Originally Posted by AntiSilence (Post 34137229)

Out of everyone here who's reclaimed some charges, has any of your banks told you that they're now closing your account at all?

Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 34138766)

Nope look at post 85 of this thread ;)

Originally Posted by Chrysalis (Post 34138417)

I am still confused since its not an available balance.

Originally Posted by Mr Angry (Post 34140802)

Pia, what did they send you info / printout wise?

Originally Posted by Pia (Post 34140755)

Hi all, just had 2 letters in the post this morning, Barclays have sent for the Barclaycard but NOT the Bank account, wonder if that comes separate or if they really did need their own letter for that... I was told on the C.A.G forums i could kill the two birds with one stone.

Anyway, the charges aren't as bad as i thought, Argos had refunded quite a few times to be fair to them, so taking that into account they've only charged me £119.

Barclaycard have charged me £240 worth, again nowhere near as bad as i thought. But still, better in my pocket than theirs;)

Just a question though, the letter they sent with it, is that a bog standard reply?:dunce:

Originally Posted by Shaun (Post 34140856)

I'm guessing the credit card statements are stored in the same way even now. No point filing statements away in a random order if they can't retrieve them.

Originally Posted by Pia (Post 34140860)

That's what i thought, seems strange that they think we'd believe they store things and not be able to retreive them:shrug:

Well i didn't get my Barclaycard til around late 2003 ish, and i ran my account well at the beginning so i doubt there'd be much point in seeing the rest of the statements.
If i knew there was lots of charges before 2004 however, i'd probably follow it through, but like i say i doubt there'd be much point.

Originally Posted by Scarlett (Post 34143398)

You need to go back to them pointing out that you only want the details of the charges and not the actual statements.

As for me Company A have responded again, they've obviously actually looked at my account this time because the threat of legal action is reduced to 'if you take it to court then we'll apply for instant dismissal and come after you for our costs...' and an offer of £4 for each £20 charge they applied (as they claim they have reduced their charge to £16 and the OFT is happy with this)

Looks like this one's going the distance. They are still stating that these are fair charges to recover there costs of adding a single line to my statement each month that they don't event print out (just email me to say the statement was ready) the amusing thing was all the justification they have previously provided for the £20 penalty charge consisted of them having someone to call me if the monthly payment didn't make it to them. Nothing whatsoever to do with going over my limit.

The big argument going back is that at one point in the past I had account cover on the card. I forgot about this but my card reached a point at which the account cover + monthly interest > minimum payment. when did they finally call me about this ? (what I apparently pay £20 each time for!) Only once the monthly payment failed to bring me back under the credit limit, not before. I believe that in this instance alone they had £100 over 5 months and although I was unhappy at the time, they refused to discuss any refund as "It is the customers responsability to monitor their account." So on one hand we have that your paying £20 because they have to employ people to monitor your account and on the other it my responsability to monitor the account. I'm going to court with this to contest that the only justification is that I should pay extra for the privilidge of having someone call me if my payment doesn't make it to them. Considering the rest is pretty much automated what were they doing with my interest payments all the time I was with them ?

Legal action starts on Friday as that was the dead line that they were given in my last letter. If once this is done and dusted I am able to reveal who company A is I will but I suspect that even If I win I will be forced to agree not to say as part of the agreement :(

Originally Posted by Pia (Post 34143452)

Scarlett, i took the amount of the charges from the statements, so i didn't think it mattered how they sent them as long as i had the records.

Originally Posted by Pia (Post 34143452)

I thought the OFT had only said 'they won't get involved' for charges of £12 not £16:shrug:

Originally Posted by Mr Angry (Post 34143438)

The OFT is not "happy" with £16.00 charges. They cannot force a non-disclosure on you as part of the settlement. I don't see why you just don't name "Company A". Someone may have prior experience of nailing them which could prove useful to you in bringing them to their senses. Additionally I think the OFT have a right to know that companies are now stating that they (the OFT) are happy with £16.00 charges.

Hold your nerve - unless you're talking hundreds of thousands in charges you are 99.99% certain not to see the inside of a court over this.

Originally Posted by Scarlett (Post 34143398)

You need to go back to them pointing out that you only want the details of the charges and not the actual statements.

As for me Company A have responded again, they've obviously actually looked at my account this time because the threat of legal action is reduced to 'if you take it to court then we'll apply for instant dismissal and come after you for our costs...' and an offer of £4 for each £20 charge they applied (as they claim they have reduced their charge to £16 and the OFT is happy with this)

Looks like this one's going the distance. They are still stating that these are fair charges to recover there costs of adding a single line to my statement each month that they don't event print out (just email me to say the statement was ready) the amusing thing was all the justification they have previously provided for the £20 penalty charge consisted of them having someone to call me if the monthly payment didn't make it to them. Nothing whatsoever to do with going over my limit.

The big argument going back is that at one point in the past I had account cover on the card. I forgot about this but my card reached a point at which the account cover + monthly interest > minimum payment. when did they finally call me about this ? (what I apparently pay £20 each time for!) Only once the monthly payment failed to bring me back under the credit limit, not before. I believe that in this instance alone they had £100 over 5 months and although I was unhappy at the time, they refused to discuss any refund as "It is the customers responsability to monitor their account." So on one hand we have that your paying £20 because they have to employ people to monitor your account and on the other it my responsability to monitor the account. I'm going to court with this to contest that the only justification is that I should pay extra for the privilidge of having someone call me if my payment doesn't make it to them. Considering the rest is pretty much automated what were they doing with my interest payments all the time I was with them ?

Legal action starts on Friday as that was the dead line that they were given in my last letter. If once this is done and dusted I am able to reveal who company A is I will but I suspect that even If I win I will be forced to agree not to say as part of the agreement :(

Originally Posted by Shaun (Post 34143497)

You are claiming through the small claims tracks aren't you? If so then they can stuff their costs as neither of you can apply to the courts for costs mate. Guff and bluster again. These companies make me really :mad: