We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
LLoyds TSB are defending my credit card charges claim...
Comments
-
The real problem with most cases of this type........
As this is still such a minefield, and the consequences of losing are enormous and life changing (just ask the Cartel customers who are having to find £30,000each in legal fees because they lost their cases) I have taken the safer option!
I don't think you can compare CCA cases in the High Court to credit card claims in the County Court.
What kind of case is yours?0 -
My understanding was that by filing in a small claims court these massive costs would not be awarded. I guess I may have been wrong.
Who are the Cartel customers?
They are referring to complicated CCA cases heard in the High Court, not the County Courts - comparing chalk & cheese.
Cartel are a disreputable claims management company that are currently under investigation by the Ministry of Justice. Their customers invariably pay large upfront fees to have their Consumer Credit Act claims handled but in reality their claims get thrown into a storage room marked 'pending' and simply gather dust.0 -
Alpine_Star wrote: »It's a fair point as there is always a theoretical risk but natweststaffmember did answer with his opinion (which I agree with) based on his knowledge of the subject and other's experiences.
natweststaffmember is a bit like Madame Defarge. He gets his knitting needles out and watches.
0 -
bengal-stripe wrote: »natweststaffmember is a bit like Madame Defarge. He gets his knitting needles out and watches.
I post information based on a couple of things.
1) Experience
2) OFT report on Credit card charges
3) Other users here. I haven't seen one credit card loss on MSE(please correct me).
Unfortunately, idiots post up "read your terms and conditions", "hope you lose" etc,etc,
I am trying the re education of idiots and the education of those seeking advice. On credit cards, the advice is reclaim the charges until they squeal like a piggy cos they keep paying out....simple 0 -
natweststaffmember wrote: »On credit cards, the advice is reclaim the charges until they squeal like a piggy cos they keep paying out....simple
Well...that's easy! - After all, it's not your head, that's on the block!0 -
bengal-stripe wrote: »Well...that's easy! - After all, it's not your head, that's on the block!
People come here for advice on how to reclaim credit card charges - the very purpose of the forum. Are you suggesting they shouldn't?0 -
Alpine_Star wrote: »People come here for advice on how to reclaim credit card charges - the very purpose of the forum. Are you suggesting they shouldn't?
People come here for all sorts of reasons, a credit card is for short term borrowing, and there is a charge for that, the T&Cs do state that there is a late payment fee, I don't think £12 is unreasonable. The account holder should take some responsibility in making sure their 'house' is in order.I don't know the full ins and outs, at a quick glance it looks like some folk are trying to play the sytem though, it's not as if the staement arrives and you have to have paid the day before, and as many have net access then there is no excuse of waiting for the post as account viewing is available online .
As somebody else mentioned the companies employ top lawyers so if they didn't feel it was a strong case to defend then they would not defend it.
How would many of you feel if you didn't recieve wages for the work or services you provided?
0 -
.
As somebody else mentioned the companies employ top lawyers so if they didn't feel it was a strong case to defend then they would not defend it.
How would many of you feel if you didn't recieve wages for the work or services you provided?
But that's the point: they rarely defend it in court and when they do they lose because the charges don't comply with the law - which is why people successfully claim them.
The charges in question are not for 'services provided' - they're default charges and as such should not exceed the cost of administering the default.0 -
People come here for all sorts of reasons, a credit card is for short term borrowing, and there is a charge for that, the T&Cs do state that there is a late payment fee, I don't think £12 is unreasonable. The account holder should take some responsibility in making sure their 'house' is in order.I don't know the full ins and outs, at a quick glance it looks like some folk are trying to play the sytem though, it's not as if the staement arrives and you have to have paid the day before, and as many have net access then there is no excuse of waiting for the post as account viewing is available online .
As somebody else mentioned the companies employ top lawyers so if they didn't feel it was a strong case to defend then they would not defend it.
How would many of you feel if you didn't recieve wages for the work or services you provided?
The charges that are being levied have never been tested in a court of law.
http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/reports/financial_products/oft842.pdf
The above is the report in 2006 about credit cards.
The report states a few things.
"1.3 The statement sets our view of the law, which is in essence that default charge provisions are open to challenge on grounds of unfairness if they have the object of raising more in revenue than is reasonably expected to be necessary to recover certain limited administrative costs incurred by the credit card issuer. It goes on to explain how we think the relevant legal principles apply in practice to credit card agreements. The statement is intended to provide guidance for financial institutions setting default charges."
They conclude: "1.14 It must be stressed that this is a statement of our position and reflects the exercise of our discretion as an enforcement agency. Only a court can decide finally whether a term is unfair, or at what level default charges should be set to meet the requirements of the UTCCRs. It should be kept in mind that other enforcers may apply for injunctions under the UTCCRs and that the UTCCRs may be relied upon by consumers in private claims."
Furthermore, UNLIKE bank charge terms:
"1.15 Default charges are not 'core terms'. They are subject to the general test of fairness set out in the UTCCRs."
The whole report goes through the legal principles and unfortunately, without proof of the cost being given to the customer the whole £12 is challengeable in a court of law.
What is fair or reasonable is irrelevant currently since as they are paying out, means that the costs are NOT fair nor are reasonable. Otherwise they would be open and transparent with their pricing.0 -
natweststaffmember wrote: »The charges that are being levied have never been tested in a court of law.
Therefore it is high-time, that they should be tested in court.
I don't really care which side wins, as long as one side wins (without 'ifs' and 'buts') and that current mess will come to an end.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.4K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.7K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.4K Spending & Discounts
- 245.4K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.6K Life & Family
- 259.3K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards