Bank Charges Reclaiming Guide discussion

chrisharri

pool-hustler wrote: »

I spoke to Natwest today and they said claimers have no chance any more.
She said the court case means they don't have to pay the charges!

Yeah Natwest are being very difficult. I wouldn't listen to the call centre people, they just do what they're told. I would send of the new template, using either the human arguement, the new legal arguement or both.See what response you get from Natwest then, and take it from there.

Premier_2

Redrage wrote: »

Having sent in an amended letter of complaint, I received a letter from Bank of Scotland today, that outright refuses to budge and makes no attempt to offer an explanation of the fees and how they are handled, other than to state that they feel they are fair.

Does anyone have any advice to offer about what I should do next? I was planning to write to the FOS. I have perviously done so regarding hardship but they felt that because I was not defaulting I was not in hardship, despite having returned to full time education and only managing to repay by good use of a student overdraft and student loan! Can I still write to them or have I no choce but to try court???

Thanks for any advice you can offer.

Hi Redrage, and welcome to MSE :hello:

Was your amended letter based on the advice of the latest MSE guide to reclaiming bank charges?
http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/reclaim/bank-charges

That guide has lots of good information, including the likely event that you would receive a rejection letter.
Have a further read; it explains what else you can try.

Redrage

Hi premier, thanks for the welcome (I am a long time lurker though)! I used the new template, using the contractual arguements which I thought was excellent. The bank have ignored all the points and simply point out that as far as they are concerned I have no legal case and the charges are fair.

I am going to reply as chillxxx suggested and if that fails I will contact the FOS again, as my uni funding runs out in June. At that stage I will start faulting payments as I only have a saturday job that does not cover my outgoings and the job market is very slow. Is it a good idea to make the bank aware of that point and promising them to make sure they are the last to get what I have if they do not deal with my complaint to my satisfaction?

sianysian69

sianysian69 wrote: »

Good evening

I had a letter from HSBC on 18th December 2009 after my original complaint from July 2007 has been on hold. Value - £2982.38

The letter says i've got 8 weeks to raise my concerns "if I believe my charges are unfair on grounds other than the level of the charges"

It says that I need to write to:

The Senior Manager
Service Quality Team
HSBC Bank Plc
Arlington Business Centre
Millshaw Park Lane
Leeds
LS11 0PP

Am i right in thinking that I need to still contact the financial ombudsman (as per guide), and send them a copy too?

If not, what do I send to this senior manager?

Any help gratefully received.

Sian

Still heard nothing on this , please can someone help i really need to get this sorted ASAP.

Sian

chillxxx

You need to follow the article on the main MSE website, and decide weather you qualify for the hardship / humane approach or send an amended compliant using the legal agrument. i am guessing by your last post that as these charges have been incurred some time ago that the legal agrument would best suite you. But have a read of the article and decide upon your own circumstances

Redrage

chillxxx wrote: »

You need to follow the article on the main MSE website, and decide weather you qualify for the hardship / humane approach or send an amended compliant using the legal agrument. i am guessing by your last post that as these charges have been incurred some time ago that the legal agrument would best suite you. But have a read of the article and decide upon your own circumstances

I did so at the time, I felt I did qualify but the FOS sided with the bank stating that because I was not defaulting, I didn't qualify even though I was/am well and truely over-committed. The letter from the FOS said my claim should remain on hold until the court case is resolved. To be honest both the human and contractual arguements apply.

gjs1701

Tried again to clain from Nationwide. Originally claimed in Jan 2008, was in hardship then, but the claim was declined pending the outcome of the court decision.

I claimed with new template letter (the legal arguement), with some additions of my own, but no mentions of hardship. I am not currently in hardship.

Today, I received a response from Nationwide. They say: 'Before we can proceed with your refund request we need you to provide us with further information as to when you started experiencing financial difficulty and what has caused this situation.'

So what next? My inclination is to write back and say I am not claiming on the grounds of hardship, but reiterate the legal arguement.

A second option would be to dig out my copies of my original hardship details and explain that I was in hardship at the time of my original claim.

Any thoughts, suggestions?

chillxxx

Redrage wrote: »

I did so at the time, I felt I did qualify but the FOS sided with the bank stating that because I was not defaulting, I didn't qualify even though I was/am well and truely over-committed. The letter from the FOS said my claim should remain on hold until the court case is resolved. To be honest both the human and contractual arguements apply.

Sorry I was responding to sinanysian69. i am new to this forum posting game.

I still think your best appraoch is repsond to your bank asking them to repsond previous letter set out any hard ship arguments have a look at your past statement highlight any points where you where in a cycle of charges you couldn't get out off etc. The banks will be recieving thousands of letters downloaded from this site. They will well aware they've been downloaded and think people can be easily fobbed off. If your are persistant and taylor your agruments to your specific circumstances you separate your case from the masses. If don't they adequately repsond to your letter it will to there deteriment in front of the ombusman or a court. If you address all your letters to them Without predjudice it own't predjudice your case in front of a court,

The more effort you put into your letter the more work and expense the bank will incurr dealing with your case and will show persistant and may reside to making an offer.

As it says in the main article getting your money back isn't going to be easy and more the presistant you are the more likely you are to see any form of refund. Most banks are not going to simple roll over and pay out hundreds or thousands because some one has downlaoded a letter of the internet and added there details to it, no matter how good the agruments.

ATB

Redrage

chillxxx wrote: »

Sorry I was responding to sinanysian69. i am new to this forum posting game.

I still think your best appraoch is repsond to your bank asking them to repsond previous letter set out any hard ship arguments have a look at your past statement highlight any points where you where in a cycle of charges you couldn't get out off etc. The banks will be recieving thousands of letters downloaded from this site. They will well aware they've been downloaded and think people can be easily fobbed off. If your are persistant and taylor your agruments to your specific circumstances you separate your case from the masses. If don't they adequately repsond to your letter it will to there deteriment in front of the ombusman or a court. If you address all your letters to them Without predjudice it own't predjudice your case in front of a court,

The more effort you put into your letter the more work and expense the bank will incurr dealing with your case and will show persistant and may reside to making an offer.

As it says in the main article getting your money back isn't going to be easy and more the presistant you are the more likely you are to see any form of refund. Most banks are not going to simple roll over and pay out hundreds or thousands because some one has downlaoded a letter of the internet and added there details to it, no matter how good the agruments.

ATB

Thanks, I will spend this evening producing a new letter using both lines of arguement.

markdsmith_2

gjs1701 wrote: »

Tried again to clain from Nationwide. Originally claimed in Jan 2008, was in hardship then, but the claim was declined pending the outcome of the court decision.

I claimed with new template letter (the legal arguement), with some additions of my own, but no mentions of hardship. I am not currently in hardship.

Today, I received a response from Nationwide. They say: 'Before we can proceed with your refund request we need you to provide us with further information as to when you started experiencing financial difficulty and what has caused this situation.'

So what next? My inclination is to write back and say I am not claiming on the grounds of hardship, but reiterate the legal arguement.

A second option would be to dig out my copies of my original hardship details and explain that I was in hardship at the time of my original claim.

Any thoughts, suggestions?

I too am trying to claim against Nationwide. I even contacted their CEO directly and got a call from them that very same day. BUT they are still refusing to budge. My argument is that my hardship was caused due to the fees as the fees always came out before the DDs , thus causing them to fail and therefore incurring further charges. They refute this and just say I should've managed my account better!!

Thye are still refusing to pay out.

Has anyone managed to get any money from Nationwide under the hardship cause? If so I would like to know as their final statement says "we have to be fair and consistent in our approach". If they have paid out then it would only be "fair" to pay others as well.