplicate SOCs (two accounts each with three separate sheets for the three rates of interest) a two page POC plus the N1 form itself, plus cheque

 

oof, eight signatures (N1, POC, covering letter, cheque) addressed, sealed and reg post tomorrow

 

oof, onwards with the Smile/Coop cases plus three for my sister

[steven4064]

Sorry not to comment earlier Hippo but as far as I can see it looks fine

 

Steven

 

If this post is helpful, please click the scales

[Micky the Hippo]

Thanks fella

 

All making good sense at the moment, dare say it'll get a bit more anxious nearer the time, fingers crossed they're too busy to pick out cases for actual arguments

[WendyB]

Hi Mickey

 

sorry to but in on your thread but I noticed you're also on the Barclays forum. I'm helping a mate out with a claim against Barclays, is this the correct address to send SAR?

Freepost RLTA-CSUE-TCHC

Barclays Bank plc

Head office customer relations

1 churchill place

london

e14 5hp

I have looked on the Barclays contact details but either I'm being thick(probably) or it wasn't too clear.

Will start a thread for him on Barclays as soon as I get him going..

 

Cheers

 

Wendy

[Parkvale]

Correct address.

[WendyB]

Cheers Parky you uber effiecient knowledgable darling:D

[Micky the Hippo]

gone off reg post today

 

time to start reading up on the next bit

[Micky the Hippo]

****y offer this morning

 

£534 or something like that, they offered me £800 odd ages ago, I'll have to check my figures as it might be the charges or charges plus stat for one account, last time they sent two offers separately with one having the wrong postcode and arriving a week late

 

their covering letters are useless 'your recent correspondence'

[Micky the Hippo]

right, it refers to one of my two accounts and is offering me £10 more than my basic charges, I claimed for CI ages ago and sent off an N1 a few days ago

 

I suppose I'll wait now for a second letter for the second account, doubtless again sent to the mad postcode it was sent to last time, I did point that out to them last time time around

 

what can you do?

[Micky the Hippo]

court summons served today

 

defendant has until the 27th

 

how exciting

 

back to sleep until the day they defend on the 27th I suppose and then comatose waiting for the court date

[steven4064]

back to sleep until the day they defend on the 27th I suppose and then comatose waiting for the court date

You got it!! (you may another flurry of excitement if youget to fill in an AQ)

 

Steven

 

If this post is helpful, please click the scales

Any opinions are without prejudice & without liability.

Almost everything I know concerning the law I learned from this site

[Micky the Hippo]

I'm a bit vague from here on in so I'll need to do some reading up, it is that simple though? respond to anything they might do and not worry about a bundle until a couple of weeks before a court date?

 

Without wanting to sound complacent, this is all hugely easier than I expected

 

Time to get busy on my SAR non compliances for old statements I think, got some credit card SARs due in fairly soon too

 

And some for my sister

 

[steven4064]

I'm a bit vague from here on in so I'll need to do some reading up, it is that simple though? respond to anything they might do and not worry about a bundle until a couple of weeks before a court date?

Perhaps not quite so laid back, but otherwise yes. You usually have to get your bundle in two weeks before the court date (altough my court told me 3 days)

 

Steven

 

If this post is helpful, please click the scales

Any opinions are without prejudice & without liability.

Almost everything I know concerning the law I learned from this site

[Parkvale]

Steven is quite right. Don't take your eye off the ball. Stay focussed. Yes i do like your confidence in finding the process easier than you thought, that is because of this site and the hard work by everyone to make claiming back your charges a much simpler and easier process to understand. Good luck.