Shadow2981 vs. Lloyds Banking Group

[Shadow2981]

Re: Shadow2981 vs. Lloyds Banking Group

I also have a question for anybody who feels able to answer.. if Durkin was awarded £8,000 for the impact of a term of a default - which in Scotland is 5 years - can you break it down into £1,600 a year and actually request £9,600 in England and Wales to cover the extra year?

[Shadow2981]

Re: Shadow2981 vs. Lloyds Banking Group

I have also been reading Foster's letters etc... the £1000 credit file damages were his requested amount and not DJ's valuation - so in the event it led to it, compo request could be in the region of £8K per account based on the other case (Durkin was it?)

[Shadow2981]

Re: Shadow2981 vs. Lloyds Banking Group

First paragraph on page 30:

"I will also allow interest on that sum at the rate of 4%..."

[Bill-K]

Re: Shadow2981 vs. Lloyds Banking Group

I'm not too good at understanding legalese (slight pun intended), but I can't see any mention in the full judgement of 4% compensatory interest being awarded. Can Ken or anybody point me to this, or post up anything to show this ? It would be interesting to see what the Particulars of the Claim were, as that would usually state 8% Statutory rate - and Tom Brennan would have claimed that, I'm sure.

As regards the spreadsheet workings, I intend to keep the compensatory interest rate at the statutory 8% unless this is revised by statute. To my tiny mind, it is perfectly reasonable to claim this at the statutory 8% rate, but if the DJ awards it at any other rate, then I would expect to see a reason for this given in the Full Judgement.

And...just to wind Niddy up a bit....

My own preference is to send the informal 'Prelim' letter as the first move, and then to concentrate on getting the figures right while that is being digested. IMO, even the 'LBA' and the FOS claim can be sent before the figures are finalised. I think we only need to have the figures sorted by the time we get a redress offer - so that we can evaluate it in a timely fashion.

[Bill-K]

Re: Shadow2981 vs. Lloyds Banking Group

Blimey - that's the first time I have ever seen a DJ award even less than the Statutory 8%.

That needs checking out, dunnit ? Well spotted, chaps !!!

[Shadow2981]

Re: Shadow2981 vs. Lloyds Banking Group

The judge awarded 4% - but isn't 8% the general standard set by the courts?

I will go with whatever is recommended by those better placed than I to do so - but would it not make sense to request/demand 8% - and only take less if it ever got to court and judgement was for less (or perhaps if an acceptable offer based on 4% was proposed prior to it getting as far as court) - or would it be better form to be true to the judgement I am predominantly relying on for my case?

[ken100464]

Re: Shadow2981 vs. Lloyds Banking Group

Bill

The judge awarded 4% interest not 8% from when they had their mucky mitts on the claimants money. Dont know if that will make any difference to your spreadsheet. Shadow paid these off in 2008 so there would be some of this element within any claim one would think.

[Shadow2981]

Re: Shadow2981 vs. Lloyds Banking Group

Cheers I didn't notice it on statements when I filled these spreadsheets in, but it may very well be there in plain sight and I just didn't notice because I wasn't actively looking for it!

Fingers crossed - it would be a very welcome finale to the whole Lloyds ordeal... would it be worth mentioning when we do send the prelim letter that my last dealings with LBG landed me in hospital (heart issues brought on by the stress of trying to deal with credit card) or would that just fall on deaf ears? They did give me compo I never cashed.. £300 partly for an admin error and the rest as means of an apology for that!!

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Shadow2981 vs. Lloyds Banking Group

Look through statements mate. The rate will be there (from SAR info).....

Regards calculations; hold fire. Bill will sort you a spreadsheet in a few days I'd hope. From that you fill it in using details off the statements in the SAR.

[Shadow2981]

Re: Shadow2981 vs. Lloyds Banking Group

Thanks Bill and NID, I am not sure if the spreadsheet calculator I used is any good or not but am happy to provide either/both of you with this to see how I reached figures etc...

I haven't calculated the difference in interest charges had the unfair charges not been applied as I don't recall what the interest rate of OD was and I thought this was being a little nit-picky - but if that is something I should have done then I will certainly do so

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Shadow2981 vs. Lloyds Banking Group

Cheers Bill

Good post. One thing to keep consistent is the approach as AAD will look after these reclaims as part of a bigger scope of action.

1. Calculate fees & interest;
2. Write to bank;
3. Write to FOS;
4. Issue LBA (on merit only);
5. Issue claim (last resort ONLY if your claim / case has merit).

But for now we need accurate calculations. Do nothing formal just yet.

[Bill-K]

Re: Shadow2981 vs. Lloyds Banking Group

Hi Shadow, I got Niddy's nudge. FWIW, I have commented in FaceBook:
" I believe that - although this case cannot yet be used as a caselaw precedent - it can still be referred to in other similar cases. However, I think it would be up to the judge in each individual case to decide if it has any bearing. I look forward to hearing if the claim that Lloyds' Terms & Conditions are generally unfair is eventually upheld, as that would probably re-open the gates to many, many claims for unfair charges to be refunded.
It is good to see something beneficial to consumers coming from EU law."
I'm more of a figures man than a legal guy, but I agree with Niddy that there are some steps to be taken before resorting to litigation. As Shadow has surmised - an informal preliminary letter ('Prelim') requesting that they consider refunding the charges in the light of this Lloyds case, and suggesting that they open a dialogue between you - would be the first stage. If they respond positively, then engage in dialogue - but I suspect they will simply turn you down. In that case, the next step is a formal Letter Before Action ('LBA'), in which you give them a final chance to do something before you refer the matter to the FOS.

I would suggest the FOS as your first port of call because
(a) there is no risk of any costs to yourself, regardless of claim size, and
(b) a FOS decision can be over-ridden by the Courts, but the reverse is just about impossible.

If you disagree with the FOS's final decision, then you can take it to court.

It may be worth considering keeping each account as a separate claim initially, as you might possibly get an FOS 'uphold' on one claim, even if the others are not upheld - in which case, you have good reason to appeal against the other decisions. Additionally, if you do finally have to go to court, then this will make it easier to keep the claim size below the Fast-Track threshold.

What you should be able to claim for are:
1. The charges themselves (some may still be considered fair, remember);
2. The portion of account/overdraft interest that is attributable to the accrued total of those charges;
3. Compensatory interest at the 8% Statutory rate on both of the above.

This will probably take the account #1 claim over the Fast-Track threshold - but that only applies if you have to go to court with it, and you can cross that bridge when you come to it.
My own suggestion would be not to mention any further compensation at this stage, because we want them to agree with the ruling in the Lloyds case first of all - and by making you an offer of redress, they will effectively have agreed. Once they have made the offer, then I believe that would be the time to bring up the subject of compo. Again - cross that bridge when you come to it.
Also, I would avoid mentioning any specific amounts at this stage. What I always suggest is that you make your own calculations (which you have already done to some extent) - and then see what they eventually offer.

It has been a while since I worked on a non-PPI related penalty charges claim, but this Lloyds case may spark up the fire again - so I'll blow the dust off my old spreadsheet/calculator programs and post up here again later.

That is my opinion as a voluntary, non-professional forum advisor - and I welcome the opinions of others, of course.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Shadow2981 vs. Lloyds Banking Group

Oh.. I DID reclaim credit card charges through a company called i-Smart (which just reduced the outstanding debt) - not sure if that matters as it is unrelated to overdraft charges?

This was after the Supreme Court ruling also though... so the overdraft charges were not brought to my attention - unlike PPI which they hounded me to claim for but I never did lol

its unrelated. Forget that.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Shadow2981 vs. Lloyds Banking Group

Bear in mind this --> http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.u...nt-charges.pdf

if you can argue the charges put you in a financial hardship position you'll almost be mirroring the case above hence the FOS may or may not take it on.

I'll post more as and when. As it's been a few years since we did charges reclaims Bill might need to find & update his formula spreadsheets so bear with us. Your timescale is as quoted by the FOS

six years from the event the consumer is complaining about (or - if later - three years from when the consumer knew, or could reasonably have known, they had cause to complain).

Source --> http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.u...volved_a7.html

[Shadow2981]

Re: Shadow2981 vs. Lloyds Banking Group

Oh.. I DID reclaim credit card charges through a company called i-Smart (which just reduced the outstanding debt) - not sure if that matters as it is unrelated to overdraft charges?

This was after the Supreme Court ruling also though... so the overdraft charges were not brought to my attention - unlike PPI which they hounded me to claim for but I never did lol