Halifax / RBOS : £12 Offer now standard?

littlesmoothfly

I sent a claim for approx £1800 to Halifax and they responded within the 2 weeks with an offer of approx £800 which they explained was the original claim minus £12.
They stated that they didn't agree with the OFT ruling but made the offer as a goodwill gesture.

Is this now a default response? Does anyone else have any experience of this response? I've seen a couple of posts stating similar from RBOS and NATWEST.

As OFT stated that £12 was the level of charge above which they would automatically get involved, have the banks decided to position there offers at this point to avoid OFT rulings?

I don't agree £12 is a fair amount and so I'm tempted to write back declining the offer and asking for the full amount plus interest...

..Anyone have any opinions about this?

Any advice appreciated. (And perhaps this could be the beginning of a thread listing any other similar offers to see if this is becomming a new standard).

Thanks

nickmack

littlesmoothfly wrote: »

Is this now a default response? Does anyone else have any experience of this response? I've seen a couple of posts stating similar from RBOS and NATWEST.

As OFT stated that £12 was the level of charge above which they would automatically get involved, have the banks decided to position there offers at this point to avoid OFT rulings?

Yes, this is a fairly standard response since the OFT finished their Credit Card investigation.

littlesmoothfly

I've just realised there's no mention in my post that this is a CREDIT CARD claim. Sorry about that.

m.colak

Am in the same position however the difference would have meant that i would have lost over £550. Original request was for £1050 offered £454. Decided to take them via moneyclaim to court (big mistake) as the original claim i made was on the 23rd september and due to me putting the initial address wrong (as in scotland not the leeds address(which you should use)). It is still going backwards and forwards between myself and moneyclaim and hopefully will finally get it reserved by the end of the month. Hope this helps however i've stated that they've know about the over charge's and have kept my money and therefore will follow the banks example and charge them the minimum interest of 17.9%(apr) for the length of time they had money which was owing to myself. Don't know if it will work but will let you know how i get on.

littlesmoothfly

But this I think is an important point. They haven't said £12 is acceptable. The OFT said that anything over £12 is definitely unacceptable, and they went on to state clearly that "...The OFT is not proposing that default fees should be equivalent to the threshold, and a court will certainly not consider that a default fee is fair just because it is below the threshold."
i.e. that £12 is not a fair charge, a fair charge must be justified.

I just want to know if OFT will still get involved if I take this further or, if this is now a standard response, whether I should go it alone in small claims to try and break this unfair precedent?

Edinburghlass_2

Not sure I understand what you mean by OFT saying they will get involved in specific cases?

It certainly wouldn't be a precedent for you to continue with your claim as most people have claimed the full amount however it is up to you and you need to read Martin's article here...

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/reclaim/credit-card-charges

littlesmoothfly

M.Colak: Thanks for that. Let me know how you get on.

Edinburghlass: Sorry I wasn't clear. What I mean is - it seems that most CC companies are now offering the difference between the original charges and £12 for each charge, as well as now charging £12 across the board for fines. As Martin Lewis agrees (and the OFT states) £12 is NOT agreed as a fair charge. The charge must be justified by reasonable expense to the bank.
Thanks for the link. The point I'm raising is that when ML wrote this article, CC companies weren't offering a settlement as standard - they were more often than not denying charges were unlawful, or ignoring the claim. I'm trying to establish that if this kind of offer is now the standard response from banks, do we still proceed forward with the full claim to stop the acceptance that £12 is a fair charge??

nickmack

littlesmoothfly wrote: »

The point I'm raising is that when ML wrote this article, CC companies weren't offering a settlement as standard - they were more often than not denying charges were unlawful, or ignoring the claim. I'm trying to establish that if this kind of offer is now the standard response from banks, do we still proceed forward with the full claim to stop the acceptance that £12 is a fair charge??

Martin includes the scenario in the article where the CC company offers the difference between the charge and the £12 figure. As I mentioned above, this offer has been standard since the OFT report.

Obviously, as this offer is easier to get from the company than a full refund, it's up to you whether this is accepted. If not, you can push for the full amount.

I know what you mean about stopping acceptance, but it's up to the individual. Some people don't want to threaten court and are satisfied with the offer.

It is sometimes misleading that the companies use this £12 figure to try and persuade the claimant they are wrong in attempting to recover the full amount. That's what should be cracked down on IMO.

littlesmoothfly

Thanks Nickmack.
I think I'm going to send a follow up letter restating the claim and denying £12 is fair.
I'll let you know how this goes.

Thanks everyone for advice.