Reclaimed Bank Charges SUCCESS stories

Edna_Bucket_2

The advice to Bananabus from maniac886 would appear to be more prudent than that of Rex Mundi.

RM's comment about the bank or solicitors not mentioning the joint nature of the account is a complete red herring. Why would they?

As in any legal action, they can only defend the claim they are presented with by the person who presents it. No doubt they'd be perfectly happy for you to fight it out with the other party for their share of the refund in due course!

If you go ahead on your own Bananabus just be aware that if your former partner reappears in the future, he might have a claim on any result you obtain.

Rex_Mundi

Edna_Bucket wrote:

RM's comment about the bank or solicitors not mentioning the joint nature of the account is a complete red herring. Why would they?

How is this a red herring edna? I'm stating facts that I know through experience to be correct. Some people are saying that you have to apply in joint names if the account is in joint names. I can say without doubt, this is not the case. I can also say that any cheques will arrive in the name of the claiment, not in joint names. I can say this because I've done this for someone. I'm not giving advice here because I read it on a another site somewhere, I'm giving advice here through experience.

The moral question of whether to tell the former partner is another matter completely, and one that I haven't advised on. This is up to the individual concerned (although I would do my best to contact the other person).

8erty8oy

Hi all, I have sent off the DPA letter and received all of my bank statements from Natwest, but they have not specified and details about manual intervention as I requested. Obviously if they do decide to defend in court ,can they still use this as an excuse for all of the referal charges they have put against me totalling a sum of £350. Also do Natwest in general pay up?
TIA

Claudie

On behalf of she who shall remain name free....

Lloyds TSB

Claimed £592
Agreed to pay £544

This was as a result of the second letter. We can't for the life of us work out where they got that figure but she is more than happy to accept it; and in true MSE style, she has agreed for me to use the full amount as a payment on her credit card. We are getting there.

Thanks again. Not only have I been able to help said anonymous family member but she is now understanding the full picture of her finances and how to get back on track.

maniac886

BANANABUS wrote:

Could i still claim even though i cannot find my past business partner?

the account close in 2002 and i tried to locate him ,
can a claim in on my own? we alway both had to sign the cheque book!!!

yours Adrian Mole!! ( JIM)

Further to my previous post I believe that it has something to do with the type of joint account. If the account requires both signitures then you will have to have both signitures when you claim,esp with when you get your statements using data protection. If not then you can claim by yourself. This is what i have read on a few threads over on CAG.

Ernest

Hi,

Just received the following from Cahoot..



"I refer to your letter dated the 10th December 2006 regarding your cahoot Current account. I have taken ownership of your particular case in order to provide a response to the issues you have raised.

We do not accept that cahoot charges are unfair under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. The object of these Regulations was not price control nor were they intended to interfere with people's freedom to agree the terms of their contracts.

It is well known that banks make charges and cahoot charges are in line with those of other banks. The terms and conditions of the account and the charges that apply are clear and fair and were provided to you at the time you opened it. You freely agreed to the terms and conditions and the charges when you opened the account. You were not under any obligation to do so and could have gone to another bank if you did not agree to the charges. Equally, you are free to move your account to another bank at any time if you do not agree with the charges.

In any event, we do not agree that the charges are disproportionate. The charges are reasonable and proportionate to the administrative costs incurred by cahoot.

I am therefore unable to refund the charges you've incurred fully appreciating the disappointment this may cause.

If you need anything further please do not hesitate to contact me."

Please be assured I have carried out a full investigation for you and I hope you feel I have offered a fair response to all of the issues you've raised. I will keep your file pen for the next 8 weeks and if I don't hear from you within that time, I will assume that everything is resolved and will close your file. If you remain dissatisfied though you can find details of how to take your complaint further within Abbey at http://www.cahoot.com/legal/legal.html#importantInfo under the heading 'Complaints policy'. The complaints policy also explains your ultimate right to refer your complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service.







What do I do now??..........

Just kidding, since they have missed by deadline for a reply by almost 2 weeks, I have already filed a Small claims action against them! Cant believe they had the nerve to wait 3 weeks, then send a standard EMAIL... not even a letter!!

Bring it on!

Steve (Still 99.2% confident)

cariad1980_2

Bank HSBC

Claimed £1386.00

Agreed to pay £1220.00

Wrote my first letter on November 22nd asking for my money after going through my online statements to find out how much I could claim (I was shocked!!) Heard nothing, so wrote again on 29th December (used templates from MSE) received a letter yesterday saying they would offer to settle at £1220.00 - not quite sure how they arrived at that figure but I am thrilled.

I've never posted on here before, but I read lots of the advice and posts before deciding to claim - so thanks to all!!

Ruby_Pudding

Bank: Natwest
Amount Reclaimed: £1379
Amount they paid: £1379

The story: Natwest agreed to pay in full after second letter. Was prepared to go to court as expected them to put up a fight. Would encourage anyone to have a go.

needtosave_4

Bank: natwest
Amount Reclaimed: £955
Amount they paid: £955
The story: sent all the letters from the CAG website - Natwest refuse to accept charges were unlawful. Issued claim on MCOL just before Christmas and a cheque arrived in the post today for the full amount!

Bank: barclays
Amount Reclaimed: £300
Amount they paid: £300
story: paid up after the last letter before i issued the court claim

credit company: MBNA
Amount Reclaimed: £200
Amount they paid: £200
story: paid up after the last letter before i issued the court claim

so chuffed! still chasing barclaycard, mint and egg..small amounts but i want it back!

Edna_Bucket_2

Rex_Mundi wrote:

How is this a red herring edna?

For the reason I previously stated. It was irrelevant to the original post. As I said, what the defendants do is neither here nor there - as always in legal matters they only respond to what they are presented with, and will do no more, no less than that.

I didn't bring the "moral question" into it at all - you did. I've simply stated the obvious fact, which you (wrongly in my opinion) omitted - if an account (and therefore the charges) is/was in joint names and you successfully claim in a single name, that other party does in turn have a claim against you either now or in the future against their share of the refund.

As you've brought morality into it, I wouldn't actually say it's a question of morality, but a simple question of honesty or dishonesty. If you claim in a single name on what was a joint account, the track record should show that you made every effort to contact the other party first - otherwise it might look in the future as if you've deliberately and deceitfully tried to get more than your own personal fair share. Would anyone want that possible accusation hanging over them?

Going back to Bananabus, he clearly passes the "test" in this case. He has made every effort to track down his former business partner and the record will show that. The fact he failed to do so means that he has to go ahead and claim on his own.

That is not to say that if/when the former partner appears in the future Bananabus does not have to pass the share of the claim over - he does. However it can clearly be seen that he has acted with propriety at all times.