Nat West Rejects New legal argument

smithp

I've now completed my financial statement and covering letter. I made reference to the fact my bills have increased along with the general cost of things like petrol etc. and that my wifes and my own wages have not been increased due to the credit crunch resulting in charges. Also since Nat West changed the way the charges are taken too, on one particular date which is just before either of us are paid resulting in being charged for charges not being paid (cycle of charges).

Thanks for all your advice and help. Lets see what response I get, hopefully should post something on here next week since Nat West are pretty quick at replying these days.

Mahatma__Steven

Good luck.

I received a similar letter only I guess at the previous stage. It explains simply what the court decided and that Nat West's charges were fair.

I seem to have missed something crucial. I am a student in financial difficulty. What available options do I have at this stage?

Thank you

davidgmmafan

Hardship, hardship and hardship again if you meet the criteria. I'm not sure the court did say charges were fair, rather that they cannot be challenged on the basis of cost. Amusing really how the banks steadfastly maintained at the beginning that the charges WERE for thier costs, then went backwards faster than a coxless four. Somebody should point that out in the media.

natweststaffmember

davidgmmafan wrote: »

Hardship, hardship and hardship again if you meet the criteria. I'm not sure the court did say charges were fair, rather that they cannot be challenged on the basis of cost. Amusing really how the banks steadfastly maintained at the beginning that the charges WERE for thier costs, then went backwards faster than a coxless four. Somebody should point that out in the media.

Administrative costs if I remember rightly, and that is what cross subsidy could be described as

davidgmmafan

Run that by me again?

Administrative costs= loss leader? Or have I ims-understood?

In any event I'm pretty sure they were saying the charges were for the costs of dealing with delinquent accounts, at least that's what internal briefings at Nationwide said.

natweststaffmember

davidgmmafan wrote: »

Run that by me again?

Administrative costs= loss leader? Or have I ims-understood?

In any event I'm pretty sure they were saying the charges were for the costs of dealing with delinquent accounts, at least that's what internal briefings at Nationwide said.

Administrative costs could be for administering current accounts including breaches and delinquent costs.

chrisharri

Hi All, I posted on a different link, but my OH has had to admit defeat with Natwest. His charges are historic, he isn't in financial hardship and the amount he is owed £750,isn't worth going to courtover.

natweststaffmember

chrisharri wrote: »

Hi All, I posted on a different link, but my OH has had to admit defeat with Natwest. His charges are historic, he isn't in financial hardship and the amount he is owed £750,isn't worth going to courtover.

Make sure you keep your eyes on the forum because things may change in time.

Mahatma__Steven

natweststaffmember, is the lending code linked in your sig. legally binding? Or simply 'suggested' practice?

Does Nat West abide by it?

maz1964

hiya all

so historic charges at the moment are a no go, and as our historic charges are on joint accs, but only recently not so many, i now am without a job signed up for jsa contribution based and partner in full time enployment, unsure if i can relate my current position as hardship as the past charges are reflected in the overdrafts total we have been struggling to clear but now have less chance without my job

hence im in a bit of a limbo in my mind what to do

any thoughts appreciated banks with overdrafts and charges are halifax, barclays, rbs,

cheers maz