Found this in my local paper

I found this in the Southend Echo and its got my blood boiling. I need help to draft a nice response to it please.
Appeal Court ruling could force banks to refund billions in charges From Echo)

[WendyB]

Re: Found this in my local paper

Something along the lines of

"Why don't you publicise the fact that anyone with half a braincell can do the reclaiming process all on their own (with FREE help and advice from Legal Beagles) without the need to sign up with an ambulance chaser who not only makes it sound like he just has to file at court and hey presto, money refunded, but also takes a whopping percentage of your refund, and seems to have calculated the interest with the aid of an abacus with the beads missing"

[Mochamoo]

Re: Found this in my local paper

The reporters email address is paul.offord@nqe.com will send him a nice mail

[natweststaffmember]

Re: Found this in my local paper

Its a lovely article. And I think we should all ring the gentleman waiting for his cut of the money, I mean the no win no fee guy.

[Sapphire]

Re: Found this in my local paper

I've tried to call him direct 3 times but he's getting a sandwich, dunno where from though must be a long way away.

[ROBSTER]

Re: Found this in my local paper

He could have at least offered to donate the fee to charity!

What’s the next installment in the paper going to read?

"Banks win right to HoL appeal so I’ll be lucky to see my charges this side of retirement"

Any publicity is good publicity, if as a result of this one more person becomes aware that they might claim their charges back must be a good thing. Banks need to be held to account for their actions it’s just a shame the comments posted after are not likely to appear in the paper, maybe contact the journalist to get a site mention for the eagerly awaited “Next Installment” .

[Mochamoo]

Re: Found this in my local paper

I sent him an email and you were right Wendy it is paul.offord not pau


I told him off for advertising ambulance chasers, explained all about hardship claims, told him of our recent sucesses and how people could claim. told him to contact admin for more info.

[Curlyben]

Re: Found this in my local paper

This bits a classic:

Mr Coombs also plans to ask for between 27 per cent and 28 per cent interest on the money the bank owed me – roughly the same amount the banks charge customers for each day they exceed their overdraft limit.

Oh is he indeed, I think not as that would be CI that's already been sealed SHUT !!!

Bloody lazy assed journos.
My brothers the same, I told him I'd do it for nowt !!!

[natweststaffmember]

Re: Found this in my local paper

CB, do you mean Halliday Vs. HBOS case for statutory interest?

[Curlyben]

Re: Found this in my local paper

yeppers, unless he's trying a restitution angle.

[ROBSTER]

Re: Found this in my local paper

This bits a classic:



Oh is he indeed, I think not as that would be CI that's already been sealed SHUT !!!

Bloody lazy assed journos.
My brothers the same, I told him I'd do it for nowt !!!

Mr Coombs also plans to ask for between 27 per cent and 28 per cent interest on the money the bank owed me – roughly the same amount the banks charge customers for each day they exceed their overdraft limit.

so it's 27% per day? theres not enough space in the cells on my excel to calculate the CI they would expect back on that claim even if it worked!!

"Bloody lazy assed journos" Thats a bit strong CB!!

I'll have you know my wife is lazy assed and there is no way she would want to be associated with Journos!!

[Sapphire]

Re: Found this in my local paper

Why don't you phone him and ask him lol, I'm sure you'd find something in common to chat about. msl:

[Amethyst]

Re: Found this in my local paper

DLA Piper

CASE LAW
85. No implied term for compound interest on refund of bank charges
From 1979 to 2006 Mr Halliday had a current account with HBOS ("the Bank"). From time to time
the Bank debited this account with charges of various kinds, for example charges for exceeding his
arranged overdraft limit. Mr Halliday contended that these charges were unlawful and issued a
claim against the Bank in Bury St Edmunds County Court.
Having taken a commercial view of the case, and without any admission of liability, the Bank paid
Mr Halliday an amount of money to satisfy his claim in full. That amount included money not only in
respect of the charges levied but also in respect of interest charged to Mr Halliday when his account
was overdrawn. The sum also included interest, at a simple rate of 8%, on the charges and interest.
The Bank acknowledged that this amount was higher than a court might have awarded but wished
to avoid any argument on the issue.
The Bank then successfully applied to strike out Mr Halliday's claim on the basis that there were no
outstanding issues for the court to deal with. Mr Halliday was however given leave to appeal on the
question of whether he was entitled to compound interest on the sums which had been deducted
from his account and at a rate of 28.8%, being the rate which the Bank was entitled to charge on
unauthorized withdrawals.
On his appeal, Mr Halliday argued that if he was not entitled to the same rate of interest as the
Bank then his contract with the Bank would be unfair under the Unfair Terms in Consumer
Contracts Regulations and the Bank would not be complying with the principles of "fair dealing" as
set out in the Banking Code and the FSA Handbook. He also argued that a term should be implied
into his contract with the Bank that he was entitled to the same rate of interest as the Bank as a
matter of law on the basis of the principle of "reciprocity" and in line with custom and usage of
banker/customer contracts. He further argued that there was a policy argument for implying such a
term, as customers on the edge of their credit limit would face higher interest rates when they
sought to borrow money to make good deductions made by banks.
The judge dismissed Mr Halliday's appeal. While courts may imply terms into banker/customer
relationships this will be on the basis of necessity and/or usage or custom, not fairness. Even when
a term is implied by law there still needs to be some "necessity" for such an implication, some "gap"
to be filled in the contractual relations between the parties. There was no "gap" here as Mr Halliday
had been repaid with compound interest and also had the right to claim statutory interest at 8%
from the court, as would any other claimant. If the law was to be criticized it would be a general
criticism of a claimant's entitlement to interest not something that could be remedied by implication
of a term. Further it was difficult to see how it could be right to impose on a bank a rate of interest
which the claimant had argued was punitive as against himself.
Mark Liddell Halliday -v- HBOS plc, Queen's Bench Division, 8 June 2007
DLA Piper acted for HBOS plc. If you are interested in any of the issues raised by the case and
want to discuss them further please contact Andrew Horton on 0113 369 2204.



86. Bank charges : limitation periods
Mr Cank had an account with Halifax plc ("the Bank"). He sought to recover bank charges debited
from his account between 30 December 1995 and 16 March 2004. He issued a claim against the
Bank on 2 August 2006.
Without any admission of liability, the Bank repaid the charges levied since 2 August 2000 together
with interest calculated at 8% per annum. However, the Bank applied to strike out the claim for
repayment of charges that had been debited prior to 2 August 2000 on the basis that the claim for
Page 14
13
Excellence through know-how
repayment of those charges was time-barred under the provisions of the Limitation Act 1980 ("the
Act").
Mr Cank resisted that application and also argued that he should be entitled to interest at 29.8% per
annum rather than the 8% per annum which had been paid by the Bank.
The judge concluded that any contractual claim which Mr Cank had in relation to the pre 2 August
2000 charges was statute barred under s.5 of the Act. Similarly any claim that Mr Cank might
advance under the provisions of the Supply of Goods and Services Act, the Unfair Contract Terms
Act 1977 and/or the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 would be statute barred
either under s. 9, s.2 or s.6 of the Act.
Mr Cank's argument that each charge amounted to an unlawful penalty and was therefore void and
unenforceable could be characterized as a claim for equitable relief. So characterized, s.36 of the
Act would apply. The court followed the guidance given by the Court of Appeal in Compania de
Seguros Imperio -v- Heath [2001] 1 WLR 112, the essence of which was that where the remedy in
equity corresponds to a remedy at law, and the latter is subject to a time limit, then the court should
act by analogy and impose the same time limitation on the equitable remedy. As the relief sought by
Mr Cank was simply to get his money back, the limitation periods provided for by sections 2, 5 and
9 of the Act would apply equally to the claim as formulated in equity. The claim in respect of pre 2
August 2000 charges would therefore be time-barred.
Although the bank-customer relationship is a fiduciary one this does not mean that every claim
brought by a customer against a bank is a claim for breach of fiduciary duty or breach of trust. This
particular claim was not a claim by a beneficiary against a trustee, or a claim for breach of fiduciary
duty; rather it was a claim concerning the enforceability of charges payable pursuant to the terms
and conditions of the account. Therefore s. 21 (1) of the Act, which excludes the normal periods of
limitation in claims brought by beneficiaries under a trust where there has been fraud or a fraudulent
breach of trust, did not apply.
Mr Cank also sought to rely on s. 32 of the Act which provides that where there has been deliberate
concealment of essential facts the clock will not start to run for limitation purposes until the claimant
has discovered the fraud, concealment or mistake or could with reasonable diligence have
discovered it. Mr Cank argued that the Bank had refused or failed to provide him with a breakdown
of the costs to which it had been put as a result of his "breaches". This, he said, amounted to
deliberate concealment. The judge dismissed this argument holding that there was no concealment,
let alone deliberate concealment.
Mr Cank further argued that the charges did not fairly reflect the loss suffered by the Bank by
reason of his various "breaches". That fact made the charges unenforceable penalties and that fact
was concealed from him by the Bank. The judge dismissed this argument. Unwillingness to
volunteer information is not the same as deliberate concealment. The information Mr Cank had
sought was evidence not fact. Whilst that evidence might be material to the prospects of success of
Mr Cank's claim, or to the prospects of the Bank's defence, it was not the same as "a fact relevant
to the [claimant's] right of action". Even if there had been a deliberate concealment of a fact (namely
the fact that the charges could not be justified) that fact "could with reasonable diligence" have been
established long before August 2000. S.32 of the Act did not apply.
On the interest point Mr Cank had argued that the Bank could have charged him overdraft interest
at 29.8%. Relying on the so-called "principle of reciprocity" he argued that he should be entitled to
claim interest at the same rate. The judge rejected Mr Cank's arguments holding that the principle
of reciprocity had no application to this case. To the extent that the Bank may have been entitled to
charge interest at 29.8% (or at a rate higher than 8%) that rested on the terms and conditions of the
account. There was no ground for awarding Mr Cank interest at a rate higher than 8%.
David Barry Cank -v- Halifax plc, Bristol County Court, 23 May 2007
Page 15
14
Excellence through know-how
DLA Piper acted for Halifax plc. If you are interested in any of the issues raised by the case and
want to discuss them further please contact Andrew Horton on 0113 369 2204

[EXC]

Re: Found this in my local paper

I suspect Mr Coombs' talents also extend to writing newspaper articles.

[Sapphire]

Re: Found this in my local paper

I've emailed the reporter and said that if he's interested in finding out about Beagles and how people can 'do it themselves', to contact me and I'll put him in touch with Ame or Tools.
Lets see if he takes up the offer.