• 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.

Current account charges

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

  • Current account charges

    Hi, thanks for your help Amethyst,

    I have applied for a court hearing via moneyclaim to reclaim unfair unauthorised overdraft charges from Barclays. From what I have read so far, on various forums and consumer websites, there is a chance of reclaiming under various points of Law that were not covered, or no was judgement made, in the Nov 2009 OFT test case.

    I have been turned down by the FOS on hardship grounds as Barclays didn't know I was hard up. In fact I was on Jobseekers allowance for seven months, the only income coming into our joint account. They actually absorbed one fortnightly payment into our overdraft on one occasion leaving me and my family (3 kids) with nothing. They did however give the money back the following day as I think they are not allowed to do that, or its not Barclays policy to absorb benefits.

    Anyway, to get back to my claim, I have pasted my particulars of claim below (excluding the long list of charges 2005-2008). Any helpful feedback would be most welcome!

    Expecting Barclays to request a ‘strike out’, I now have a response ready after reading the ‘Hull 20’ case from 2007. The other move I am bracing myself for is a move to a higher court (out of small claims).


    PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

    MY REASONS FOR CLAIMING

    Account number: xxxx and account number: xxxx

    I am claiming against Barclays Bank as I believe that they should repay all the charges in relation to direct debits, unauthorised overdrafts and standing orders that have been applied to my account in the past six years.

    I have worked very hard to earn a living as a self-employed skilled worker and find it heinous that Barclays Bank has levied unfair and disproportionately high charges against the two Bank Accounts I hold with them.

    The relationship between me and Barclays Bank is unfair because Barclays have taken advantage of my personal circumstances by applying bank charges to my accounts that are tailored to create profit for them and to the detriment of any social responsibility and accountability to customers such as myself. By debiting anything from £30 up to £265 in one single month from my account on an ongoing basis has put considerable strain on my ability to manage my finances and provide for my wife and three children as the sole income provider (2005- 2008).

    Furthermore, Barclays Bank was in the unique and privileged position of having direct access and control of my funds. Unlike most other services, were I could withhold payment or at least argue my case, before parting with my money for a poor or overpriced service, the charges/penalties levied upon me by Barclays Bank occurred without consideration to my personal spending priorities such as purchasing groceries, paying a utility bill or paying a creditor.

    I do not believe it to be fair that I should be financially penalised by Barclays Bank and their clearly disproportionate charges that have been conceived to ensnare customers like myself who struggle to manage their finances.

    It is the overall size of the charges applied, repeatedly over time and the circumstances and manor that they have been applied that is my grievance.



    In brief, my claim is based upon my rights as a consumer:
    • It is not legal that Barclays Bank has charged me, and a proportionately small number of customers like me, excessively high charges to cross-subsidise free banking services for the rest of its customers who have remained in credit.
    • It is not fair that the bank account market in the period 2005 – 2008 did not offer a readily available alternative bank account that had the option, for example, to opt-out of paying over limit charges in exchange for a ‘fair’ fixed monthly fee.
    • It is not legal that the charges levied upon my accounts by Barclays Bank are disproportionately high when compared to the cost of providing my bank accounts to me. I have already paid interest on my overdraft facility and the following monthly ‘Account fees’
    -£9.50 per month from 01/09/2004 to 01/12/2005
    -£10.00 per month from 03/01/2006 to 02/10/2006
    -£11.50 per month from 01/11/2006 to 01/05/2008
    • By law, if the Barclays Banks charges that have been levied against me are liquidated damages they should reflect the actual costs incurred and not exceed the damages the bank suffered due to a breach of contract. If the Barclays Banks charges that have been levied against me are a fee for a service they must be reasonable under the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982. I invite Barclays Bank to prove to me and the court the fairness of the charges that I am claiming for by way of a breakdown of their actual business costs for each charge as itemised in my list of Barclays Bank charges on the following pages.
    • Barclays Bank has unlawfully taken money out of my Bank Accounts without my permission.

    CLAIM DETAILS

    1. The Claimant holds two current accounts with Barclays Bank (“the Current Accounts”).

    2. The Current Accounts are operated in accordance with the standard terms and conditions which Barclays Bank applies to current accounts held with it (“the Standard Terms”). The Standard Terms were not individually negotiated between the Claimant and the Barclays Bank.

    3. During the periods particularised in paragraph 4 below, the Current Accounts were in unauthorised overdraft. The terms on which the said overdraft was granted and/or continued were contained in the Standard Terms. Accordingly, in respect of those periods during which the Current Accounts were overdrawn, the Standard Terms constituted a credit agreement between the Claimant and Barclays Bank pursuant to s.140C of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

    4. The periods during which the Current Accounts were overdrawn are:
    (1) September 2005and April 2008.


    5. Pursuant to the Standard Terms, Barclays Bank has levied the following charges on the Claimant in respect of the operation of the Current Accounts (“the Bank Charges”):
    (1) £3,075.

    6. The Standard Terms and/or the circumstances in which the Bank Charges were levied were such that the relationship between Barclays Bank (as creditor) and the Claimant (as debtor) arising out of the Standard Terms is and/or was unfair to the Claimant (as debtor) within s.140A(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. In particular, and without prejudice to the burden of proof which rests on Barclays Bank to prove that the circumstances of its relationship with the Claimant are fair (pursuant to s.140B(9) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974), the relationship between the Claimant and Barclays Bank was unfair in the following respects:
    (1) The charges provided for by the Standard Terms were (or had the potential to be) excessive in comparison with the level of borrowing which triggered the levying of the said charges.
    (2) The charges provided for by the Standard Terms were (or had the potential to be) excessive and punitive in comparison with the costs to Barclays Bank caused by the conduct which triggered the Bank Charges.
    (3) The charges provided for by the Standard Terms were set by reference to the overall cost to Barclays Bank of providing current accounts to all of its customers which held such an account, rather than merely to the cost of the conduct by the Claimant which triggered the charges thereby effectively requiring the Claimant to subsidise the provision of current accounts by Barclays Bank to other customers.
    (4) In the premises Barclays Bank did not deal fairly as between the Claimant and its other customers.
    (5) The existence and quantum of the charges provided for by the Standard Terms and/or the circumstances in which those charges were levied were inadequately and/or insufficiently explained and/or drawn to the attention of the Claimant either:
    (a) When the Current Accounts were first opened; and/or
    (b) When the Claimant gave an instruction to Barclays Bank which would result in the levying of a charge; and/or
    (c) Otherwise before any particular charge was applied.
    (6) The circumstances and manner in which the charges were levied created potential for:
    (a) The application of multiple charges; and/or
    (b) The levying of charges to give rise to the application of further charges.
    (7) The complexity of the charges provided for by the Standard Terms and/or the circumstances in which they were levied.
    (8) The nature of the charges and/or the circumstances of their application was such as to cause inherent difficulties in predicting the incidence and amount of such charges in advance.
    (9) The absence of any effective competition between providers of current accounts which restricted the ability of the Claimant to chose a current account operated on terms which did not provide for charges such as (and/or equivalent to) those levied by Barclays Bank pursuant to the Standard Terms.

    7. Further or alternatively, by reason of each of the facts and matters set out above (save for those matters which relate to the level of the Bank Charges as against the service supplied in exchange), the contractual terms pursuant to which Barclays Bank levied the Bank Charges were unfair pursuant to article 5(1) of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 because, contrary to the requirement of good faith, they caused a significant imbalance in the parties’ rights and obligations arising under the Standard Terms, to the detriment of the Claimant.

    8. If considered as a fee for a service, the charges levied upon the claimant are disproportionately high and must be reasonable under Section 15 of the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982.

    9. By reason of the matters aforesaid, the Claimant is entitled to and claims hereby:
    (1) Repayment of all sums paid by the Claimant by way of the Bank Charges as particularised above.
    (2) Alternatively, the repayment of such part of the Bank Charges as the Court thinks fit in all the circumstances.
    (3) An order that the Defendant shall cease to levy the Bank Charges on the Claimant pursuant to the Standard Terms.
    (4) A declaration that those terms within the Standard Terms pursuant to which the Barclays Bank levied the Bank Charges are unenforceable by Barclays Bank.

    10. Further, the Claimant claims interest pursuant to section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 on the amount found to be due to him at 8% or such a rate and for such period as the Court thinks fit.
    AND the Claimant claims:
    (1) Alternatively such sum as the Court thinks fit by way of repayment of all sums paid by the Claimant by way of the Bank Charges
    (2) An order that the Barclays Bank shall cease to levy the Bank Charges on the Claimant pursuant to the Standard Terms
    (3) A declaration that those terms within the Standard Terms pursuant to which Barclays Bank levied the Bank Charges are unenforceable by Barclays Bank
    (4) Interest pursuant to section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984
    (5) Further or other relief
    (6) Costs


    LIST OF BARCLAYS BANK CHARGES
    (EXCLUDING ACCOUNT FEES AND OVERDRAFT INTREST CHARGES)

    Long list of charges ....
    Tags: None

  • #2
    Re: Current account charges

    The fees £9.50 to £11.50 is for the additions account, ie an account with extras which was not obligatory to have.
    The "hull 20" cases you mention are prior to the OFT test case and so any preparation for them is irrelevant.
    To date, very few payouts have been made and a handful since the end of the OFT test case but with specific inidividual traits.

    You are going to have to argue that every single solitary charge is disproportionate in your specific circumstances and apply the relevant law to each and every charge.

    Currently you're facing an uphill battle.
    "Family means that no one gets forgotten or left behind"
    (quote from David Ogden Stiers)

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Current account charges

      Hi, thanks for your feedback,

      I know, its going to be hard / impossible as there would have been many more success before me. I'm finding it hard to accept that the charges can be so unfairly high in market with no real account choices (2005-2008). I'm still inclined to fight and put in the hours required (if not the money) to strengthen my case.

      I'm glad there is a choice of account products now and the charges have come down somewhat but I still feel ripped-off.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Current account charges

        Originally posted by Stevos46 View Post
        Hi, thanks for your feedback,

        I know, its going to be hard / impossible as there would have been many more success before me. I'm finding it hard to accept that the charges can be so unfairly high in market with no real account choices (2005-2008). I'm still inclined to fight and put in the hours required (if not the money) to strengthen my case.

        I'm glad there is a choice of account products now and the charges have come down somewhat but I still feel ripped-off.
        steve, look I admire the fact that you are willing to go for it and are willing to put the time and energy into it. Have you read both the OFT test case transcripts plus the legal opinion by Anthony Scrivener QC?
        "Family means that no one gets forgotten or left behind"
        (quote from David Ogden Stiers)

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Current account charges

          LB's initial views on the Legal Issues submitted to OFT - Legal Beagles Consumer Forum
          and
          Important - full Legal Opinion and update on LB's position on bank charge reclaims - Legal Beagles Consumer Forum
          and Legal Beagles Consumer Forum (scrivener's opinion)

          May be of use.


          You have very minimal personal information in your POC and many of those arguments have fallen by the wayside. That you have already been through the FOS on hardship grounds and been refused also serves to weaken your case particularly in the s.140 CCA argument.

          You also need to read Bank Charge Claims in Courts System - next steps - Legal Beagles Consumer Forum forum and Legal Beagles Consumer Forum forum.
          #staysafestayhome

          Any support I provide is offered without liability, if you are unsure please seek professional legal guidance.

          Received a Court Claim? Read >>>>> First Steps

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Current account charges

            Thankyou both,

            I have read AS's opinion but I really need to read it a couple more times to absorb it. I have an overdraft with Barclays that is almost the same amount as I am claiming, it has been frozen for 3 years so they may take me to court at some point. I am holding out hope that there may be a valid legal argument left. I will read-up and let you know how I get on.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Current account charges

              Sorry to just give you a lot of reading Stevo but sadly it is really the only thing we can advise so you have a full grasp of the current situation.

              Any questions on specific areas please feel free to ask. Overall the opinion will be quite negative and you really have to find an angle to hit this from - probably the benefits angle would hold most water - they took all your benefits one week but then after complaining returned them - at that point they would have been fully aware of your financial situation - did the complaint through FOS cover that ? Did charges continue from that point ? Did you take action (such as cancelling DD's etc) to minimise risk of charges ? Did bank advise you to take any other action ?
              #staysafestayhome

              Any support I provide is offered without liability, if you are unsure please seek professional legal guidance.

              Received a Court Claim? Read >>>>> First Steps

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Current account charges

                One slightly (possibly daft) question I have to ask. Are the Bank charges a 'Service' or a 'Penalty for breach of contract'? Does the fact that the charges can't be assessed for fairness under UTCCR mean they cannot be challenged under the supply of Goods and Services Act 1982?

                I believe the burden of proof lies with the bank to prove to the court that the charges are fair?

                Reading all I can to absorb the basics! I will personalise the charge instances in my POC.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Current account charges

                  Penalty charges for breach of contract is a no since the charges are already in the contract, you can't breach a contract and be charged a penalty if the penalty, so to speak, is within the contract because that means that there is no breach.

                  Can you see if you can answer some of the questions amethyst has asked ya.
                  "Family means that no one gets forgotten or left behind"
                  (quote from David Ogden Stiers)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Current account charges

                    Hi, thankyou for the clarification,

                    sorry, to answer your questions Amethyst, the swallowing of my Job seekers allowance occurred in July 2008, just at the end of the period I am claiming for. I have had some charges since then but mostly interest only on my £,3000 overdraft which has sat with only a small amount paid back (about £800 on both accounts). Since 2008 my day-to-day banking has been with Halifax . The interest charges (2008-2011) have pushed my Barclays accounts back up to £3000+ again.

                    I ran my own business and suffered from mental exhaustion which (without all the personal health details) was liquidated in 2008. The period I am claiming for was, mostly, while I was pretty ill 2007-2008 and before that.

                    I like your angle that the Bank could have seen, by the account activity, that I was in trouble. I will pick through the transactions to gather evidence of this. They also held my business account which closed on liquidation of the Ltd Company. I no longer have the Ltd company statements unfortunately as they now the property of the receiver.

                    I did highlight my personal circumstances to the FOS (including the swallowed benefit payment) before being turned down. I went back to them and they said I could appeal but there was little hope. I felt rather than wait for 3, 6 or 12 months, I would go the Court route as it is quicker. I have successfully fought for payment in court before so I am used to the format. However I do realize that a bank charges claim is at an entirely different level.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Current account charges

                      Hi, back again.

                      Thankyou for your support so far Ame and leclerc.

                      Barclays are using Simmons & Simmons and they have put in an application to strike out. I know the chances are slim but I'm really up for a fight on this. I have read quite a few other threads and found dyfrigs story interesting and useful; particularly the defense put up by Santanders legal team. dyfrigs motivation is where I'm coming from but I know I'm going to have to personalise my case with as many specific instances of unfairness as possible (or all of them individually) to stand a chance. Where I can remember I will mention the impact the charge had on me and my family. Jennifer Sharp's story (picked up from another site) was also interesting. A shame it didn't get any further due to costs.

                      S&S have written to me saying I have set myself a 'high bar' with my claim. At least their is a bar to aim for! I have written back in answer to their letter citing specific laws and evidence from the Commons Select Committee enquiry and a Vince Cable TV interview regarding competition amongst banks and the fairness of the charges.

                      It looks like a lot of this is down to getting a sympathetic judge as well as a thoroughly prepared case.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Current account charges

                        The Sharp/RBS case is still alive as far as I know - there was a procedural hearing recently.

                        RBS successfully applied to have the case moved from small claims to a higher court - due to the complexity of the issues - which would expose the claimant to costs (which I suspect Barclays may do in your case) but Govan secured legal aid for their client which allows them to ask the court for a protective costs order.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Current account charges

                          I now have a hearing date in a months time, 2 hours set aside for my case. Barclays applied for a strike out and costs.

                          I'm going to work now on personalising my story as best I can. I'm thinking that gathering information to support the fact that the 2009 OFT case was not a blanket 'get out' for all other cases as that seems to be the way the banks are going. the BIS testimonies and I have a letter from my MP saying they are doing their bast for fair charges and treatment.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Current account charges

                            I'd just like to say good luck, I would love to see a success story here, I think there are too many of these stories of the banks being robbing bastewerds, I personally lost £650 in 4 months to charges from Natwst and have no way of reclaiming....

                            Good Luck Stevos.
                            ~Never has PPI refunds been owed to so many...by so few~

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Current account charges

                              Thanks PTD, the support means a lot. I'm sick of being fleeced by Institutions that many years ago could be trusted but have now embraced this opportunistic, asset stripping culture that seems to be an acceptable way of doing business with their customers.

                              I now read all the terms and conditions for any service I purchase as it seems this is where Banks and Insurance companies see a 'profit center' opportunity.

                              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