need advice on if i can still claim

[n33dsomeadvice]

hi there im new to forum I want to know if I can still take barclays to court or not, I had 2193 pounds worth of bank charges and tried to claim them back last year and got offered 900 pound which i took as a goodwill gesture noot realising i could get the full amount could i still try and claim back the remaining 1293 and take them to court or would i lose

 

please help

[dar£n]

This depends on the terms of the agreed settlement.

if you still have a copy of the agreement, post it on here so the wording can be checked.

failing that, assuming you claimed for the pre 6yrs, you can now go back further if this interests this is what 'BANKFODDER' proposes

Claiming beyond 6 yrs - important new information!!!

We think that claimants should consider claiming beyond 6 yrs.

 

Firstly, the charges campaign has been in full swing now for a good year. The banks were well aware of it a year ago and also the OFT report highlighted the law and the bank's obligations - just in case any of them were at all in doubt.

 

To my mind this is good evidence that any bank which continued its charges regime after the date of the first OFT report has been concealing its charges regime and therefore has lost the protection of the Limitation Act.

 

I do not believe that the Limitation Act offers any long-stop mechanism so that if you concealed the facts one year ago then you do not merely accrue an additional year of liability. I think that a single instance of concealment invokes s.32 and the limitation barrier falls away completely.

 

Concealment amounts to a question of the morality of the defendant's action. Once this is established then I do not believe that the courts will strive to give them any help.

I understand from Zootscoot that this view is also confirmed by case-law.

 

In fact it seems even if a concealment has occurred even after the breach in question has occurred, the limitation period still falls away.

 

If the banks want to challenge this then it is up to the claimant to respond at least with the arguments above and then if the bank want to rebut this, they can rebut it with a statement of truth.

I doubt whether any of them would dare. They are already getting in too deep as it is.

A statement of truth which is made knowing that it is false or reckless as to its truth is a contempt of court. I do not believe that the banks would go this far

 

We would urge all claimants to claim as far back as they can.

In the case of the Yorkshire and Clydesdale banks we would suggest that even where claimants have accepted full and final settlements or have accepted compromise settlements that they should now go back for anything outstanding on the basis that the Whistleblower disclosures show that there has been concealment and that any full and final agreements are now vitiated by that concealment.

 

We expect to be giving the same advice in respect of other banks as more information surfaces - as it surely will.

 

However, we consider that beyond 6 years is now just a basic claim.

 

We will be amending templates and so forth in the coming days