Pauline

Pauline_Johnstone

Hi...I have tried to reclaim package bank account charges since May 2014 and it has been to the ombudsman and their decision is totally unacceptable as it is based on likely probabilities, because of lack of evidence due to the length of time ...being 2006 when this was mis-sold....It was all done on a phone call, when I wanted an overdraft and was told I had to have this package account to get it....as simple as that! but proving this has proved to be impossible. ..so court is the next step to which I have no knowledge of how to go about this, or what it will cost, what is the liklihood of being succesful, if I loose will I have to pay Barclays costs etc etc

Is their anybody who has been down this road? really would appreciate advice for the purpose of my gaining some incentive to seek justice ....according to my calculations I am owed approx £2.400.00 and have been denied this because of lack of evidence, whereas others have reclaimed succesfully in the same circumstances, I feel that Barclays have wriggled their way out of this and the ombudsman has acted with a bias opinion towardds them.

I dread the thought of maybe having to appear in court and the whole proceedure I envisage is daunting and complex but I know that I am owed this money and am in need of the knowledge for the way foreward in receiving my claim.

thanks Pauline

dunstonh

t has been to the ombudsman and their decision is totally unacceptable as it is based on likely probabilities, because of lack of evidence due to the length of time

How is that unacceptable? That seems quite reasonable to me.

but proving this has proved to be impossible. ..so court is the next step to which I have no knowledge of how to go about this, or what it will cost, what is the liklihood of being succesful, if I loose will I have to pay Barclays costs etc etc

And what evidence are you going to present to the court that you could not present to the FOS?

The FOS are more consumer friendly than the courts. There is a cost involved and there are no known successful court cases. Without any evidence to back up your allegations, you are on a hiding to nothing.

I am owed approx £2.400.00

You are not owed anything.

I feel that Barclays have wriggled their way out of this and the ombudsman has acted with a bias opinion towardds them.

The ombudsman has a marginal bias towards consumers. Your problem is that you are getting UK law wrong.

Let me give this simple scenario. I accuse you of stealing £100 from my wallet. There is no evidence available to support my allegation. Under your thinking, the onus is on you to prove you didnt steal it. You cant so therefore you must pay me the £100.

If there is no evidence of wrongdoing and nothing points towards wrongdoing then you are not going to get a case awarded in your favour.

[Deleted User]

Pauline_Johnstone wrote: »

it has been to the ombudsman and their decision is totally unacceptable as it is based on likely probabilities,

In the absence of any documentary evidence, all Ombudsman decisions are taken on the balance of probabilities.

Would it have still been "totally unacceptable" if the adjudication had gone in your favour?

If you do take this court, it is likely to prove very expensive and the very strong likelihood is that the court will side with the Ombudsman.

Pauline_Johnstone wrote: »

I am owed

You really are not.

magpiecottage

The ombudsman has listened to what you said but in the absence of any evidence, has nothing to indicate that your recollections are accurate.

A court would do the same except for one thing.

You are disputing something that you allege happened more than 15 years ago. So if the bank decidesto apply section 14B of the Limitation Act 1980 your claim will fall before it even starts.