Bank charges reclaim & statute of limitations

isthisthingon

New to these forums so hope I haven't missed anything too obvious.

I have a specific query regarding a reclaim for bank charges. The bank in question has cited the statute of limitations to avoid processing my claim & request for a list of charges under the data protection act, saying that they are only obliged to hold information for 6 years. Directly contradicting themselves, the same bank paid my PPI claim and had the data to do so, which I'm sure extended beyond 6 years.

Does anyone have a suggestion for a robust response which might work out in my favour?
Thanks in advance for any light that can be shed on this topic.

dunstonh

Directly contradicting themselves, the same bank paid my PPI claim and had the data to do so, which I'm sure extended beyond 6 years.

Insurance requirements are different when it comes to mis-sale complaints.

You have 6 years from the commencement of the policy or 3 years from being reasonably aware of an issue to raise a complaint on the insurance (whichever is the longer). So, whilst they could meet the 6 year rule, they cant because of the 3 year rule. There is unlikely to be anything to trigger the 3 year clock ticking with PPI.

With bank charges, it is different. There is no complaint involved (the banks won the court case in 2009 and no longer consider complaints about "unfair" bank charges). So, you just have the data protection act and limitations act.

Does anyone have a suggestion for a robust response which might work out in my favour?

Why do you want a list of charges? Its not as if you need them for anything. You can no longer reclaim unfair bank charges. The only two areas are incorrect application of charges (i.e. an error made) or CURRENT financial hardship. it wont be an error, so we can ignore that one. So, the only potential area is financial hardship. But again, you dont need to know the charges on that as that is not how it works.

So, why are you after a list of charges?

[Deleted User]

dunstonh wrote: »

So, why are you after a list of charges?

Clearly user "isthisthingon" is using the MSE advice article about claiming back bank charges which does indeed suggest first writing to the Bank demanding a full list of charges.

Obviously, the aforementioned article needs a thorough re-write. It does mention being in current financial hardship, but it doesn't specify that the likelihood of getting back historical bank charges is nil.

"isthisthingon", I recommend you read some of this long thread;
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/2248345

I've highlighted page 73 because the very earliest pages are from a time when bank charges were still being refunded.

The key points are;

You need to be able to show yourself in current financial hardship. This is really the only requirement.

The Bank does not have to refund anything. Any payments are goodwill.

No point in sending a list of bank charges because the bank already know what you've been charged.

No point in sending a list of bank charges because the bank will not refund historical charges at all, typically they will refund only those levied in the last six-twelve months.

If you are no longer a customer of the specific bank, there is no point in writing to them at all. No refund will be made.

Do not make reference to the charges being "unfair". This is an automatic rejection. The bank won their court case about "unfair" charges in 2009.

The bank have a range of options available to them if they deem a customer is in current hardship. They can suspend future interest or insist on a debt management programme. Therefore, do not assume that a refund will be made even if you are successful.

Mersey_2

To be fair to Martin Lewis and this site, his latest advice on Bank Charges is here for the OP and others:


www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/banking/2014/09/is-bank-charges-reclaiming-back-martin-lewis-thinks-it-could-be




[I've asked the site to flag that rather than the original advice from a decade ago]

[Deleted User]

70276097 wrote:

[I've asked the site to flag that rather than the original advice from a decade ago]

I told the Forum Team this over eighteen months ago.
The problem is that the "archived" version is still searchable and the newer one still requires substantial revision.

I don't know where Martin Lewis's reputation comes into the equation, he sold this site two years ago and didn't write the article in any case.

Mersey_2

Other than it comes from him, hence the title and quotes.


[Incidentally, I've no idea why you seem to have a problem with him on this site, as you obviously like these forums. It's hardly unusual that OPs should come here once they see or hear him in the media]

[Deleted User]

Martin Lewis made millions selling this site and continues to earn a handsome retainer by continuing to lend his name to it. I have no problem with this, but I admit it irritates me when people think he still has any real personal involvement here.

Helen Knapman wrote the MSE article on Bank Charges that you link to and wrote it in the form of an "interview" with Lewis.
The original MSE Bank Charges article was written by an MSE staff member more than ten years ago...

Nasqueron

Mersey wrote: »

To be fair to Martin Lewis and this site, his latest advice on Bank Charges is here for the OP and others:


www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/banking/2014/09/is-bank-charges-reclaiming-back-martin-lewis-thinks-it-could-be




[I've asked the site to flag that rather than the original advice from a decade ago]

But even then, the advice relates to current hardship, not past inconvenience, which is what that recent court case was about - the bank allowed themselves to vary the charges without informing Oliver which contributed to the hardship - too many people still believe (thanks to the old article which has to be deleted to avoid it coming up on google searches) they can make a list of charges from years ago and get the money back, which they can't.

Banks who keep people in a cycle of hardship need dealing with, people who live beyond their means and then want free money should not get any.

[Deleted User]

Nasqueron wrote: »

Banks who keep people in a cycle of hardship need dealing with, people who live beyond their means and then want free money should not get any.

That's it in a nutshell.:T

isthisthingon

Thanks for all the replies and comments. I appreciate the time you all gave. I wanted to share an update.

I have been offered a refund of all charges with interest on at least one of the accounts. Others pending and looking likely. In some instances, I had to provide my own copy statements, owing to the 6 year limit. This 6 year time frame is also not seemingly set in stone. One of the credit card companies I contacted alerted me to a card I had forgotten which was closed more than six years ago. it shows on a 2004 bank statement and they still seemingly have records relating to it.

Thanks again to all those who posted with positive replies.

Nasqueron

isthisthingon wrote: »

Thanks for all the replies and comments. I appreciate the time you all gave. I wanted to share an update.

I have been offered a refund of all charges with interest on at least one of the accounts. Others pending and looking likely. In some instances, I had to provide my own copy statements, owing to the 6 year limit. This 6 year time frame is also not seemingly set in stone. One of the credit card companies I contacted alerted me to a card I had forgotten which was closed more than six years ago. it shows on a 2004 bank statement and they still seemingly have records relating to it.

Thanks again to all those who posted with positive replies.

There is no universal 6 year time frame on data retention - under the data protection act they have to act reasonably to destroy data when it is no longer useful, it is a common guideline that 6 years after accounts are closed the data should be deleted or potentially archived away - if you are a current customer the data may date back much longer than 6 years but if you were a customer say 10 years ago and closed it then, likely they will delete the records as they are required to by law - that is to say you may get lucky with complaints going back more than 6 years.

The time bar rules are legal too and can be applied if the bank so wishes though it's extremely rare for a bank to refund charges for bank use (such as unauthorised overdraft use) when there is no current hardship - can you clarify whether you are being refunded bank / credit card charges from a closed account when you are not in current hardship or is it a refund of another type of charge?