Barclays defending claim for estimated amount

[palgone]

Hi everybody, been reading a lot of the threads with a good deal of interest. Very impressed with the amount of help and advice being offered by the group, I think i might finally need some myself!

 

Current status is that today I received from Northampton County Court notice of Barclays intention to defend. They now have until 10th May to file defence. I have been looking ahead to any AQ and CB i have to put together and have noticed a small gap in my claim.

 

I originally used a a different site to guide me through the process, that site: ( BBC NEWS | Business | How to claim back penalty charges ) stated a method where you could claim an estimated amount from the statements you already have.

Having 3 years of statements I followed the method given and came to an estimated amount of £1765. In the initial template letter, there was a line allowing Barclays to dispute the estimate by providing evidence of statements of the last 6 years: "If you disagree with this amount please supply me a copy of all the charges applied to my account dating back six years within the next 7 days"

 

They ignored this and a second letter, I filed a claim, they offered me £765 goodwill, I turned it down (via a phonecall), and now i'm at stage where i might have to prepare for court.

 

I realise if it comes to the court bundle i will have to provide evidence of these charges for the last 6 years and I only have them for 3. However does the line in my initial letter give me an out where the onus is on Barclays to present these statements? Or should i call them now and ask for my statement 2001 - 2004? My worry is they can stall me from getting these until the court deadline runs out. So i'd be left to fight it out with evidence amounting to around £850. :-|

 

Then again they havent even filed a defence yet so, what, me worry?

[Micky the Hippo]

the perils of using other sites ...

 

You seem to have covered yourself ok it seems to me, make that clear in your documention for court

 

they 'defend' every case so I'm guessing that they'll settle with you as they do everyone else

 

your problem is that if you estimate low you know they'll settle for your figure

 

I'm new so take expert advice over mine

[lthomp192]

I did the same as you, my son omly had 2 years statements and we did as per the BBC site and we estimated to speed up the claim, then we seen this site, i am now as far down the line as a court date on the 15/05. all we did was carried on with the estimated claim and made it clear at every oppertunity that they were estimated figures,there has never been anything back from Barclays disputeing the figures in any way.I feel they have had ample oppertunity to dispute this fact in the beginning (ie produceing the statememnts),and they haven't so i can't see them disputing it now. as time has gone on i have realised it is frowned upon here,and with hindsight it would have been maybe more secure with all statements in hand,but not knowing at the time, i was too far down the line to go back when i joined the CAG. (exactly the same as you). so i suppose all you have to do is keep an eye on my thread over the next couple of weeks or so and see how it goes with me. i'm sure you will be ok there is enough expertise on this sight to combat any of Bs little stunts to pull us both through this.

B.T.

[oneofakind]

The biggest weapon we have is their reluctance to actually stand up in court. Hopefully, your claim will end the same way as all the others.

 

As Micky says, you appear to have given them the opportunity to respond to your estimate, but yes, make it absolutely clear in your court docs. how you arrived at your figures.

 

I'd assume your estimate amounts to half the total? If so, things look ok for you IMHO, because they've offered you almost half already.

 

Fingers crossed.

 

D.

[oneofakind]

FWIW, I looked at several similar sites after seeing ML on GMTV; including MSE of course, BBC, Which, MSN Money etc.

 

I found CAG totally by chance (Thanks Google!) and as soon as I read the first page, I was hooked.

 

I knew absolutely nowt then, and have rapidly picked up a lot of info. I'm now beginning to feel that it's ME in control, and I no longer dread the thud of statements and charge notifications landing on the doormat. I'm even beginning to understand some of the arcane workings of the legal system.

 

Mr. Average CAN get justice !!

 

OK, rant over. What's for lunch.....

[PKea]

I would wait and see what Barclays put in their defence.

 

IMO you have to show the actual charges and not estimate.

 

They may state that they can't defend on the basis that you can't prove the charges were taken.

ie the 2 years could have been full of charges and the other 4 could have no charges. They WILL know what they have charged you.

 

I would read there defence carefully, maybe post it for advice.

 

Paul

[Micky the Hippo]

People have done estimate charges before, it's not ideal obviously

 

But Barclays have repeatedly refused to show the actual charges despite being asked to

 

So they can hardly get arsey about the estimate can they?

 

So the only concern is that they will choose the route that suits them

[oneofakind]

Surely the court would know that Barclays have the necessary information available if they wanted to argue the point?

[Bookworm]

Absolutely.

 

Make it clear that if and when Barclays provide the information, you will then be more than happy to alter your claim (cost £35, which you'll claim back from Barclays, as it's their fault you couldn't put in the correct amount), but until then, the onus remains on them to prove you wrong.

 

They can't have it both ways: either they don't know exactly how much they charged you (highly unlikely, as anyone can see, they're a BANK!) in which case they can't argue the amount to be repaid, or they DO know how much, in which case any one could reasonbly ask why not give the info earlier then?

[PKea]

Surely the court would know that Barclays have the necessary information available if they wanted to argue the point?

 

The court has to base their decision on whats in front of them (evidence), not what they may think or presume.

[Micky the Hippo]

you're saying that the court won't presume that the bank knows exactly what the charges were and would reach no conclusions from their failure to produce those charges despite being asked to?

[oneofakind]

I know what the courts have to base their decisions on.

 

Barclays have been clearly invited to dispute the amount, which it appears they have declined to do. Is this not, on the balance of probability, an indication that they have something to hide? The court would not have to 'think or presume' anything! It is a fact that they have this information, so why have they not provided it before now?

 

Like Bookworm says, they can't have it both ways.

[lthomp192]

I would wait and see what Barclays put in their defence.

 

IMO you have to show the actual charges and not estimate.

 

They may state that they can't defend on the basis that you can't prove the charges were taken.

ie the 2 years could have been full of charges and the other 4 could have no charges. They WILL know what they have charged you.

 

I would read there defence carefully, maybe post it for advice.

 

Paul

 

There defence they sent to me was the same as everybody elses on this site (i have read a few that have been posted) so i can't see any way they can justify treating our claims any different from anybody elses. Surely it was upto them to question the amounts of the claim in the early stages if this was going to be problem. As i am only a layman at this game,i am only saying it as i see it, obviously oyher members with a lot more knowledge might have different ideas.

B.T.

[oneofakind]

Hypothetically....

 

If, say, a utilities company were to send you a bill for 2003, saying 'sorry, but we think we've been underpaid by £xxx, What's the first thing YOU'D do?

 

Dig into your records, right? Show them what they billed you, and what you paid them.

 

Why, in principle, should this be any different?

 

[lthomp192]

Hypothetically....

 

If, say, a utilities company were to send you a bill for 2003, saying 'sorry, but we think we've been underpaid by £xxx, What's the first thing YOU'D do?

 

Dig into your records, right? Show them what they billed you, and what you paid them.

 

Why, in principle, should this be any different?

 

 

Very well put, hopefully everything goes ok this time, then we know for future claims,part of learning process.