littlewoods charges

Goldielox_2

cali_ wrote: »

It's been months and months since i have been sending littlewoods letter after letter to get my charges back. They have refused in every reply. Now i'm stuck. I don't know if i want to take it to the FOS or if i should leave it. They might close the account out of spite and i don't really want to close my account yet.

I am in same position, keep getting refusal letters, I'm going to FOS, if they close my account it's no odds I'll never deal with them again anyway!

fayei

well i've had my first reply, as expected they told me to look into my terms and conditions etc..... next stop FOS.....

anyone else any further forward with them??

Goldielox_2

Hi fayei

I've had no luck so I've posted my form off to FOS. I'll let you know when I get response perhaps you would also do the same. thanks

mumofthreeboys

thanks fayei im in the process of re-writing the letters so hopefully i'll get somewhere this time,

on a good note i've just checked my marshall ward account online and they've refunded over £200 in admin fee's and interest and they told me a year ago they wouldnt refund any (i havent wrote to them since) , so hopefully they will refund my other accounts

the_insider

natweststaffmember wrote: »

Dare you to prove it? Only a court can decide what is a fair charge. I can source the information about only a court being able to decide what a fair charge is under UTCCR 1999, can you source the costs for collection without going through the process involved which WILL involve a cost to the provider(before you suggest that I am saying there is no cost)?

I'm not saying that the charges are fair or that £12 is the actual cost of the administration of a missed payment but it a bit naive to think that the only cost the bank incurs is for sending a letter.

natweststaffmember

the_insider wrote: »

I'm not saying that the charges are fair or that £12 is the actual cost of the administration of a missed payment but it a bit naive to think that the only cost the bank incurs is for sending a letter.

On your previous post you are justifying the charge by saying what it is for. I am saying that you are naive to suggest that it is for one thing when clearly no credit card company is stating what their costs are. The OFT report on default charges on credit cards states that while the limit is a threshold they are not expecting the companies simply to align their charges to that threshold to avoid action. As an off topic remark, that statement appears to contradict their current account report since they stated they were not a "price fixing organisation"(COUGH, COUGH!).
Until a bank is willing to openly share the cost of a default on a credit/store or catalogue account then the advice is to claim the lot and force their hand. If they are unwilling to do so then they have to pay out.

daviduk1976

Hiya guys, just trying to get charges back from Littlewoods catalogue. Got standard letter telling me to bog off.....charges amount to £125. Unsure of which letter is next......could someone do the link plz.....I can't tell which one to use

oops bit thick! lol

Many thanks


David xxx

natweststaffmember

daviduk1976 wrote: »

Hiya guys, just trying to get charges back from Littlewoods catalogue. Got standard letter telling me to bog off.....charges amount to £125. Unsure of which letter is next......could someone do the link plz.....I can't tell which one to use

oops bit thick! lol

Many thanks


David xxx

If you are using the reclaim credit card charges template then it is the next letter.

the_insider

natweststaffmember wrote: »

On your previous post you are justifying the charge by saying what it is for. I am saying that you are naive to suggest that it is for one thing when clearly no credit card company is stating what their costs are. The OFT report on default charges on credit cards states that while the limit is a threshold they are not expecting the companies simply to align their charges to that threshold to avoid action. As an off topic remark, that statement appears to contradict their current account report since they stated they were not a "price fixing organisation"(COUGH, COUGH!).
Until a bank is willing to openly share the cost of a default on a credit/store or catalogue account then the advice is to claim the lot and force their hand. If they are unwilling to do so then they have to pay out.

I'm not justifying anything. That's for the bank's to do in court, right? I just think it's dangerous for people to go into these things thinking that the argument of "it doesn't cost £12 to send a letter" is going to get them anywhere. Because as the banks have always maintained, that's not just what you're being charged for.

natweststaffmember

the_insider wrote: »

I'm not justifying anything. That's for the bank's to do in court, right? I just think it's dangerous for people to go into these things thinking that the argument of "it doesn't cost £12 to send a letter" is going to get them anywhere. Because as the banks have always maintained, that's not just what you're being charged for.

And I would always say, I couldn't care less whether you think it costs/does not cost £12.00 for a letter(which I would agree with you is irrelevant to the charge anyway). No bank is prepared to go to court and justify their charge. They did provide figures to the OFT when they were compiling the report on default fees and when the OFT invited them to charge the true costs, they chose instead to go down to the level that the OFT would not take action. TO be honest, the OFT is becoming more and more irrelevant anyway since it pays lip service to consumers and chooses not to do the right thing. I certainly have lost faith in the OFT as it stands today. They were relevant once, they are a waste of money now.