Johnwilsonstorey 2nd Case

[johnwilsonstorey]

I am making a second claim on my wife's account after I was successful in my last claim and NatWest paid up in February.

I had most of the relevent paperwork and have started the ball rolling by hand delivering an LBA to my local branch and also a copy by special delivery to customer services dept in Borehamwood.

Attached please see a copy of my LBA and any comments will be gratefully received, of course I will update as time goes by.

 

Dear Sirs ACCOUNT NUMBER xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I am writing to you to ask you to refund the penalty charges which you have levied from my account since 23rd July 2004.

As you will no doubt be aware, these have been deemed disproportionate and wholly unlawful. I calculate that the charges that have been applied amount to £xxxxxxxx plus interest at the rate of 8% totalling £xxxxxxxx making a total of £xxxxxxxxxx

Please be aware that in the event that this case reaches the Court stage I will ask the judge to order interest to be paid at the Banks’ unauthorised rate of 29.6% making a total of interest alone of £xxxxxxxxand increasing at £4-99 daily.

In addition to repayment of the above the following action is required:

My account is funded almost entirely with state funded benefits which the bank must be aware are provided and owned by the Government solely for my living expenses.

I will attach a copy of government legislation at the bottom of this letter.

In 2003 a loan was also taken out, almost entirely to repay unlawful charges, I am requesting you to repay the interest on this loan. This caused me considerable distress.

 

In addition to the sum of £xxxxxxxxxx it is my intention to ask the Court for damages, because my family and I have been caused considerable distress and inconvenience by your actions. This amount has yet to be quantified but should be included in your settlement figure

 

If a settlement figure has not been agreed within 14 days of this letter it is my intension to submit a claim to the local county court

 

Please find below a copy of the social security act of which you must be aware but chose to ignore

 

Social Security Administration Act 1992

Miscellaneous

Certain benefit to be inalienable **

 

187- Subject to the provisions of this Act, every assignment of, or charge on-

(a)benefit as defined in section 122 of the Contributions and Benefits Act;

(b)any income-related benefit; or

©child benefit,

and every agreement to assign or charge such benefit shall be void; and, on the bankruptcy of the beneficiary, such benefit shall not pass to any trustee or other person acting on behalf of his creditors

[steven4064]

Looks like you've covered all the basic points. I am a little concerned about "funded almost entirely with state funded benefits" - do you know what proportion - they might quibble that the charges only went against the non-benefit funded bit

 

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.

[johnwilsonstorey]

Hello Steven

Thanks for the comment, it is something I have thought long and hard about but I have a small problem in as much as the only other monies paid in were given by my Son and only paid in to cover charges.

On the other hand Natpest have already paid out £4600 to me for the same reason.

I know this claim is for more but now I am much more confident about this claim, hence the claim for compounded interest at the Banks rate and also damages etc. One can only try these things and after all they can only say no.

[steven4064]

One can only try these things and after all they can only say no.

And even if they say no, they have topay up in the end!!

 

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.

[steven4064]

John

 

I've just discovered that workingtax credit and child tax credit are not covered by the SSAA 1992. The are covered by the TAx Credits Act 2002 but s45 of that Act makes them inalienable too. So, if you claim either of these, you need to add "and Tax Credits Act s45" to your reference to the SSAA 1992.

 

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

[johnwilsonstorey]

Dont worry the DSS allowances are all income tested, I had 2 strokes 3 years ago but prior to that arthritus stopped me working. All the monies I receive are covered by the Social Security act, I think I have all avenues covered. I can even take them to court and it wont cost me anything!

Thanks again for your support

[johnwilsonstorey]

I cant believe it NatWest have actually offered almost £7000 which is the exact figure of the charges. They havent offered to pay any interest but what should I do?

Shall I hold out for the interest or take the money, I must admit £7000 would come in very handy at the moment but what should I do?

Perhaps it was the thought of contravening the DSS laws which made them make such a large offer but who knows.

[fiestychick]

Hi JWS,

 

I may be wrong (and I', sure someone will correct me if I am!), but the MODS recommend that if you are offered your charges back in full that you should accept and NOT continue to persue the interest as the courts take a dim view of this.

 

AS I say, that's only something I have gleaned from the site.

 

Good Luck

 

love Fiesty xx

[johnwilsonstorey]

Hello and thanks for the interest. Yes you are right, but when almost all of the charges were taken against my DSS benefits I had in fact threatened them with contractual interest and damages (see my LBA).

Could it be that they realise this and are offering this amount hoping to avoid paying interest and damages? because I'm sure they haven't made this good offer out of the goodness of their hearts

[fiestychick]

I see your point, but again I'm not 100% whether, regardless of the funds that the charges were applied against, whether you have recourse to decline full charges and go for interest also. I was under the impression that CI was claimed instead of s8 8%, therefore it is viewed under the same umbrealla - that is that they have agreed to refund your charges and pursuing the interest may be viewed as vexacious. Again this is only maybes so I would advise PMing a MOD for advice.

 

On the other side of the coin - it is unlikely they wil enter a courtroom to defend this and so are likely to pay whatever you request to prevent having to do do.....

 

as always is your claim and your cash very best of luck x

[steven4064]

As fiestychick says, its you claim. However, it is alomst certain that if you hang in there you will get back everything you have claimed including interest (I'm not sure about damages- but the banks are so afraid of having to go to court they will probably settle that too)

 

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

[johnwilsonstorey]

THE BOSS HAS SPOKEN AND IT IS HER ACCOUNT AFTER ALL

WE ARE GOING TO ACCEPT THE OFFER AND THE ACCEPTANCE LETTER HAS ALREADY BEEN SENT

 

She said that a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush and instead of a Court cas we have accepted the offer

I still cannot understand why Natwest caved in so quickly but all I have to do now is wait for their cheque to arrive.

Many thanks for all that have helped in this case and the last.

John

[steven4064]

JWS

 

It's still a win. So WELL DONE!

 

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

[fiestychick]

JWS

 

So pleased for you! Congrats!

[hedgey06]

CONGRATULATIONS!!!!!!!!

It's still a fine win - enjoy the cash!

Best wishes, hedgey xxxx