Hello and Good Morning

[felixx]

Hi Guys just joined, the reason is i'm looking to see if anyone would have some information.

Just recently i had my identity stolen which has lead to some charges accuring on some of my account (just to let you know it's not with these i need the assistant)

the assistant i need is on the web some where i saw on another forum which i now cannot find some people had taken to imposing their own FINES/CHARGES on the like of DCA's ect.

After reciveing a very snooty letter from a DCA i decided to right back and impose my of FINE/CHARGES amazingly they drop the case back to the orginator(it was a bank) like a hot rock.

Now the bank have said i legally cannot fine or impose any charges on them i have written to them again asking for the said legislation which say i cannot do this and again they have sent at letter just saying i canot leagally do this.

so my question is does anyone know if there is such legislation?

[teaboy2]

Re: Hello and Good Morning

Well i send them invoices all the time when they chase me for alleged debts or mobile contracts i not have or ever owned or are unenforceable. (Seems once your name is on the list they chase you for debts that are not even yours).

So long as you have informed them of the said charges and what they will be charged for i.e. £25 for further letters demanding payment or for each future phone call made to you both answered and unanswered etc, then by carrying on sending you such demands or making such phone calls they have accepted the rates of the applicable charges that you have laid out to them. They simply can not say that you can not charge them, as if it went to court you would beable to charge them for your costs if you should win.

At the moment Lowells owe me £750 in charges it invoiced them, as a result of them chasing me for a mobile phone contract that was a result of 2 mobile phone being sent as unsolicited goods to me, which i as per the distance selling regulations treated them as unconditional gifts and sold on as per my right to do so.

Basically the bank is taking up your time when you respond to them, therefore you are entitled to charge for your time spend dealing with the matter - In my opinion.

[felixx]

Re: Hello and Good Morning

Well i send them invoices all the time when they chase me for alleged debts or mobile contracts i not have or ever owned or are unenforceable. (Seems once your name is on the list they chase you for debts that are not even yours).

So long as you have informed them of the said charges and what they will be charged for i.e. £25 for further letters demanding payment or for each future phone call made to you both answered and unanswered etc, then by carrying on sending you such demands or making such phone calls they have accepted the rates of the applicable charges that you have laid out to them. They simply can not say that you can not charge them, as if it went to court you would beable to charge them for your costs if you should win.

At the moment Lowells owe me £750 in charges it invoiced them, as a result of them chasing me for a mobile phone contract that was a result of 2 mobile phone being sent as unsolicited goods to me, which i as per the distance selling regulations treated them as unconditional gifts and sold on as per my right to do so.

Basically the bank is taking up your time when you respond to them, therefore you are entitled to charge for your time spend dealing with the matter - In my opinion.

Thank you for your reply Teaboy one question have any of them actual paid up?

Felixx

[CleverClogs]

Re: Hello and Good Morning

I believe he may soon assign the Lowells debt to MacKenzie Hall to collect.

[leclerc]

Re: Hello and Good Morning

To clarify with you, you cannot charge the bank for sending letters to them since you cannot unilaterally make charges to a bank. No legislation would support you on doing this unilaterally.

[teaboy2]

Re: Hello and Good Morning

Thank you for your reply Teaboy one question have any of them actual paid up?

Felixx

Yes i had Iqor pay upto £120 if i remember correctly.

I believe he may soon assign the Lowells debt to MacKenzie Hall to collect.

Lol that would be fun.

Yeah am still working on getting Lowells to pay up.

[CleverClogs]

Re: Hello and Good Morning

To clarify with you, you cannot charge the bank for sending letters to them since you cannot unilaterally make charges to a bank.

I believe one can, but I also expect that one may experience some difficulty in obtaining payment.

No legislation would support you on doing this unilaterally.

Nor would any legislation forbid it.

What one is seeking to do would be to alter the terms of one's contract with the bank and, if they do not reply to the first invoice telling you to get lost, one could argue that they had accepted the variation of the contract. After all, that is pretty much the argument used by the bank whenever they bump up their interest rates or otherwise alter their terms of contract with their customers.

[leclerc]

Re: Hello and Good Morning

I believe one can, but I also expect that one may experience some difficulty in obtaining payment.


Nor would any legislation forbid it.

What one is seeking to do would be to alter the terms of one's contract with the bank and, if they do not reply to the first invoice telling you to get lost, one could argue that they had accepted the variation of the contract. After all, that is pretty much the argument used by the bank whenever they bump up their interest rates or otherwise alter their terms of contract with their customers.

And I assume that would mean that they could close the account as well, similarly to the same thing a customer could do.

If we go back to post 1, surely the issue if the money has come from ID theft is the usual, complaint to bank and that any settlement includes an amount that puts the OP back in to the position had the ID theft not happened. Albeit, that is what they have already done.

Have we got any cases to back up sending an invoice for payment, it being refused and then it being enshrined that a contract was made with reference to a financial institution?

[felixx]

Re: Hello and Good Morning

To clarify with you, you cannot charge the bank for sending letters to them since you cannot unilaterally make charges to a bank. No legislation would support you on doing this unilaterally.

How can it be classed as unilaterally seeing as BANK charges me so i then CHARGE the BANK

I'm not charging them for the letters i'm charging them for bad customer services, just the same as they charge me for my bad customer services

[leclerc]

Re: Hello and Good Morning

Because the bank are charging for consideration of a request by you. You are simply stating that you want to charge the bank for writing a letter yet you do not have the right to do so unless you give the bank the statutory timescale for a variance of the contract. However, the risk is that he bank says no and decides to close your account since there would be clear evidence that neither of you see eye to eye. When the bank gives notice of a change of the terms and conditions, you have the right to close the account.

You cannot charge them for poor customer service, if they do not correct an error when they should have then you have the right to claim compensation from the bank if they do not correct when you make them aware of the issue. So for example, something goes wrong on the account due to the bank's error. You make them aware of it and they don't correct it, so you have to write/telephone the bank to correct it, there is the right of redress since they didn't fix the problem at the first attempt. However, where in your current banking contract does it state you can make a charge? As some may have said in the years, you cannot impose a contractual penalty that is not part of the terms and conditions.

[SpringerSpaniel]

Re: Hello and Good Morning

Yes i had Iqor pay upto £120 if i remember correctly.



Lol that would be fun.

Yeah am still working on getting Lowells to pay up.

I got Lowells to drop all claims against me in exchange for not pursuing proceedings under the Protection from Harrassment Act, and was asked by a District Judge if I really wanted to accept this rather than press for compensation from them.

[teaboy2]

Re: Hello and Good Morning

I got Lowells to drop all claims against me in exchange for not pursuing proceedings under the Protection from Harrassment Act, and was asked by a District Judge if I really wanted to accept this rather than press for compensation from them.

Good result, though if it been me id have gone for the compensation as i bet the judge would have written of any alleged debt.

Lowell's haven't been intouch since about march so not harassing me since i put them in their place, though dispite my section 10 notice over a month ago, they recorded an unrecorded enquiry on my credit file last week. So they in breach of the Data Protection Act for failing to obey by the section 10 notice.

Though point is some of the amount i invoiced them was compensation for phone harrassment endured 2-3 times or more a day by my mother virtually everyday when she has a servere heart condition, that was probably made worse by the calls that came from fredricksons acting on behalf of lowells. Though the majority of the invoice is made up of £10 late payment fees for every week it remains overdue. I never had a contract with Lowell's so since they accepted the charges that i had given them prior notification of by continuing to send their demands for payment, then they had entered a contract to pay such charges for each letter and phone call received demanding payment, and the late payment fees. So no get out for them, even got an apology for the harassment of my mother so the compensation amount included in the invoice is perfectly a legit amount to claim too. So i looking at way in which to enforce the debt.

Anyway Back to topic, but hope my post above is useful.

[felixx]

Re: Hello and Good Morning

Because the bank are charging for consideration of a request by you. You are simply stating that you want to charge the bank for writing a letter yet you do not have the right to do so unless you give the bank the statutory timescale for a variance of the contract. However, the risk is that he bank says no and decides to close your account since there would be clear evidence that neither of you see eye to eye. When the bank gives notice of a change of the terms and conditions, you have the right to close the account.

You cannot charge them for poor customer service, if they do not correct an error when they should have then you have the right to claim compensation from the bank if they do not correct when you make them aware of the issue. So for example, something goes wrong on the account due to the bank's error. You make them aware of it and they don't correct it, so you have to write/telephone the bank to correct it, there is the right of redress since they didn't fix the problem at the first attempt. However, where in your current banking contract does it state you can make a charge? As some may have said in the years, you cannot impose a contractual penalty that is not part of the terms and conditions.

Firstly the Account is close so there is no risk.

Scondly who say i cannot charge them for bad customers services.

thirdly where in the contract/term and condition does it state i cannot charge them.

This is my whole point with the BANK's, they are spouting out you can't do this you can't do that, and as i have said WHO SAY'S i can't where is the evidence, just because some SAY'S you CAN'T or it's ILLEGAL doesn't mean YOU CAN'T or in fact it is ILLEGAL without providing EVIDENCE of the fact

[teaboy2]

Re: Hello and Good Morning

Firstly the Account is close so there is no risk.

Scondly who say i cannot charge them for bad customers services.

thirdly where in the contract/term and condition does it state i cannot charge them.

This is my whole point with the BANK's, they are spouting out you can't do this you can't do that, and as i have said WHO SAY'S i can't where is the evidence, just because some SAY'S you CAN'T or it's ILLEGAL doesn't mean YOU CAN'T or in fact it is ILLEGAL without providing EVIDENCE of the fact

If the account is closed then any agreement governed by the terms and conditions of the account would have been terminated, so the issue with terms and conditions would not be relevant anymore.

Basically the charges are for the loss of time you have incurred for having to deal with this matter that was a result of the banks mistake that has caused your detriment in lost time and detriment in cost of materiel (paper, ink, stamps, phone calls etc).

For Example - If you were their accountant, you would charge them for your service, and basically your doing accounting for them by working out the error and pointing it out to them. For which you are entitled to charge them for your time and costs with dealing with the matter, just like you would apply for the same costs if you won in court.

[leclerc]

Re: Hello and Good Morning

Firstly the Account is close so there is no risk.
So the case is resolved, right?
Scondly who say i cannot charge them for bad customers services.
If you want to do that then do it but do not expect anything of a monetary value back from them.
thirdly where in the contract/term and condition does it state i cannot charge them.
Would you like me to give you the contract law that was used against bank charges in the early days? That is the case law that does not allow you to charge a contractual penalty to a company. If you want to chance your hand than so be it.
This is my whole point with the BANK's, they are spouting out you can't do this you can't do that, and as i have said WHO SAY'S i can't where is the evidence, just because some SAY'S you CAN'T or it's ILLEGAL doesn't mean YOU CAN'T or in fact it is ILLEGAL without providing EVIDENCE of the fact

You can attempt to charge the bank but please can you tell me how you will ENFORCE that charge since if you took them to court for it, you would lose. Felixx, it's up to you how you want to spend your time, if you want to waste it on this then so be it. Realistically, are you out of pocket? Did the fraud and any charges get refunded?
If the answer is, that eventually they were, and you accepted settlement then where is the loss?
I would add that the bank have already rejected your attempt to change the contract so therefore you cannot do that(post 1).
Case Law, is that what you want which does not allow for it? If you've read the case law prior to the OFT test case on bank charges then you can find the case law.
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------

If the account is closed then any agreement governed by the terms and conditions of the account would have been terminated, so the issue with terms and conditions would not be relevant anymore.

Basically the charges are for the loss of time you have incurred for having to deal with this matter that was a result of the banks mistake that has caused your detriment in lost time and detriment in cost of materiel (paper, ink, stamps, phone calls etc).

For Example - If you were their accountant, you would charge them for your service, and basically your doing accounting for them by working out the error and pointing it out to them. For which you are entitled to charge them for your time and costs with dealing with the matter, just like you would apply for the same costs if you won in court.

But that should have been dealt with when the issue of ID theft was being dealt with, ie compensatory amount. If the OP has accepted the resolution of the ID theft issue then you can't go back and say, "I don't agree with it anymore, can I have some more money?" The bank can't and nor can the OP.