Number6 -vs- Lloyds TSB **WON**

[Number6]

did you eventually figure out how to calculate your interest - I'm just at the stage when I have to file moneyclaim and am v confused re interest on charges etc and 8% interest. What is the 8%. Is this statutory interest?

 

I thought I had but I believe I may have c****d it up - time will tell.

 

I used the complex Excel spreadsheet from the library on here. I listed all of the unlawful charges along with the dates that they were entered on my statement. The spreadsheet then calculated the compound interest on those charges relative to my bank balance (or lack of it!) at the time. That was all easy and straightforward.

 

The spreadsheet also calculated the Statutory 8% interest (yes you are correct about this) on the lot so my moneyclaim was made for charges + actual interest + 8% statutory interest. I thought this was correct at the time. However, since then I have seen posts where it is stated that the 8% should only be claimed if you do not claim any other interest.

 

So I'm not clear about this but in any event my claim has gone in and I'll just have to wait and see if LTSB challenge it.

 

If you want any help or advice in the actual calculation of your interest then PM me, I'll be glad to help.

 

Pete

[Number6]

Yes and Lloyds won't file a defnece until the very last minute.

 

Thanks Michael.

 

Pete

[closey]

Just to clarify, once you get to the MCOL stage everyone can claim the 8% APR (use Vamps spreedsheet to calculate this).

 

The other interest people refer to (and which a lot of people choose not to claim) is interest your bank charge you when their unlawful charges have caused you to exceed your overdraft limit. There is a another spreedsheet to assit in calculating this, but it is complicated and therefore many chose to leave that part off their claim.

[Number6]

Just to clarify, once you get to the MCOL stage everyone can claim the 8% APR (use Vamps spreedsheet to calculate this).

 

The other interest people refer to (and which a lot of people choose not to claim) is interest your bank charge you when their unlawful charges have caused you to exceed your overdraft limit. There is a another spreedsheet to assit in calculating this, but it is complicated and therefore many chose to leave that part off their claim.

 

Thanks Closey.

 

What you state is what I originally thought was the case, hence the nature of my claim. Since claiming though I have definitely seen a few threads where it has been stated that either Contractual or Statutory Interest can be claimed, but not both. I will see if I can find the threads and refer to them here.

 

Pete

[thewifeandI]

There's two distinct lots of interest applicable here and you need to get them straight in your mind first.

 

When you had a charge deducted from your account this lowered your bank balance. Over time the accumulated total of these charges may have driven your account into overdraft, and maybe past your limit. The bank usually charges you interest on the overdraft balance. Some of the interest paid could be due to genuine use of your overdraft, but over time the accumulation of charges will mean that the proportion that is due to charges will be greater, even up to the whole amount. There is a spreadsheet available (see my sig below) that will work out how much of the interest they have charged you is down to the charges. Note that it's the complex version that is required to do this calculation. This interest on charges IS reclaimable as part of your initial claim.

 

When your claim gets to the stage when you have to issue a summons for repayment of the monies owed you are entitled under Section 69 of the County Courts Act to add interest at 8% to the amounts you are claiming. The spreadsheet will also calculate this amount.

 

In your initial claim ask for the charges back, plus the calculated interest on those charges. Only when you raise your court paperwork can you claim the extra 8%.

 

 

To complicate it slightly - you have the option of claiming lost (not deducted) interest at 8% (s69 Interest) or at contractual rates (i.e. what the bank would have charged you for unauthorised borrowing). If you do this you have to claim it in your LBA at the latest and you CANNOT claim s69 interest as well.

[Number6]

There's two distinct lots of interest applicable here and you need to get them straight in your mind first.

 

When you had a charge deducted from your account this lowered your bank balance. Over time the accumulated total of these charges may have driven your account into overdraft, and maybe past your limit. The bank usually charges you interest on the overdraft balance. Some of the interest paid could be due to genuine use of your overdraft, but over time the accumulation of charges will mean that the proportion that is due to charges will be greater, even up to the whole amount. There is a spreadsheet available (see my sig below) that will work out how much of the interest they have charged you is down to the charges. Note that it's the complex version that is required to do this calculation. This interest on charges IS reclaimable as part of your initial claim.

 

When your claim gets to the stage when you have to issue a summons for repayment of the monies owed you are entitled under Section 69 of the County Courts Act to add interest at 8% to the amounts you are claiming. The spreadsheet will also calculate this amount.

 

In your initial claim ask for the charges back, plus the calculated interest on those charges. Only when you raise your court paperwork can you claim the extra 8%.

 

 

To complicate it slightly - you have the option of claiming lost (not deducted) interest at 8% (s69 Interest) or at contractual rates (i.e. what the bank would have charged you for unauthorised borrowing). If you do this you have to claim it in your LBA at the latest and you CANNOT claim s69 interest as well.

 

Now that is the explanation I've been looking for!

 

I used the complex spreadsheet to calculate all the figures and very straightforward it was too! I was always under the impression that the 8% Statutory Interest was chargeable on the whole claim once it reached the Court stage, I just got confused when I saw a few posts discussing contractual vs statutory interest.

 

Yes, it is the interest deducted due to the overdraft caused by the charges that I have claimed, plus the 8%.

 

So that's OK then.

 

Thanks

 

Pete

[Number6]

The clock is ticking and the excitement is beginning to build!

 

Monday (11th Sep) is the deadline for LTSB to file a defence. So only four working days to go.

 

Must admit to a slight case of the wibbly-wobblies now; that will they - won't they feeling! I would love to able to serve a default judgement on them, preferably followed by a warrant to send in the baliffs but I guess I'll receive a last minute defence like most seem to do.

 

Hey-ho, the waiting gets worse.

 

Pete

[Number6]

Three working days left.

 

No defence filed yet.

[nina p]

Hello Pete,

 

I have just read your notes and hope you hear shortly. I will keep watching for your update! I too want to claim for charges with Lloyds TSB, but have only just logged to on this great site. I am able to go back to 2002 for statements on Lloyds TSB site, but apparently can claim for past 6 years? I have looked at the standard letters, but could you point me in the direction of the one to request list of charges from them as I need 2000 - 2002. Any help would be appreciated as I am really frustrated with their customer services and would like to get the ball rolling as it would be good if I could get anything back from them. Thanks Nina

[reload]

Hi nina p, and welcome to the club

 

I'd suggest you read the Frequently Asked Questions forum, in particular the Step-by-Step Instructions, the FAQs themselves, and the Rules of Engagement.

 

You'd do well to read the other threads in there too

 

Once you've got those under your belt, take a look at the Bank Templates Library. It contains all the letters you should need to see your claim through to the end. You may want to start your own thread to log your progress too.

 

The letter you're after though, is the DPA Subject Access Request letter in the Bank Templates Library

[nina p]

Thank you Reload. You have been a great help! I have letter ready to send just need address and have followed link to find Bank address, but for Lloyds there are loads. Do you know which one I should use? Could I send to my local branch? Also (very embarrassed) but how do I start my own thread? Nina

[reload]

Data Protection Dept.

Lloyds TSB Bank PLC

The Pentagon

48, Chiswell Street

London

EC1Y 4XX

 

[Number6]

I knew it couldn't last:

 

Defence

 

You are unable to take any further action online on this claim.

 

The Defendant disputes the whole amount you have claimed. Your claim cannot proceed online and will be transferred to the appropriate court for continuation. You will receive confirmation to where the claim has been transferred to shortly.

 

 

Hey ho.

 

Hey nina p - welcome. Yep, do as reload says, fire off your S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) and start up your own thread to keep us all up to date and to ask any questions. Plenty of help freely and willingly available on here. Bets of luck!!

 

Pete

[reload]

Unlucky Pete. Can't say you weren't forwarned though :/

[Number6]

I would have been VERY surprised if no defence was submitted!

 

I shall eagerly await the defence papers and start preparing the AQ.

 

Pete

[andy998]

what happened the pages ran out?

[andy998]

good luck with the claim, just joined today, thanks for the links. My claim is against LTSB as well, so I will be watching with interest.

Quick question however, if this does go to court, can I sue them for stress blah blah blah. My claim is for about £710, but it would be nice to get more, for all the time an effort I will be about to make. If what they have done is illegal, why are they not paying for my time and effort to claim money back?

andy?

[Number6]

what happened the pages ran out?

 

Eh..??

[Number6]

I would have been VERY surprised if no defence was submitted!

 

I shall eagerly await the defence papers and start preparing the AQ.

 

Pete

 

Mind you....

 

... there's always the chance I'll be the first to actually go to court...

 

 

....... and lose!! :-|

 

 

Pete

[reload]

what happened the pages ran out?

 

The End of the Internet ?

[Number6]

LTSB's defence received this morning and is as follows:

 

3. Defence

 

1. The Defendant Lloyds TSB Bank plc (the Bank) is a Bank whose registered office is 25 Gresham Street, London, EC2V 7HN. It is admitted that the Claimant has been a customer of the Bank at all material times.

 

2. By opening an account with the Bank, the customer enters into a commercial arrangement with the Bank for the provision of banking services. The Bank is entitled, as part of that arrangement, to charge for those services. At account opening a customer is provided with details of the Bank?s charges, currently in a leaflet a guide to our banking charges. By using the account, the customer acknowledges that the charges are incorporated into the contract. For personal customers, a number of services are provided for free, notwithstanding that they are an expense to the Bank. Such services presently include, but are not limited to, providing;

 

cheques

bank statements

the facility to make payments by direct debit and standing order

debit cards

ATMs (cash machines) .

 

3. By maintaining the account in credit, or within any limit agreed with the Bank, the customer may avoid most if not all charges. If the customer fails to ensure that there are sufficient cleared funds in the account to cover payments, whether by cheque, debit card, standing order or direct debit, the customer makes a request for a payment to be made from the Bank?s own funds. If the Bank maks payment, orreturns the payment, it provides a service as specified in the leaflet and makes a charge in accordance with the terms of the contract. On page 1 of the leaflet, the Bank explains that ?there are normally no charges for everyday banking at Lloyds TSB when your account is in credit.

 

When you use an agreed overdraft, there is no monthly fee and we only charge interest on the amount you are overdrawn each day. Where you go overdrawn without an agreement or where you use special services, such as copy statements, we will make a charge. This guide explains how these charges work, and when they will apply. If you want to use a service that we haven't listed, we'll tell you the cost of that service before you give us the go-ahead.

 

4. There is no breach of contract; the charge cannot therefore be a penalty, consequently there is no requirement that the charge be a pre-estimate of the Bank's loss.

 

5. The customer is given advance warning of charges being imposed; statements show the charges, if any, the customer has incurred during the course of a month, and which will appear as debits on the following month's statement. Customers are warned by letter when they go overdrawn or over their agreed limit without arrangement with the Bank. If the customer fails to remedy the position, and payments such as standing orders and direct debits are refused then again the customer is warned by letter.

 

6. The charges are fair and reasonable, and it is denied that they are unlawful.

 

7. The customer is notified of the charges in plain intelligible language at the conclusion of the contract, and on each monthly statement. The charge are terms which relate to the price payable by the customer for a service provided by the Bank, and pursuant to Regulation 6 of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999, are not subject to the assessment of fairness.

 

8. In the premises:

 

8.1 the charges are for banking services, and are not damages nor a penalty;

8.2 the Bank is entitled by contract to impose the charges, which are fair and

reasonable;

8.3 it is denied that the charges are unlawful or contravene any statute or

regulation.

 

9. The Claimant's claim is denied in its entirety. It is further denied that the

Claimant is entitled to the sum claimed or to any sum from the Bank.

 

 

I don't think this is anything different to the standard defence that most others have received but if anyone thinks otherwise could they comment please.

 

Thanks.

 

Pete

[Number6]

Re: the AQ.

 

I intend to put the following wording in Section G (other information) [wording taken from the Library]:

 

I believe the hearing should last no longer than one hour.

 

This issue is not a complicated one; it is an issue of fact and not of law. The issue is only whether the money levied by the Defendant in respect of its customer’s contractual breaches exceed their actual costs incurred. I am happy to pay their actual costs and I am surprised the Defendant did not counterclaim for these, because I would have paid them without argument.

 

However, the continuing problem is (in common with the 100s of other cases currently being brought by other bank customers) that the banks refuse to reveal the details of their penalty-charging regime. As the banks have a fiduciary duty towards their customers, they have a duty to deal straightforwardly and in utmost good faith.

 

Accordingly, I would respectfully ask that the court in this case, not withstanding allocation to the small claims track, order standard disclosure. I understand that it is in the courts discretion to do so. I believe this would bring a rapid end to this litigation.

 

It's a Small Claims Track case. Does anyone see anything wrong with using this?

 

Pete

[thewifeandI]

I think it would be worth adding something about the 'service charges' being disguised penalties - have a search on the site for suitable wording.

[Number6]

How about something like this:

 

This issue is not a complicated one; it is an issue of fact and not of law. The issue is only whether the money levied by the Defendant in respect of its customer’s contractual breaches exceed their actual costs incurred. I am happy to pay their actual costs and I am surprised the Defendant did not counterclaim for these, because I would have paid them without argument.

 

The defendent is attempting to restructure accounts in order to present events of default spuriously as additional services for which a charge may be made. This is nothing more or less than a disguised or "cloaked" Penalty Charge. For example, a charge for 'agreeing to' or 'allowing' a customer to exceed his credit limit is no different from a charge for the customer's 'default' in exceeding his credit limit.)

 

However, the continuing problem is (in common with the 100s of other cases currently being brought by other bank customers) that the banks refuse to reveal the details of their penalty-charging regime. As the banks have a fiduciary duty towards their customers, they have a duty to deal straightforwardly and in utmost good faith.

 

Accordingly, I would respectfully ask that the court in this case, not withstanding allocation to the small claims track, order standard disclosure. I understand that it is in the courts discretion to do so. I believe this would bring a rapid end to this litigation.

[thewifeandI]

Yes - that looks good to me. It acts as a better counter to their claim that they are service charges. Whenever did you see not doing something as a service (not paying a DD)? And if they are services then they would have to ask your permission to carry them out before being able to charge for them, wouldn't they?