• Welcome to the LegalBeagles Consumer and Legal Forum.
    Please Register to get the most out of the forum. Registration is free and only needs a username and email address.
    REGISTER
    Please do not post your full name, reference numbers or any identifiable details on the forum.

Amex v Matty - Partial success

Collapse
Loading...
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: Amex v Matty - Partial success

    I agree with Turbo on this one. I've read their letter again and my original thoughts remain unchanged. Is there still a balance outstanding, or not? Did you clear the whole balance, down to zero, or not?
    Is no longer here

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Amex v Matty - Partial success

      Originally posted by WendyB View Post
      I agree with Turbo on this one. I've read their letter again and my original thoughts remain unchanged. Is there still a balance outstanding, or not? Did you clear the whole balance, down to zero, or not?

      Thanks Pompey,Turbo & Wendy.

      There was an outstanding balance and I was on a fixed payment plan imposed by Amex.

      To try and explain myself further and using the figures (in the same order as shown on statement) from one of the statements sent to FOS:

      Previous balance ; £3274.99
      Payment received:£160.00
      Late fee: £12.00
      PPI: £25.01
      Interest Charged: £40.03
      Total charges 77.04
      Closing balance:£3192.03

      Interest rate applied 1.2% / month.

      Whichever way I do the interest calc it appears to me that they have applied interest to everything or if as they claim they have not,they have charged me (considerably)more than the advertised rate.

      Even if you take the whole of the previous balance(prior to deducting the payment made) ,add the late & ppis charges ,add interest to the total (which I get to £39.74),it is still less than the amount charged.


      I would also confirm that whilst there was a carried forward balance,all fees were paid from the payment made along with all of the interest and some of the outstanding balance in line with Amex's policy as laid out on the back of their statements:
      Allocation of payments:
      1:Interest
      2:Any repayment protection premiums
      3: Any annual card fee
      4:Any fees - other than Annual card fee
      5:Any money in respect of promotional purchases or balance transfers
      6:Any money in respect of of transactions(other than cash withdrawals) shown on previous statements.
      7: Any money in respect of cash withdrawals shown on previous statements
      8: Any money in the same order as shown 5 to 7 above to pay amounts shown on your last statement
      9:Monies in the same order as shown in 1 to 8 above to pay any other amounts.


      Final point I did not / was not allowed to use the card whilst on the repayment plan,which is the period we are arguing over.
      All that was added to the account over this period was default fees,PPI premiums and interest.

      Does the above help you to understand my position / change anyones views on this?

      I hope so, as it is clear (to me at least), that they have applied interest to all charges and have therefore gained from their wrong ,but FOS think that this is ok?
      (If they have applied interest to the charges and I have paid this - how could I possibly not have been deprived of this money?)

      What really puzzles me is that Amex have returned interest at CI compounded rate upto 2007 and then at 8% simple from then on - but looking at the statements for both periods nothing changed and yet the FOS cannot see this.

      The worrying thing is that I have a PPI claim upheld but off to the Ombudsman for their view on the very same argument(In this case the adjudicator agrees with me but Amex simply refuse to pay) - does the argument differ for interest applied to PPI charges made ?
      I have read of other cases where the settlement includes returned PPI,associated interest as applied at contract rate + 8% SI in restitution.

      BTW Turboman - Your/Bills spreadsheets used for calculating both PPI & Charges claims, include interest at contract rate and 8% - Do I assume that this is no longer correct?

      Matty.
      Last edited by MattyA; 12th June 2011, 07:41:AM. Reason: added a bit

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Amex v Matty - Partial success

        Matty, regarding the interest this came up with a case that has been reported on here in last 6 months or so I will have to do some research so that you have the facts and you can quote this case to Amex and the FOS, I will search the thread out for you. I am not sure if it had PPI in it but it was more about the way interest had been charged at compounded rate when the contract did not allow for it, Amex lost that case in court. There is also the more recent case that PT did and this can also be quoted as it I believe also covers the interest issues.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Amex v Matty - Partial success

          Turbo,

          I know what you are saying, but with all credit cards the interest is added after the PPI so interest at the cards rate has been applied, now if the card has a zero balance quiet rightly that has to be refunded plus 8%. however if the card has a balance that interest is still within the balance as it has been applied each month.

          So although it does not have to be refunded as it has not been paid, the portion of interest that was assigned to the PPI still has to come of the card balance otherwise the balance will not reflect the borrowers true borrowings as the interest amount will be too high.

          So for example:

          Previous balance ; £3274.99
          Payment received:£160.00
          Late fee: £12.00
          PPI: £25.01
          Interest Charged: £40.03
          Total charges 77.04
          Closing balance:£3192.03

          Interest rate applied 1.2% / month.


          SO 1.2% of the monthly interest applied above is interest applied to the PPI

          Regards
          If you think nobody cares if you're alive, try missing a couple of payments.

          sigpic

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Amex v Matty - Partial success

            This is the Armstrong v Amex one of the cases I was reffering to earlier today. It is on here somewhere but I just spotted it on all about forums - I hope PT does not mind me copying the link. It is only 8 pages, let me know if this is helpful.
            Last edited by Amethyst; 13th April 2014, 17:13:PM.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Amex v Matty - Partial success

              Thanks Tuttsi - have read it but need to read it again......It seems as though the argument is over compounded contractual interest and that the Judge didnt agree with the argument ,but penalised Amex also for destroying evidence.
              ------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
              Originally posted by pompeyfaith View Post
              Turbo,

              I know what you are saying, but with all credit cards the interest is added after the PPI so interest at the cards rate has been applied, now if the card has a zero balance quiet rightly that has to be refunded plus 8%. however if the card has a balance that interest is still within the balance as it has been applied each month.

              So although it does not have to be refunded as it has not been paid, the portion of interest that was assigned to the PPI still has to come of the card balance otherwise the balance will not reflect the borrowers true borrowings as the interest amount will be too high.

              So for example:



              SO 1.2% of the monthly interest applied above is interest applied to the PPI
              [/color][/left]

              Regards

              Thanks Pompey.
              Last edited by MattyA; 12th June 2011, 21:41:PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Amex v Matty - Partial success

                You may want to keep an eye on this forthcoming hearing with Amex, not sure what it is about but anything with Amex should give you some amunition.

                http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...mex#post212600

                The other case is the one that PT had a result with, I am just going to find it and post up the link.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Amex v Matty - Partial success

                  Cheers Tuttsi - I have been thinking more about the Armstrong case you posted earlier and am now thinking the relevance is more to do with Amex claiming one think and doing another? which if so is more useful to me.

                  Matty
                  ------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
                  Originally posted by TUTTSI View Post
                  You may want to keep an eye on this forthcoming hearing with Amex, not sure what it is about but anything with Amex should give you some amunition.

                  http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...mex#post212600

                  The other case is the one that PT had a result with, I am just going to find it and post up the link.

                  Thanks Tuttsi - not sure what I am doing wrong but it wont let me open the link.
                  Last edited by MattyA; 12th June 2011, 22:11:PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Amex v Matty - Partial success

                    Previous balance ; £3274.99
                    Payment received:£160.00
                    Late fee: £12.00
                    PPI: £25.01
                    Interest Charged: £40.03
                    Total charges 77.04
                    Closing balance:£3192.03



                    Just had another look at this.
                    If you deduct the total amount of charges(£77.04) from the payment made(£160) and deduct the remainder from the previous balance it arrives at the current balance.
                    I must therefore have paid the charges and the interest applied, month on month and thus must have been deprived,unlawfully in the case of PPI & associated interest,of this money - Despite what Amex say.

                    Matty

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Amex v Matty - Partial success

                      http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...5&d=1298911019

                      This is the PT case which is really against Link but they were acting on behalf of Amex behalf, so it involved Amex and the judge was none to happy with Amex.

                      Happy reading - I hope you find something interesting in here as well, which I a, sure you will.
                      ------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
                      Originally posted by MattyA View Post
                      Cheers Tuttsi - I have been thinking more about the Armstrong case you posted earlier and am now thinking the relevance is more to do with Amex claiming one think and doing another? which if so is more useful to me.

                      Matty
                      ------------------------------- merged -------------------------------



                      Thanks Tuttsi - not sure what I am doing wrong but it wont let me open the link.

                      http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...mex#post212600
                      Last edited by TUTTSI; 12th June 2011, 22:26:PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Amex v Matty - Partial success

                        Originally posted by TUTTSI View Post
                        http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...5&d=1298911019

                        This is the PT case which is really against Link but they were acting on behalf of Amex behalf, so it involved Amex and the judge was none to happy with Amex.

                        Happy reading - I hope you find something interesting in here as well, which I a, sure you will.
                        ------------------------------- merged -------------------------------



                        http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...mex#post212600

                        Thanks Tutsi - much appreciated.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Amex v Matty - Partial success

                          The FSA rule on PPI refund - interest

                          http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/policy/ps10_12.pdf

                          Annex 2 'Material Examples' from page 104

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Amex v Matty - Partial success

                            Cheers for this Tuttsi - I shall have a good read of this tonight.
                            Matty
                            ------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
                            Originally posted by MattyA View Post
                            Thanks Pompey,Turbo & Wendy.

                            There was an outstanding balance and I was on a fixed payment plan imposed by Amex.

                            To try and explain myself further and using the figures (in the same order as shown on statement) from one of the statements sent to FOS:

                            Previous balance ; £3274.99
                            Payment received:£160.00
                            Late fee: £12.00
                            PPI: £25.01
                            Interest Charged: £40.03
                            Total charges 77.04
                            Closing balance:£3192.03

                            Interest rate applied 1.2% / month.

                            Whichever way I do the interest calc it appears to me that they have applied interest to everything or if as they claim they have not,they have charged me (considerably)more than the advertised rate.

                            Even if you take the whole of the previous balance(prior to deducting the payment made) ,add the late & ppis charges ,add interest to the total (which I get to £39.74),it is still less than the amount charged.


                            I would also confirm that whilst there was a carried forward balance,all fees were paid from the payment made along with all of the interest and some of the outstanding balance in line with Amex's policy as laid out on the back of their statements:
                            Allocation of payments:
                            1:Interest
                            2:Any repayment protection premiums
                            3: Any annual card fee
                            4:Any fees - other than Annual card fee
                            5:Any money in respect of promotional purchases or balance transfers
                            6:Any money in respect of of transactions(other than cash withdrawals) shown on previous statements.
                            7: Any money in respect of cash withdrawals shown on previous statements
                            8: Any money in the same order as shown 5 to 7 above to pay amounts shown on your last statement
                            9:Monies in the same order as shown in 1 to 8 above to pay any other amounts.


                            Final point I did not / was not allowed to use the card whilst on the repayment plan,which is the period we are arguing over.
                            All that was added to the account over this period was default fees,PPI premiums and interest.

                            Does the above help you to understand my position / change anyones views on this?

                            I hope so, as it is clear (to me at least), that they have applied interest to all charges and have therefore gained from their wrong ,but FOS think that this is ok?
                            (If they have applied interest to the charges and I have paid this - how could I possibly not have been deprived of this money?)

                            What really puzzles me is that Amex have returned interest at CI compounded rate upto 2007 and then at 8% simple from then on - but looking at the statements for both periods nothing changed and yet the FOS cannot see this.

                            The worrying thing is that I have a PPI claim upheld but off to the Ombudsman for their view on the very same argument(In this case the adjudicator agrees with me but Amex simply refuse to pay) - does the argument differ for interest applied to PPI charges made ?
                            I have read of other cases where the settlement includes returned PPI,associated interest as applied at contract rate + 8% SI in restitution.

                            BTW Turboman - Your/Bills spreadsheets used for calculating both PPI & Charges claims, include interest at contract rate and 8% - Do I assume that this is no longer correct?

                            Matty.

                            Any further views on this Turbo / Wendy?
                            Last edited by MattyA; 13th June 2011, 17:49:PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Amex v Matty - Partial success

                              Matty, I've asked this question twice, and I'm going to ask it again. Forgive me if you have answered it already and I've missed it.

                              Is there an outstanding balance now? Did you clear the card down to NIL.?
                              Is no longer here

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Amex v Matty - Partial success

                                Originally posted by TUTTSI View Post
                                The FSA rule on PPI refund - interest

                                http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/policy/ps10_12.pdf

                                Annex 2 'Material Examples' from page 104

                                Indded - Example 6 seems to be me....I now understand the application of 8% SI in as much that this would only apply if the balance was paid of in a particular month / months.
                                This was not the case with my Amex card ,I therefore believe that I should be repaid the intrest applied to these charges a t contract rate (compounded).
                                I do not therefore now understand the FOS line at all as it is not consistent to the FSA guideliens.
                                Nor do I understand Amex's offer to pay only 8% after 2007 when they claim to have stopped applying charges (which I have proven to be not the case with my account).

                                Does anyone know what they are doing....or is it just Amex doing a bit of 'horsetrading' to save a few points on the intrerest repaid?

                                If so ,as I started out saying,they will have profited from their wrong doing.

                                Matty.

                                PS Example 2 will also come in handy for my loan ppi refund calcs.

                                Comment

                                View our Terms and Conditions

                                LegalBeagles Group uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience and to create a secure and effective website. By using this website, you are consenting to such use.To find out more and learn how to manage cookies please read our Cookie and Privacy Policy.

                                If you would like to opt in, or out, of receiving news and marketing from LegalBeagles Group Ltd you can amend your settings at any time here.


                                If you would like to cancel your registration please Contact Us. We will delete your user details on request, however, any previously posted user content will remain on the site with your username removed and 'Guest' inserted.
                                Working...
                                X