Bank Charges - illegal?

bookworm1363

I have just had a letter back from Yorkshire Bank (well its on clydesdale but its part of the National Australia Bank) saying my statements are not covered under the data subject access. I have telephoned them to say that I believe they are and that I will go to the IC if required. They have said it is fine to go to them as they have defended this many a time with them.

Durant vs FSA:
"Provided the information in question can be linked to an identifiable individual the
following are also examples of personal data:
• information about the medical history of an individual;
• an individual’s salary details;
• information concerning an individual’s tax liabilities;
• information comprising an individual’s bank statements; and
• information about individuals’ spending preferences."

So in short: yes, they're bluffing. Don't let them intimidate you. Good luck.

xxx
ML

ali82

I will be calling them later to advise this and to also put the point across that I should be able to get a list of charges applied to my account as part of the information so they can do more work.

Let them know that they will be charge £700 from the I.C to look into it.

Kylie

tylerdurden_167 wrote:

I have just read every post on this thread over the last 2 nights and I am inspired by it.

I have paid out over £400 to HSBC since last Jan (and I still have 2 statements I cannot find so is likely to be more) and I'm chomping at the bit to get this money back.

I have a couple of queries if anyone can help ;

1) Once I have received my £400+ from the bank, should they wish to close the account, I will still be approx £550 in the red, what is the procedure towards paying this back to them ie how much time do I have or would I need to settle ASAP?

2) I have approx £40-60 worth of charges on a joint account with my partner (also a HSBC account), should I file one claim with them for both accounts or deal with each account seperately?

3) Lastly, I am sure the answer to this is No, but anyway, would they have any right to close this other (joint) account with them (eg tell me I am no longer wanted as a customer) or would this account remain "untouchable"?

Thanks.

I had an accoutn with HSBC, opened in my name and then a couple of years later, made into a joint account with my partner. Also had a HSBC credit card. I sent one letter with a list of charges from both c/c and chq account (when it was sole & joint) and they refunded all the charges (and interest I charged them). Did not close account. Absolutely no problems.

Mattjimf

just found this article on the bbc website, here is the start of it:

A campaign is being launched telling Glasgow University students that many bank charges may be unlawful and could be challenged in the courts.
It follows research at the university which found that its students pay up to £1.3m a year in bank charges.

Many of the charges were levied after students went over their overdraft limit, some by as little as £4 or £5.

A Plymouth student recently received £5,000 in compensation for unfair bank charges in an out-of-court settlement.

An advice centre is now being set up at Glasgow University. Workers there have teamed up with Govan Law Centre, which has undertaken pioneering work on the issue.

carlih1

gothicf0rm wrote:

well the halifax have made me a full out of court offer. they havent even bothered to file a defence. the most interesting thing is they still say the bank charges are my fault (most of them arent) and then say they are settling because of commercial reasons - theyd win but their costs would be more than the money they owe me. yeah yeah... solicitors dont cost almost 2 grand for an afternoon.

i argued that as of jan 2004 the charges were greater than my overdraft level and therefore the entire overdraft existed because of the charges and they should refund all the interest theyd taken from my account from this moment on. after the first charge had that money been instantly refunded i would never have gone over my overdraft limit ever so they should also refund the entire difference between the authorised and unauthorised interest rates from this point which was december 2001. i think im the first person to have stuck this in his claim.

i have replied to the halifax telling them their offer is acceptable and that i will withdraw the claim after they have paid the money into my account. should there be delays i will proceed with the legal action until the money is paid in so im guessing they'll make a deposit tomorrow.

i think this shows you can enlarge the scope of your complaint past the charges and 8% interest under the county courts act and also get the interest theyve charged you that is a direct result of the charges.

I have sent halifax my first letter which they have ignored, how much farther did u take it one more letter or just straight to court?

Carli

equitydealer

bookworm1363 wrote:

Ah, good one!... Unfortunately, totally wrong. Barclaycard will refund you ONCE and once only as a "goodwill gesture" and will give you a patronising lecture in the process on how to handle your finances. :mad:

As for Barclays, they have now altered their T&Cs to advise that they will refund you ONCE if you haven't been refunded in the previous 12 months. (Received leaflet this AM). Methinks they can feel the winds of change blowing their way, and are going to try that approach as the new fob-off for people wanting their 6 years worth of illegal charges back :rolleyes:

xxx
ML

I did not get a patronising lecture, they were quite apologetic! That does not mean I back the level of Barclaycard's late payment fees though, but there needs to be a charge levied on people who do pay late. Set up a direct debit for the minimum or full balance payment, it's not rocket science.

dchurch24

[Jay] wrote:

Well im in the process of two claims online with HMCS.
One with Halifax and the other with Natwest.
Havnt heard anything from Halifax but the HMCS tells me that Natwest have acknowledged the claim.
I have also received in the post a notice of Acknowledgement of Service that Natwest intend to defend all of this claim.
Is this normal or standard procedure, how far does this really go?
Hope someone can give me some sound words, just feel a little worried as this is all new to me.
Thank you.

Nothing to worry about - it just buys them 28 days from the day they were issued the papers rather than 14.

The next step is that they will (might) enter a defence - it's all part of the poker game - they are pushing to see how far you will take it. If they do this, the next step will be that you receive a court allocation questionnaire to complete - easy, just a few questions to fill in if you are not a solicitor, if you are then abotu 3 questions more to complete- send that back - then the bank will most likely realise that you are not to be messed with and give you your money back.

Take it all the way; you have nothing to lose apart from the initial court costs - IMO, you will get the whole lot back anyway - they would LOSE in court, because the law on contracts re. Punitive vs. Liquidated is well documented and cemented in case law.

dchurch24

homer_j wrote:

I have just had a letter back from Yorkshire Bank (well its on clydesdale but its part of the National Australia Bank) saying my statements are not covered under the data subject access. I have telephoned them to say that I believe they are and that I will go to the IC if required. They have said it is fine to go to them as they have defended this many a time with them.

Is this a bluff? Has anybody else successfully claimed against Yorkshire Bank?

Just to add this is a closed account. I have just typed out the main bidy of the letter:

Quote---->

Under the DPA you have a right to see what our organisation holds about you, this is known as a data subject access request, which entitles you to be told if any personal data are held about you. The information should include what sort of data we hold, the purpose for which data is processed and the type. As your joint account is no longer open there is no available data to provide and therefore have returned your cheque.

Application for copy statements is not included in a subject access request and must be ordered through your branch separatel. We have a charging structure in place for duplicate statements and the fee is £5 per copy.

end quote

---

>

Bluff is not the word - outright lie is the term that should be used.

They HAVE TO keep your records for a minimum of 7 years unless you request that they destroy them - and that is not an easy task.

They are just trying their luck - report them straight away to the IC.

Switch

I am going to be sending my letters for the refund of charges to HSBC Bank and Lloyds TSB this weekend.

I am however going to charge them for the privilege of having my money due to punitive charges the very same extortionate rate of interest, as they would charge. If my request for the refund of charges including the extortionate rate of interest is not made in full then I will take the case to Court and add a further 8%.

My theory is; if it gets as far as Court then I will be told that I’m a silly boy and I am unable to charge the 29 odd % and this will be deducted from my claim (fair enough).

So if the requests are paid in full outside of Court I get the 29 odd % in interest (They screwed me, now I’m screwing them back thank you very much).

If the case does goes to Court then I get my charges back plus the 8% and have demonstrated to anyone that has any doubts that the bank charges are not enforceable by law.

Either way I see it as a win win situation but I some how think the banks will go for the first option of settling out of Court to stop further bad publicity, which is of course the option that I would prefer for financial gain reasons.

dchurch24

It has come to my attention (and anyone who reads this thread) that the banks are playing the only defence they have as regards to these bank charges - i.e. wriggling and writhing when it comes to the DPA - don't worry about it.

Just file an online claim for an unknown amount e.g. "I expect to recover no more than £2000" for instance.

That is a valid claim and the court will not look kindly on a big company's pathetic attempts to bully/wriggle it's way out of it's legal responsibility. If the amount you are claiming for is more than the actual amount and as a consequence the court charges are higher then that is a problem for the bank - not you - I can't see a judge siding with them over that when they have blatantly flouted the DPA and as a result made it impossible for you to claim accuratly.