Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • Barry Napierski
    • By Barry Napierski 13th Jul 18, 1:35 PM
    • 8Posts
    • 0Thanks
    Barry Napierski
    Credit Card Charges reclaim
    • #1
    • 13th Jul 18, 1:35 PM
    Credit Card Charges reclaim 13th Jul 18 at 1:35 PM
    Hi,
    Im going to check if my old credit card had any charges, I will write to them in due course.
    My query is the time bar (6 years) my account was closed approx 5 years ago but was open 3 or 4 years previous. Can I claim for the duration the account was open or just the 1 year from the 6 year time bar until the account was closed?

    Thanks
Page 1
    • Nasqueron
    • By Nasqueron 13th Jul 18, 1:46 PM
    • 4,928 Posts
    • 2,980 Thanks
    Nasqueron
    • #2
    • 13th Jul 18, 1:46 PM
    • #2
    • 13th Jul 18, 1:46 PM
    Perhaps you missed the various updates and articles on this site but the ship of complaining about bank charges sailed in 2009 when the banks won the court case.

    You can only ask for help for current financial hardship, anything historic will be dismissed by the bank with a nod to the 2009 case.

    Credit card charges were not specifically covered in that case but the precedent was set and they will not give you any old charges back if you simply write and ask for old charges
    • dunstonh
    • By dunstonh 13th Jul 18, 2:00 PM
    • 93,385 Posts
    • 60,888 Thanks
    dunstonh
    • #3
    • 13th Jul 18, 2:00 PM
    • #3
    • 13th Jul 18, 2:00 PM
    Im going to check if my old credit card had any charges, I will write to them in due course.
    Did you mismanage your credit card? i.e. fail to pay it within the required dates each month?

    If yes, then you probably had charges. If no, then you would not have charges.

    Credit cards are allowed to make a charge. The OFT set a figure of 12 in 2006 and card providers moved to that level.

    Going by your dates, it was closed around 2013 and you had it 3-4 years (lets say 4) which makes it 2009. That is 3 years after the OFT level was set.

    Can I claim for the duration the account was open or just the 1 year from the 6 year time bar until the account was closed?
    Seeing as you had the account 3 years after the OFT ruling, what makes you think that you can complain about any charges?
    I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). Comments are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from an Independent Financial Adviser local to you.
    • brown1950
    • By brown1950 13th Jul 18, 4:42 PM
    • 238 Posts
    • 53 Thanks
    brown1950
    • #4
    • 13th Jul 18, 4:42 PM
    • #4
    • 13th Jul 18, 4:42 PM
    Perhaps you missed the various updates and articles on this site but the ship of complaining about bank charges sailed in 2009 when the banks won the court case.

    You can only ask for help for current financial hardship, anything historic will be dismissed by the bank with a nod to the 2009 case.

    Credit card charges were not specifically covered in that case but the precedent was set and they will not give you any old charges back if you simply write and ask for old charges
    Originally posted by Nasqueron
    Yet again i have to remind you that Bank charges have nothing to do whatsover with Credit card charges. No prescedent has ever been set in relation to Credit card charges. I know of many people who have claimed ALL their charges back from the likes of Barclaycard.

    For the OP see :-

    https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?448783-HP-Mum-v-BC-reclaiming-penalties-and-Compound-Int-t-**WON**

    https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?110700-Orge-vs-BC-**WON**-chgs-repaid-with-compound-int-t-and-CRA-data-removed

    https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?423713-Barclaycard-penalty-charges-)-**WON**-with-restitutionary-interest
    • Nasqueron
    • By Nasqueron 13th Jul 18, 4:53 PM
    • 4,928 Posts
    • 2,980 Thanks
    Nasqueron
    • #5
    • 13th Jul 18, 4:53 PM
    • #5
    • 13th Jul 18, 4:53 PM
    Yet again i have to remind you that Bank charges have nothing to do whatsover with Credit card charges. No prescedent has ever been set in relation to Credit card charges. I know of many people who have claimed ALL their charges back from the likes of Barclaycard.

    For the OP see :-

    https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?448783-HP-Mum-v-BC-reclaiming-penalties-and-Compound-Int-t-**WON**

    https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?110700-Orge-vs-BC-**WON**-chgs-repaid-with-compound-int-t-and-CRA-data-removed

    https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?423713-Barclaycard-penalty-charges-)-**WON**-with-restitutionary-interest
    Originally posted by brown1950
    Yet again I have to remind you that UK law works on the basis of previous legal decisions. The supreme court case in 2009 has set the precedent that banks charging fees are NOT unfair and any future court case on credit card charges will almost certainly use that decision as a basis to not allow this.

    You do not know MANY cases, you have linked 3, ALL of which concluded with the poster signing a confidentiality clause with no details of what they won, if they won anything, they may simply have had debts written off, they may have had a token payment, the CAG people have assumed a win. None of these cases are recent (the second one started in 2007 and took EIGHT YEARS to resolve), none are from cards opened after the 2006 fees ruling.

    Please stop posting incorrect information
    Last edited by Nasqueron; 13-07-2018 at 4:56 PM.
    • brown1950
    • By brown1950 13th Jul 18, 9:49 PM
    • 238 Posts
    • 53 Thanks
    brown1950
    • #6
    • 13th Jul 18, 9:49 PM
    • #6
    • 13th Jul 18, 9:49 PM
    Yet again I have to remind you that UK law works on the basis of previous legal decisions. The supreme court case in 2009 has set the precedent that banks charging fees are NOT unfair and any future court case on credit card charges will almost certainly use that decision as a basis to not allow this.

    You do not know MANY cases, you have linked 3, ALL of which concluded with the poster signing a confidentiality clause with no details of what they won, if they won anything, they may simply have had debts written off, they may have had a token payment, the CAG people have assumed a win. None of these cases are recent (the second one started in 2007 and took EIGHT YEARS to resolve), none are from cards opened after the 2006 fees ruling.
    Please stop posting incorrect information
    Originally posted by Nasqueron
    It is you who is posting incorrect information linking credit card fee's and Bank charges .
    You said a precedent was set regarding credit card fee's - Please provide which Court case set this precedent. (The Supreme Court ruling on bank charges certainly did not)
    What 2006 credit card fee's ruling ????
    It is well known that Barclaycard settle out of court and always impose a confidentiality clause into
    any agreement.

    To sum up - your comments on credit card fee's are factually wrong and i will continue to challenge
    you when you continue to link the Supreme Court BANK charges with credit card default fee's.
    • Nasqueron
    • By Nasqueron 14th Jul 18, 9:56 AM
    • 4,928 Posts
    • 2,980 Thanks
    Nasqueron
    • #7
    • 14th Jul 18, 9:56 AM
    • #7
    • 14th Jul 18, 9:56 AM
    It is you who is posting incorrect information linking credit card fee's and Bank charges .
    You said a precedent was set regarding credit card fee's - Please provide which Court case set this precedent. (The Supreme Court ruling on bank charges certainly did not)
    What 2006 credit card fee's ruling ????
    It is well known that Barclaycard settle out of court and always impose a confidentiality clause into
    any agreement.

    To sum up - your comments on credit card fee's are factually wrong and i will continue to challenge
    you when you continue to link the Supreme Court BANK charges with credit card default fee's.
    Originally posted by brown1950

    Brown, as I have pointed out many times before, the UK legal system is based on precedent. When a high up court like the supreme court sets a rule or a case finishes with a judgement like bank charges are not unfair, it means similar cases (credit card charges are exactly the same thing) will refer to that. Note for example the recent Beavis vs Parking Eye ruling in parking charges, that established that a defence of excess charges did not apply, thus any attempt to refer to excess charges for parking results in a defence quoting this case. This is how the law works. There doesn't need to be a supreme court ruling specifically on credit card charges, we have already established that banking charges are fine. If you don't understand that, fine, but it doesn't change the facts. You may not understand gravity but if you drop an egg it will fall to the ground.


    In 2006 the OFT looked at fees and ruled that the higher ones were unfair and that a charge of 12 was the maximum acceptable, all card providers reduced their charges following this ruling. The 2009 case followed and again established "unfair" charges could not be challenged. Why can you not provide evidence of a case for a card taken out after 2006 where it was proven the charges were "unfair" and could be refunded and that the person got all the charges back? Because such a case doesn't exist as the charges are fair, as ruled by the OFT!!!


    You can challenge what you like but you are knowingly giving false information on this site. You claimed you have "loads" of cases where people got refunds of all the credit card charges, yet you cannot provide a single case that shows this. You linked 3 cases, NONE of them resulted in a confirmation that the poster had received back all the charges, the CAG muppets assumed a full refund of charges and interest without any evidence! Can you not see how misleading that is? You have suggested it's easy, yet one of those 3 you linked took EIGHT YEARS with no result known and you claim it's no risk yet when I challenge you to give the people you are advising the funds for the case you refuse which proves you know it's not as easy or guaranteed as you claim.
    Last edited by Nasqueron; 14-07-2018 at 10:00 AM.
    • -taff
    • By -taff 15th Jul 18, 5:31 PM
    • 7,428 Posts
    • 5,503 Thanks
    -taff
    • #8
    • 15th Jul 18, 5:31 PM
    • #8
    • 15th Jul 18, 5:31 PM
    You can lead a horse to water but you can't get him to reveal his oh so secret secrets about charges that are so secret, I expect it's even a secret from him...
    • antrobus
    • By antrobus 15th Jul 18, 6:03 PM
    • 15,766 Posts
    • 22,424 Thanks
    antrobus
    • #9
    • 15th Jul 18, 6:03 PM
    • #9
    • 15th Jul 18, 6:03 PM
    ...
    What 2006 credit card fee's ruling ????
    .
    Originally posted by brown1950
    This one.
    http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20131101193648tf_/http://www.oft.gov.uk/news-and-updates/press/2006/68-06

    It's so old it's in the National Archives.

    Which means, given the OP's timescales - account was closed approx 5 years ago (2013) - open 3 or 4 years previous (2009) - that any credit card charges levied would likely be of the 12 variety and perfectly fair.

    Waste of time 'claiming' I'd say.
    • brown1950
    • By brown1950 15th Jul 18, 11:26 PM
    • 238 Posts
    • 53 Thanks
    brown1950
    Yet again the usual 'defenders' come out of the woodwork with NO legal argument.

    I will ask again what LEGAL precedent has been set regarding credit card default fee's ? NONE

    Linking bank charges to credit card fees is ridiculous.

    Why do Barclaycard always do a confidentiality clause when paying court claims for credit card default fee's. I think the answer to that one sums up my position.

    I look forward to at least one of the 'defenders' to point me in the direction of a LEGAL precedent regarding credit card default fee's.
    • Barry Napierski
    • By Barry Napierski 16th Jul 18, 12:27 PM
    • 8 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Barry Napierski
    Thank you all for your replies.
    At this stage i just want to check that the charges (If any) have been charged at the correct rate. If they have then i will not be perusing any potential claim.
    If any charges are above the amount recommended then i shall assess the difference and see if i believe there is a case to be answered.

    Again, thanks for the reply's.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

1,265Posts Today

8,175Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • What does resilience mean to you? For me it?s understanding my own limitations, physically and mentally? What about? https://t.co/CuuRLoQFTr

  • Donald Trump has apologised and admits he said would when he meant "wouldn't" when siding with Putin over US inte? https://t.co/z1CRJSkEO1

  • About to watch #AckleyBridge on C4+1. I do enjoy it, even though I always feel somewhat stressed and depressed after watching.

  • Follow Martin