HELP! ADVICE NEEDED!

[smokingboot]

Not on how to get me off lj...there's no help for me, clearly.

No, I need some legal/financial type help...see, thanks to the glorious probablyscotty I followed the advice given in the link below, which basically outlines how the Office of Fair Trading have decided that the charges made by major banks on unauthorised overdrafts etc are unfair, and shows ways in which you can claim your money back.

http://money.uk.msn.com/Banking/Current%20Accounts/Decision%20centre/Better_Banking/article.aspx?cp-documentid=488325

Now, my bank have not come back to me with the details of my transactions over the past 6 years as stipulated in the Data Protection Act...and of course, they disagree that the amounts they have ripped off me in the last 6 years have been wrong. But they are prepared, as a 'gesture of good will' to offer me a one off payment of just under a grand. Hmm. So I don't know whether to accept the payment (very handy) or say, 'This is all very well, but I don't know how much you've taken so I don't know how reasonable this offer is.' Of course, they could argue that the payment is just to stop them from going through all the hassle of digging out the info. And of course,grabbing the money saves me the trouble of courts etc.

Thoughts from people less crap with money than myself would be gratefully received!

Comments

[delvy.livejournal.com]

I am equally rubbish with money and therefore would like to ask you 2 questions 1) which bank you are with and 2) could I please have a copy of you letter you sent them to get my moeny back too? :)

I would guess that of the amount they are offering is anywhere near what you think is due I would probably take it. They have probably worked out their liability and offered a chunk of that.

[smokingboot.livejournal.com]

I am with the iniquitous and deeply shite NatWest. Here's the body of the letter I sent them.


Dear Sir/Madam

Re:
Account number:
Sort code:

I understand that a ruling from the Office of Fair Trade has recently been made regarding bank penalty charges of more than £12, enforced for late payments on credit cards, unauthorised overdrafts, unpaid direct debits and standing orders and missed payment fees on store cards and mortgages. The ruling extends back over 6 years; I also understand that under the Data Protection Act I am entitled to a list of all such charges made to me by the bank during that time. I would like you to send me a list of all my bank charges made over the last 6 years and a refund of all charges in excess of £12 per instance.

Thank you for your help,

Yours faithfully


etc

[nyarbaggytep.livejournal.com]

Genius.
I shall be onto it and let you know how I get on too.

[nyarbaggytep.livejournal.com]

Incidentally I checked back through my records and I found that my bank (Co-op) only charged £10 per *transgression* until a couple of years ago, when it went up to £25.

I found 14 charges, which would mean £182 refund. And I have written to ask them for that.

So if I were you I'd be better off with the £1k! But it depends what your bank charges and how often you got charged I guess.

[load-of-flannel.livejournal.com]

Write back saying you will accept the 'interim' payment of one thousand pounds to allow them to fully investigate the money they owe you. Indicate that any failure to provide interim payment will lead to immeadiate legal action coupled with notification of the media.

The only reason they are offering you this is because they know they are in the wrong and want to get shot of you. Under no circumstances sign anything that indicates this is a full and final payment.

[smokingboot.livejournal.com]

Interesting..yes, the letter makes clear that this is intended to be a full and final payment, end of story, no claim to suddenly turn up in the future.

*Thinks very hard. Steam start to rise from head*

[load-of-flannel.livejournal.com]

Write back demanding that they immeadiately fufill their duty as required by lawe before you are forced to report them for refusing to comply with the Data Protection Act...

erm if they sent you six years records jhow come you don't know how much they owe?

[smokingboot.livejournal.com]

They haven't sent me the six years records, which is why I don't know what they actually owe.

[load-of-flannel.livejournal.com]

Threaten the gits. The records are easy to obtain, there is no difficulty, they have undoubtedly already looked at them.

Write back and Demand the records befor you consider whether to accept their offer.

Mention that they will be reported if the continue to ignore your request.

Ask why they did not actually respond to your previous letter and instead tried to offer a Bribe, ask if this is their method with all customers, mention that the papers would be interested in a banl that would rather bribe its customers than do what they have been asked.

Do not let them get away with it... most poeple do thats why they keep behaving like twats.

Personally Id say its your social responsibility to comply with the OFT.

Its quite unlikely youll have to take them to court. Even if you do this.

[evilwillow.livejournal.com]

It's probably a reasonable figure. You could go through the process and get an exact figure but the chances are the bank is offering a fairly generous amount to save them having to dig up all that paperwork and put the manhours into calculating the right figure.

If you have to sue them for it through the small claims court you are better off accepting their offer, the process is arduous at best.

[smokingboot.livejournal.com]

I could certainly use the money now...so you think that might be a generous chunk to save the hassle?

Hmm.

[load-of-flannel.livejournal.com]

On what basis do you believe this to be a reasonable figure though?

[evilwillow.livejournal.com]

Mainly on the basis I've worked for a bank since 1993 and have seen them deal with changes in legislation that entail large amounts of work to bring them into line.

I worked for the department that had to either calculate the impact of these changes and later for the technical department that had to implement legislation based system changes such as these. In my experience Where possible they will come to a reasonable amount of compensation to avoid the need to take on the extra manpower required.

[load-of-flannel.livejournal.com]

Im sorry i dinnae know you but I have to question that....

Are ye suggesting that bringing up 6 years of computerised records (we call the bank statements) and sending them to someone requires a large amount of manpower?

Thats what she asked then to do. They didn't they decided to waste time and manpower producing a letter and offering a bribe. Infact they did nothing she asked them to do at all... a massive waste of time and resources.

Are you suggesting that they/'ll offer everyone who writes in a thousand pounds so they dont have to look up records. No. The reason they offered that amount is because they know how much they owe people. They have already looked at the records and decided not to send them.

Thats customer service from banks that is. In addition its hardly 'new' legislation that requires thenm to find records, as a customer I can request those records at any point and via the data protection act I can demand it for a tenner with no reason at all.

Not complying is not actually an option.

This is standard bollocks pulled by every company whose arse is in the fire. You try and buy people off to avoid possible legal action.

It's pathetic and should neither be allowed or encouraged.

A bank thinks its to much trouble to work out how much theyve charged you... laughable frankly.... its a bank. If you owed them money they'd be damn quiick to produce the records.

[evilwillow.livejournal.com]

I really can't be arsed to defend this properly as I don't actually care enough. It's not just about requesting, printing and posting 6 years of bank statements.

To come up with an accurate figure each individual charge of more than £12 will need to be identified and the extra amount noted.

As for them already knowing how much they owe her and just offering a bribe, it just shows your ignorance of bank systems and compliance procedures with the Bank of England and how matters like these can affect a bank's clearing status.

Most statements are only available for 6 - 12 months in a readily viewable format before being archived to the mainframe. The retrieval of individual charges will be entirely dependent on how detailed the bank's charging codes are.

But sod it, Debs get the individual statements and make them work out an exact figure. I'm interested to know how accutate their offer was.

[mrtonylee.livejournal.com]

Did you post it, email it, or drop it into the bank?

[smokingboot.livejournal.com]

Posted it.

[mrtonylee.livejournal.com]

Hold on - that link's dated ther 27th - When did you send it, and how quickly did they come back to you?

[smokingboot.livejournal.com]

My letter was dated 5th June, went more like 6th or 7th...I believe there is a time within which they must respond, 6 weeks? the link mentions it. There was a holding letter about 9 days ago (can't remember; my grasp of paperwork is pretty vague) and this last came through this morning.

[probablyscotty.livejournal.com]

You've requested the data, they haven't supplied it. Move on to the next letter in the chain. I have several other links if you need them, or you can call/mail me. :-)

[november-girl.livejournal.com]

Take it. A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush and that's doubly true where litigation's concerned. Let's face it, are you really going to sue them for it? It'll be under £5k almost certainly, so it would cost more to pay the legal fees than you'd get back, and you wouldn't be able to get the bank to pay costs because it'd be allocated to the small claims track and the court don't say the loser has to pay the winner's legal fees in that. And believe me, it's not a legal claim you'd want to bring without trained help - even I'd be reticent to do so.

The other thing to bear in mind is that the £12 figure was given as a reasonable example in the case in question and was not meant as a general maximum. It is not risk free, and you can bet your bottom dollar that there are banks out there looking at how they can get round it.

[probablyscotty.livejournal.com]

However claiming is also low cost online through a small claims system. Yay the internet! https://www.moneyclaim.gov.uk/csmco2/index.jsp

Read this FAQ after registering with the consumer action group, don't think you can read it without. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/faqs-please-read-these/5079-data-protection-act-1998-a.html

November_gril's excellent legal advice aside, I personally would at least want to know how much I was giving away. *shrug*

[november-girl.livejournal.com]

Irrespective of where you issue it (on line or on paper) it's still a very technical claim to bring and if it's not pleaded properly the judge will give you one chance to remedy it then strike it out.

As I said, there's no definite way of knowing what you're giving up, as there's no set figure set for what is/isn't acceptable (despite what the press seem to be reporting).

[probablyscotty.livejournal.com]

Q. My bank has refused or has not responded to my application for statements by way of Data Protection Act disclosure. What should I do?
A. Make an immediate complaint to the Information Commisioner and let him decide.

[binidj.livejournal.com]

Having recently been hit for over a hundred pounds charges in the space of one month, which pushed me from slightly overdrawn to catastrophically overdrawn, I have decided to write to NatWest too. I shall keep you appraised.