Bank Charges Reclaiming Guide discussion

Premier_2

SydsMum wrote: »

Hi.

I am new to the forum & apologise if I am posting my query in the wrong place. I have a quick query on reclaims under the financial hardship guidelines. I am trying to reclaim a couple of grand in charges (over 2 Halifax accounts) on behalf of my mother who is very sick and meets the hardship criteria on many levels. The claim was originally made prior to the courtcase and the Halifax fobbed her off in January. She took it no further due to ongoing problems and I have reinstated the claim, including the second bank account. Because my mother has shut the main bank account in the meantime, to prevent any more charges, the Halifax are now refusing to deal with this part of the claim (surprise surprise, this is the bank account with the bulk of the charges!). Are they able to do this? Should I pass the matter to the FOS? I was under the impression that the only limitation on claiming was re timescale (ie 6 years max).

Thanks in advance.

If the original claim was made on financial hardship grounds, then it should not have been put on hold. There was a waiver in place during that period for those in financial hardship.

The other problem is that following the final response of the bank regarding the claim, you would only have had 6 months in which to take matter to the FOS .

As your mother has now closed the account, there are presumably no more charges on it, so they are not contibuting to the ongoing financial hardship you say your mother is experiencing.

SydsMum

Hi.

Thanks for your response but you have misunderstood me. The original claim was not under financial hardship, but just the standard one that failed at court. I have been led to believe that the financial hardship could be historic by the MSE reclaiming guide. Is this not the case? My mother was in extreme financial hardship when the charges were incurred. Due to serious illness, she is about to experience difficulties again, a fact that I have only mentioned to the Halifax in that it illustrates how important that it is to her that she recoups some of the charges.

Regards.

Premier_2

SydsMum wrote: »

...I have been led to believe that the financial hardship could be historic by the MSE reclaiming guide. Is this not the case? ...

This is what the article actually says:

..The Ombudsman suggests claiming as far back as you like, and it will decide whether or not all or part of your claim can be considered. Technically it can only help with claims within three years of when you realised there was a problem, so if you’ve been waiting, claim now, although you could argue you didn’t know you could claim until now...

However, recent results from others who were awarded any refund by the FOS because of financial hardship (theres no obligation to any refund, even for those who do prove financial hardship) suggests the FOS only consider charges up to a maximum of 6 months duration, and then only if the account is still open, saying that if the account is closed the charges are not contributing to the financial hardship at this time ... and so a refund would not be an appropriate resolution to the issue.

PJD81

I'm hoping somebody will be able to help with my request...

In response to my first letter asking for details of charges incurred, HSBC have sent me details covering the last 9 years. I am now ready to send the second letter of the process asking them to repay. To what address and to whom do I send this letter? I presume it will be different to the recipient of the first.

Many thanks!

Dirks_Engine_Room

I started proceedings against HSBC regarding bank charges from as far back as 2004. It is not a big amount but the charges kept from being in credit and even on the day I put money into my account to stave off charges - guess what? I still got charged!

Do not hold out any hope, but we'll see. Sent it by e-mail so saved on the stamp!

JaspaC

I am in the process of trying to reclaim unfair charges from natwest,

Whilst going through my statements to find evidence of hardship I noticed that the charging periods shown on the website were wrong. Two of the periods overlapped by a few days each.

Are they in breach of any kind of law by displaying inaccurate data? expecially given that it could have effected my judgement or when my charges would have been taken out (although in this particular case they didnt).

I told natwest this in writing with a print screen and was told " the charging periods are as follows ..... please call our technical team if you have any online ussues". They just fob off every thing I put them.I have written and reveiced 6 letters to and from them and they never directly answer my points, they just restate irrelvant points.

Premier_2

JaspaC wrote: »

...Are they in breach of any kind of law by displaying inaccurate data? expecially given that it could have effected my judgement or when my charges would have been taken out (although in this particular case they didnt)...

I doubt they have broken any law if they happen to have made a genuine error over the dates displayed on their website.

As you don't seem to have suffered from this error, there's not much mileage in worrying about it now.
If you had suffered, you could follow the bank's official complaints procedure; I feel sure even if the bank 'fobbed you off', the ultimate step of complaining to the FOS would result in any loss you had suffered being appropraitely addressed.

JaspaC

fair enouh,

though you can see why such a simple mistake can be very annoying given that if a customer accidentally slips over their overdraft limit without intending (or wanting the bank to allow it) they are charged £38, yet for the bank's mistake, no consequence.


I was just wondering whether there would be any leverage here to demonstrate the unfairness of thier charges by relating them to the banks mistake here, which could be very important.

Premier_2

JaspaC wrote: »

fair enouh,

though you can see why such a simple mistake can be very annoying given that if a customer accidentally slips over their overdraft limit without intending (or wanting the bank to allow it) they are charged £38, yet for the bank's mistake, no consequence.


I was just wondering whether there would be any leverage here to demonstrate the unfairness of thier charges by relating them to the banks mistake here, which could be very important.

As I said, if you (or indeed any customer) had suffered any identifiable loss as a direct result of an error made by the bank, then even if the bank didn't offer appropriate compensation for that loss, the FOS almost certainly would.

However, in this instance, you didn't suffer any loss and so no compensation is applicable.

No windfall payments simply for spotting an error on their website, sorry.

sweetpete

i have had a claim going through with ABC Incorporation ltd and i am getting no response for over 6 mths just an autimated email reply,
i need to get my claim up and running again what can i do,