sainsburys bank puzzle

Zedicus

Stephen_Leak wrote: »

It is confusing, because there are two types of interest involved.

I'll use my last CC late payment charge as an example. I paid 1 day late. For that day, I was borrowing the total of my bill from the CCC. I got charged interest on this. They have every right to charge me interest on this until I pay it back. I can't claim this back.

However, the £12 charge is unlawful. I can claim this back. As I have been "unlawfully deprived" of the use of this money, I can also claim the so-called "statutory" 8% per year interest on this charge from the date it was raised until now.

That isn't what is confusing me (sorry, I don't think I read your first post carefully enough :rolleyes: ).

It is the statements by Kurt_Hampster and others that you cannot ask for interest until you take the bank to court.

Beate

I quote Martin's article, hope that clears it up:

Charge interest on top

If you won via the courts, you would be entitled to add 8% interest (not compounded) on top from the date you were ‘first deprived’ of the money (i.e. the date of each charge). Therefore you may want to ask for the interest as part of the initial claim. It's important to understand that you are not legally entitled to interest unless you win in court, yet all prior letters are a tool of negotiation; think of it a bit like haggling.

You may get lucky and get the interest on top, but even if not, the legal feedback I've had is that it’s one route to pushing the bank to settle quickly so it can offer to pay you without the interest. Of course there is a risk that asking for too much makes them less likely to settle too - sadly this is an art not a science. This isn't an easy concept so I've recorded a quick audio file which may help explain it.

For those who do want to ask for interest, I’ve had the calculator below specially built to work it out for you and included it as an option in the template letters later. However, if you'd prefer to play safe simply ask for the charges without interest in the early stages.

Moglex

Zedicus wrote: »

That isn't what is confusing me (sorry, I don't think I read your first post carefully enough :rolleyes: ).

It is the statements by Kurt_Hampster and others that you cannot ask for interest until you take the bank to court.

I think you can safely discount those statements (at least from the point of view of claiming) since they contradict what Martin has written here.

This area seems a bit convoluted and, as I said earlier, it really needs some input from a legal professional rather than a succession of stabs from well meaning amateurs.

Stephen_Leak

I think we're getting there.

The fact is that you don't have a legal right to the 8% statutory interest until the court awards it to you. However ...

You can use it as a bargaining tool. It is like in an Arab soukh - except that you open the bidding high and they open the bidding low.

You are saying, "Look. This is how much extra you could have to pay, if you make me go to court (and I will). So save yourself time and money and pay me my charges now, please."

On the other hand, if you come on too strong, the bank could think, "Greedy b*st*rd. F*ck him".

Moglex

Beate wrote: »

I quote Martin's article, hope that clears it up:

Charge interest on top

If you won via the courts, you would be entitled to add 8% interest (not compounded) on top from the date you were ‘first deprived’ of the money (i.e. the date of each charge). Therefore you may want to ask for the interest as part of the initial claim. It's important to understand that you are not legally entitled to interest unless you win in court, yet all prior letters are a tool of negotiation; think of it a bit like haggling.

You may get lucky and get the interest on top, but even if not, the legal feedback I've had is that it’s one route to pushing the bank to settle quickly so it can offer to pay you without the interest. Of course there is a risk that asking for too much makes them less likely to settle too - sadly this is an art not a science. This isn't an easy concept so I've recorded a quick audio file which may help explain it.

For those who do want to ask for interest, I’ve had the calculator below specially built to work it out for you and included it as an option in the template letters later. However, if you'd prefer to play safe simply ask for the charges without interest in the early stages.

Unfortunately, even this is not a complete answer to the question since it does not even attempt to tell you what to do if interest is a large proportion of your claim but the bank make you an offer of the amount without that interest.

If you are not 'legally entitled' to the interest until the charges are awarded by a court, how can you possibly take them to court for the interest?

And if they have offered you full payment of the charges, how can you get them awarded by the court since the bank will say they offered all you are entitled to?

It really is pointless having people who are not legally qualified commenting on this since it's clearly a very tricky area.

Edinburghlass_2

Moglex wrote: »

I think you can safely discount those statements (at least from the point of view of claiming) since they contradict what Martin has written here.

This area seems a bit convoluted and, as I said earlier, it really needs some input from a legal professional rather than a succession of stabs from well meaning amateurs.

In fact it needs people to actually READ the information that is in the article and also in the Reclaim Help Thread.

However, you can take a horse to water, but you can't make them drink and so my job is point people in the right direction

Zedicus

Stephen_Leak wrote: »

I think we're getting there.

The fact is that you don't have a legal right to the 8% statutory interest until the court awards it to you. However ...

You can use it as a bargaining tool. It is like in an Arab soukh - except that you open the bidding high and they open the bidding low.

You are saying, "Look. This is how much extra you could have to pay, if you make me go to court (and I will). So save yourself time and money and pay me my charges now, please."

On the other hand, if you come on too strong, the bank could think, "Greedy b*st*rd. F*ck him".

Sorry, we're getting nowhere at all.

You still haven't even attempted to explain how you get your interest if the bank chose to pay penalties without going to court.

I'm inclined to agree with moglex that it really would be better to get an opinion from someone who is legally qualified rather than just looking at guesses.

Stephen_Leak

If they do pay you the interest as well, it is a bonus, so take the money and run.

Beate

Moglex wrote: »

Unfortunately, even this is not a complete answer to the question since it does not even attempt to tell you what to do if interest is a large proportion of your claim but the bank make you an offer of the amount without that interest.

If you are not 'legally entitled' to the interest until the charges are awarded by a court, how can you possibly take them to court for the interest?

And if they have offered you full payment of the charges, how can you get them awarded by the court since the bank will say they offered all you are entitled to?

It really is pointless having people who are not legally qualified commenting on this since it's clearly a very tricky area.

For me it is crystal clear.
You are NOT entitled to interest before going to court so interest can only be a legally recognised part of your claim once you go to court. So if the bank makes you an offer for the sum minus interest you have to take it. If the bank makes you an offer BELOW the full sum (disregarding the interest) or no offer at all, you can file a court claim, and because you are doing this, you are now entitled to the interest on top, but you can't just file a court claim because you want the interest on top!

Moglex

Beate wrote: »

For me it is crystal clear.
You are NOT entitled to interest before going to court so interest can only be a legally recognised part of your claim once you go to court. So if the bank makes you an offer for the sum minus interest you have to take it. If the bank makes you an offer BELOW the full sum (disregarding the interest) or no offer at all, you can file a court claim, and because you are doing this, you are now entitled to the interest on top, but you can't just file a court claim because you want the interest on top!

Yes, what you said IS crystal clear.

However, IF it is correct it is nonsensical.

It implies that the law believes that you ARE entitled to interest BUT blocks you from claiming that interest unless a certain path is followed and that path is under the control of the debtor!

As someone else asked earlier: "without wishing to be rude, are you legally qualified?"

Otherwise I fear that the fact that something is crystal clear to you means very little