Egg...

wednesday1867

EEK!!! wrote:

I have been on a DMP since 05 and have always made my payments.
After reading about reclaiming my charges I went ahead and succeeded with Egg and they have refunded me my charges but they are now requesting I sign a Tomlin Order stating if I for what ever reason I cannot make my payments they will counterclaim for the whole amount outstanding effectivly gicing me a CCJ. Can Egg legally do this considering I have been making regular payments??

Any help would be much appreciated.

Are you paying Egg or a dca on your dmp? Only reason i ask is im on a dmp too, i also have an Egg card, i wanted to claim my charges back, but not too sure now. Only thing is im paying a dca on behalf of Egg, so wonder if thats different, if so i will move on to reclaim.

darrens

Hi,

Just been going through the process of reclaiming monies from Egg, and they have replied that they are only offering me the difference between the £20 they charged and the £16 they now do, as the OFT recognise that they are doing all that they can.

Searching the web, I have found 1 article to back that up, but are Egg just playing the game that most banks are doing, or should I be accepting the payment (£40, as appose to £200+)!

Thanks for any advice.

Darren

Edinburghlass_2

There is an Egg thread somewhere which I'll just shift you into but in fact the OFT recommendation is £12 so you could quote that at them if you want!

You can write back and say you are carrying on for the full amount though.

bathing.ape_2

Hi there

Just wondering if anyone has had an luck in reclaiming charges back from our friends at Egg?


bathing.ape

Another_1_Bites_The_Dust

I requested that Egg pay back £282.28 and have now received a letter of which point 2 states:

You allege that these charges are a penalty. You have put forward no evidence to support this allegation and we do not accept it. As explained in our previous letter, the charges set out in the Agreement are a genuine pre-estimate of the loss caused to Egg when a customer breaks the terms of their Agreement.

Point 3 then states:

You may have followed recent media cocverage of the OFT investigation into default charges. Following the conclusion of this investigation, the OFT indicated that it would not proceed further against Egg on the basis that Egg reduced its charges from £20 to £16. Without any admission in relation to the previous level of charges, Egg has reduced the charges accordingly. This reduction does not apply retrospectively, but in your case we are prepared, without any admission of lilability, to apply the reduction to the disputed charges. If this is acceptable to you, we will credit your account with a total of £28.00 (being £4 per default charge applied to your account, on the basis of 7 defaults).

And then the 'bribary' on point 5:

We would like to remind you that it is our policy to consider ending out Agreement with you if we feel that the bank/customer relationship has broken down, e.g. in the event of legal proceedings. If we do this, you will no longer be able to use your credit card but will still be liable to repay any balance on the account.

Can anyone give me an idea of what I should write back to them saying? I owe £1500 on the credit card so wonder if it's worth claiming this £282 - but it's MY money at the end of the day... isn't it? I'm normally ok with wording letters but since this is all in legal terms I am worried that I might say something incorrect therefore making me look a total fool

Edinburghlass_2

Its interesting that they quote OFT when OFT recommend that the charge should be £12 and not £16.

nickmack

Edinburghlass wrote:

Its interesting that they quote OFT when OFT recommend that the charge should be £12 and not £16.

Exactly!!

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.html?p=4485529&postcount=296

Taadaa

I have been playing ping pong e mail with Egg customer services for the past few days. They are quoting OFT which has unfortunately used them as an example to justify charging £16. Just pinged one back saying all well and good but you still haven't explained why you have a business requirement to charge £16. They are being quite blunt with me now so Im obviously getting on their nerves

Im lucky enough to have a zero balance, so they can threaten what they like, it makes no difference to me :rotfl:

nickmack

Taadaa wrote:

I have been playing ping pong e mail with Egg customer services for the past few days. They are quoting OFT which has unfortunately used them as an example to justify charging £16. Just pinged one back saying all well and good but you still haven't explained why you have a business requirement to charge £16. They are being quite blunt with me now so Im obviously getting on their nerves

If you continue to engage with them, I'd be interested to know where they got this figure of £16 from.

jamalfatty

Because egg's systems are highly automated and it is a requirement of having one of there accounts to have a DD in place, this causes less people to default, which in turn means it costs them more per customer if someone does default.

Couple of things i've picked up from this thread, while the OFT has recommended egg's default fee to be £16, this does not mean it is now lawful when they charge you this, so you can still and should go after every penny of every charge.
The £16 was just the limit that if egg went above the OFT would take action against them for.

Also, egg will cough up in end same as any other bank, they fobbed me off with the difference between what the charges used to be and £16. My letter before action then went off, swiftly followed by a phone call to advise them I was on the steps of the court about to file my N1 and would they like to save themselves even more money and settle right then, surprise surprise, they did. I have done this with each bank I have claimed against (5 in all, and counting) and has worked on each and every one of them.

The final thing I picked up from thread that i've mentioned elsewhere on this forum, there does seem to be quite a few people who have not prepared nearly enough to start claiming there charges back if they want to be taken seriously by the banks. You are taking on a multinational corporation with an army of lawyers - you need to know what you are doing! spend an afternoon reading through whole process before you even think of beginning!