Credit Card Reclaiming Discussion

LABMAN

zubo wrote: »

i think we had our wires crossed, i was ignoring the ombudsman and going straight for the ourts.

The 15 year rule gives me just enough time to pursue these.
In most cases the debt outstanding is less than the charges compounded... for example MBNA debt on one account 2000 pounds yet the charges of 200 pounds compound to 4200 so these are worth pursuing I would have thought.

can you please provide me any link to the 15 year limit...

thanks

The Ombudsman has no cost to you, the Courts however do.

lel1961

Thanks very much for your reply Nasqueron.

Nasqueron

zubo wrote: »

i think we had our wires crossed, i was ignoring the ombudsman and going straight for the ourts.

The 15 year rule gives me just enough time to pursue these.
In most cases the debt outstanding is less than the charges compounded... for example MBNA debt on one account 2000 pounds yet the charges of 200 pounds compound to 4200 so these are worth pursuing I would have thought.

can you please provide me any link to the 15 year limit...

thanks

You are talking about trying to make a criminal case out of a civil issue. The bank will point to the 3 and 6 year time bars and almost certainly the courts will agree there is no case. You are trying to prove criminal wrongdoing for a civil issue of bank charges, this is doomed to be a waste of money but crack on if you must. Most people who post this will disappear, the odd one will come back and claim to have won all their money back, compensation of a bajillion pounds etc etc

zubo

I have no idea why you think I am making this a criminal case. The couny courts are used extensively to recover debt and are used to recover PPI and unfair charges IF you can prove the case.
I see no criminal nature at all in my posts. None at all.

and yes there are multiplr posts of chancers claiming all sorts. I take great offence at being branded as such. In a previous life on a number of forum like you I gave carefully considered advice to certain people i felt needed help.

Its been a very long time since then and all I needed were some pointers in areas I am unfamiliar with. You would benefit from researching Restitution law though - it is after all about civil matters rather than criminal matters.

Back to my question though... I need to better understand where the 15 year rule is formalised to determine what dates are used in the cause of action.

btw, I would only use the courts if I thought I had reasonable chance of success and it is clear the rules set out in the fca handbook prevent me using them

dunstonh

The couny courts are used extensively to recover debt and are used to recover PPI and unfair charges IF you can prove the case.

After the banks won the court case in 2009, reclaiming of bank charges effectively ended. The OFT ruled on credit card charges in 2006. So, again, its unusual nowadays. PPI is rarely handled via the courts as you are more likely to lose than using the regulated complaints process.

So, possible but not extensive nowadays.

btw, I would only use the courts if I thought I had reasonable chance of success and it is clear the rules set out in the fca handbook prevent me using them

The FCA rule book only affects the FCA regulated complaints process. Not the courts. The issue for you with the courts is the 15 year rule. Plus, if the debts were unpaid, the award, if there is one, can go against the debts.

Nasqueron

zubo wrote: »

I have no idea why you think I am making this a criminal case. The couny courts are used extensively to recover debt and are used to recover PPI and unfair charges IF you can prove the case.
I see no criminal nature at all in my posts. None at all.

You don't have a debt, you aren't recovering anything. You're trying to go to court to get fees back which were lawfully charged and agreed to you by taking out the product. The bank will point to the 3 year rule, 6 year rule and the Supreme Court case in 2009 and will in all likelihood succeed in getting the case thrown out and if not, will win

zubo wrote: »

and yes there are multiplr posts of chancers claiming all sorts. I take great offence at being branded as such. In a previous life on a number of forum like you I gave carefully considered advice to certain people i felt needed help.

Its been a very long time since then and all I needed were some pointers in areas I am unfamiliar with. You would benefit from researching Restitution law though - it is after all about civil matters rather than criminal matters.

Back to my question though... I need to better understand where the 15 year rule is formalised to determine what dates are used in the cause of action.

btw, I would only use the courts if I thought I had reasonable chance of success and it is clear the rules set out in the fca handbook prevent me using them

All I can say is we have seen posts like yours over and over here, there is little that differentiates yours from any other.



As above, you're wasting your money, the time bar rules will stop your case which you won't win anyway but feel free to come back in a couple of years posting about how you won the case and a link to the court details

zubo

I'm not sure who Nasqueron is but clearly he has taken a dislike to my posts and questions and is being unhelpful in the extreme.
A little education for him to help him (her?) in distinguishing between a civil legal case and criminal case...

According to William Geldart, Introduction to English Law 146 (D.C.M. Yardley ed., 9th ed. 1984),
"The difference between civil law and criminal law turns on the difference between two different objects which law seeks to pursue - redress or punishment. The object of civil law is the redress of wrongs by compelling compensation or restitution: the wrongdoer is not punished; he only suffers so much harm as is necessary to make good the wrong he has done. The person who has suffered gets a definite benefit from the law, or at least he avoids a loss. On the other hand, in the case of crimes, the main object of the law is to punish the wrongdoer; to give him and others a strong inducement not to commit same or similar crimes, to reform him if possible and perhaps to satisfy the public sense that wrongdoing ought to meet with retribution.”

So it is clear my case will always be a civil case.

Yes it is true that there is not a fat lot to distinguish me from all those other hopefuls who previously posted and I really am not looking for it I simply find it unbelievably difficult to accept such a torrent of negative information from someone who should b guiding me and others. I am not sure how long he has been posting but in the six years I posted support I was never so dreadfully critical and harshly dismissive. I find his attitude so unbelievable... and unacceptable... but that is my opinion... I posted a thank you only for a small piece of information I und useful.

Then when I sought more information I received none only critical unhelpful and irrelevant information.

So I will ask again: does anyone else have detailed information on the 15 year rule please...

thank you if you do.

dunstonh

So I will ask again: does anyone else have detailed information on the 15 year rule please...

Quite a lot on google but here is a link that breaks it down by country
https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/1-518-8770?transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default)&firstPage=true&bhcp=1

antrobus

zubo wrote: »

...

So I will ask again: does anyone else have detailed information on the 15 year rule please...

You quoted from William Geldart, Introduction to English Law. Try the index.

zubo

thanks antrobus I quoted what i found on google comparing civil and criminal an his explanation seemed to make sense to me... i do not have access to the book nor the index...