BANK & CREDIT CARD CHARGES
 

It really annoys us when banks and other financial firms penalise customers so heavily for their mistakes. However, when the boot’s on the other foot, these companies are quick to deny responsibility and routinely refuse to pay out compensation when they mess up.Therefore, if you’ve got a grievance, then don’t get mad, get even. Here are five ways to fight back against bullying banks: 1. Recover unauthorised overdraft charges If you go overdrawn without permission, exceed your overdraft limit, or ‘bounce’ payments from your current account, then your bank will punish you for your mistake. You can expect to pay up to £40 per slip-up, even if your unauthorised borrowing is just a few pounds.  However, the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) believes that these punitive charges are unfair, so it has taken legal action against eight banks and building societies.This case is being heard now.  However the Staute of Limitations Act 1980   in English law means that you can go back six years when attempting to reclaim these charges. So, if you’ve been fined for unauthorised borrowing at any point since late July 2002, submit a claim now in writing. Then, when the OFT finally wins its case, you’ll already be in the queue for compensation. 2. Claim back credit-card fines Credit card providers make billions of pounds every year from people just like you. They attach excessive charges at every available opportunity and it's not fair. They could owe you thousands. Until two years ago, most credit-card issuers would charge fines of £20 to £30 for bounced, late or missed payments, or for exceeding your credit limit. However, in April 2006, the OFT decided that these penalty charges were unfair. In response to this ruling, card issuers reduced their charges to no more than £12 a time. Again, if you’ve been fined by your credit-card company at any point in the past six years, then apply for a refund. Don’t be fobbed off with excuses, as many card issuers falsely claim that these refunds are, like bank-charge claims, on hold for the duration of the above court case. Also, demand full repayment of each fine -- don’t allow your card issuer to pay only the difference between your fine and the ‘fair’ (!) fee of £12.

3. Recoup mortgage exit arrangement fees Mortgage lenders have also been guilty of charging massive "exit" fees on mortgages.  If you have been charged a mortgage exit arrangement fee greater than that stipulated in your contract, then demand a refund from your mortgage lender. This massive ‘fee inflation’ is unfair and, in January 2007, the Financial Services Authority (FSA) agreed. 4. Demand mis-selling compensation Over the years we have witnessed massive mis-selling in the Financial Services Industry. Our battles date back to the 1960's and 1970's when the large insurance companies went to war with us for giving our client's discounts on financial purchases. To-day the authorities recommend it.  We can recall regulatory failures, mis-selling problems, FSA fines and compensation payouts to the public regarding (in alphabetical order): business bank accounts; Equitable Life; extended warranties; free-standing additional voluntary contributions (extra pensions); guaranteed equity bonds; hamper firm Farepak; high-income ‘precipice’ bonds; home-income plans (investment mortgages in the Eighties and Nineties); Nation Life (The William Stern Scandal) maximum investment plans; mortgage endowments; payment protection insurance; personal pensions; secured loans (second mortgages); split-capital investment trusts; and store cards. Theft of Pension Dividends in 1997 by Gordon Brown in breach of pension contracts. There are seventeen scandals in the above list, but perhaps the most significant is the widespread mis-selling of mortgage endowment policies. Indeed, the possible shortfall from these failing part-insurance/part-investment policies could exceed £50 billion. This happened because the "terminal bonus", which had formerly been given was disapated by companies purchasing "second hand policies".

In the early nineties we witnessed an arguement between the principals of Insurance Companies & the 2nd hand purchasers. Those Principals are criminally guilty of allowing past performance to be shown when THEY KNEW the figures could not be reproduced. 5. Don’t forget to charge for your time  Remember that you should always insist  that you also be compensated for inconvenience, distress and time wasted. So, if your bank charges you  for a computer-generated letter, return the favour by charging  for the above. If you are taking time off your work to spend hours listening to music on the telephone charge them at an hourly rate! 6 What Should You Do Now? If you have already made a complaint - it is likely that your claim for bank charge refund will be frozen pending the outcome of the test case.  If an offer has been made and you have accepted that offer, the bank would be bound to honour the agreement under the normal rules of contract. If you have already taken Court Action - there likely to be a direction from the Courts that all actions will also be frozen.  This is usual in test cases as this will save court time, costs, duplication of work and a prevention of conflicting court judgements.  Cases will then be reviewed once a final decision from the test cases are handed down. If you have not made a complaint to date - it is our advice that you should contact us and make a formal claim now.  If the test claims win at court, as you have registered your claim, it will help speed up the claim process.  In simple terms you are more likely to be paid out earlier.  We cannot make any guarantees but in our experience in test cases this often happens.  Groups of claimants who have been waiting longer for the test case to conclude would normally be those who are paid out first. We would imagine that if the test case is successful there would be a mass of people putting in claims which would result in severe delays.  You should register with us now by contacting us on 0870 794 2180 or   Contact us by clicking here and we will contest the charges. (UK Only)

Update February 26th 2009

Eight banks have lost an appeal aimed at stopping the investigation
into overdraft charges, so the legal battle goes on.

We have cheery news for fed-up banking customers: the banks have lost their latest attempt to halt the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) investigation into unfair overdraft fees charged by current accounts.

The OFT wins round one

Eight banks -- Barclays, Clydesdale, HBOS, HSBC, Lloyds TSB, RBS and Nationwide BS -- argued that the OFT did not have the authority to investigate whether their charges for unauthorised overdrafts were unfair and, therefore, unenforceable. The Court of Appeal disagreed and backed the OFT.

---

THE LEGAL POSITION AS OF OCTOBER 2008

For some time now there have been a series of hearings as the Office of Fair Trading has been challenging the Banks on their charges. The current position for you in four simple bullet points:

• The High Court has ruled that the OFT can assess whether charges are unfair and take action against the banks, but the banks have appealed this decision and we await the appeal hearing. Whether the OFT chooses to take action against the banks remains to be seen.
• The banks have almost totally closed one of the arguments - that the charges are unlawful penalties under common law. The charges could still be unlawful penalties under totally different law: the UTCCR.
• The FSA waiver remains in place, meaning people can’t at the moment reclaim charges but the banks can continue to charge them. Wealthier people continue to pay nothing for their current accounts.
• Only when all this is over will we know whether we can reclaim charges, and whether the banks will continue to charge us or scrap free banking.

  ---

• 
  
• Avoid this devious credit card sting!

  Donna Werbner  Published in Credit cards on 16 March 2009

• Using this little-known trick, companies can take automatic payments from your credit card - even after you've closed it down! Imagine this. You pay off your credit card, close down the account and cut up the card. All is settled until months later, out of the blue, you get a statement from the credit card provider, demanding payment for a new transaction on the card. It's for a 'recurring payment' - and it's one of the slimiest credit card stings ever hidden in the small print. How recurring payments work On the surface, a recurring payment works in exactly the same way as a direct debit. You authorise a company to take regular payments - say, for an annual subscription or service - from your credit card. Simple, easy, convenient... until you want to cancel it. Unlike a direct debit, a recurring payment does not automatically cease to exist when you close your account down. You cannot even cancel it by notifying your credit card provider that you want it to stop. The only way to cancel a recurring payment is to ask the original merchant you set it up with to stop taking the payments. A dangerous system As if that wasn't enough, there are two big dangers associated with this method of payment: You and you alone are responsible for keeping a record of all the recurring payments you have set up on your card. The credit card provider will not keep track of them. And if you don't know which companies are authorised to take recurring payments from your card, then you will not be able to cancel the payments. If you cancel the account and then, say, move house, your statement will go to your old address. So you will have no way of knowing that a new payment has been taken from your card, and that you need to pay it off.

  This could lead to a black mark being placed on your credit record, which could cause you serious problems if you try to take out a new card or borrow a mortgage in the future. So if you're ever faced with the option of making a regular payment by credit card or direct debit, my advice would be to choose the direct debit route every time. Too late If this advice comes a little too late for you -  - then what can you do about it? Neil wrote in to lovemoney.com because, six months after cancelling an MBNA credit card, he received a statement stating that more than £90 had been paid from the card to a car breakdown company. This was for cover he no longer needed or wanted. What to do What should you do if you find yourself in this situation? 1. Dispute the payment with the company that took it. Believe it or not, you are much more likely to get a refund this way than arguing with the credit card company that you closed the account or weren't aware that the payment would recur. Here's how to argue your case: A reputable company will send you a letter warning you that your subscription is up for renewal, and that payment will be taken on a particular date. If you didn't receive this letter, you have a case for disputing the payment.

  Depending on what you have bought, you should have a cooling off period of at least seven days, where you can cancel the policy or return the goods. Contact Consumer Direct to double-check your rights, if you find this cooling off period is disputed. You may even have longer than seven days. Finally, try explaining your situation calmly and reasonably. For example, Neil, our 66-year-old reader, no longer drives a car and therefore has no need for car breakdown cover. Clearly, he would not have renewed this cover voluntarily. Most reputable companies will take a reasonable attitude when there is a clear case for a refund like this. If they don't, you could try reporting them to a relevant regulator or trade body. 2.  Dispute the payment with the credit card provider. If you fail to get a refund from the company that took the payment, it's still worth at least trying to get a refund from the credit card provider - although it may be difficult. If you have cancelled your card, you could argue that you hadn't realised that the payment would be taken. This is especially true if it is obvious, as in Neil's case, that you would never have knowingly renewed the subscription or service. Alternatively, do bear in mind you have Section 75 Protection for payments over £100. So if the product cost more than £100 and was misrepresented to you in any way, you could dispute the payment on these grounds. Using these arguments, I am pleased to say Neil successfully managed to get his payment refunded - but only after Citizens Advice got involved. Many of you with recurring payments on your cards may not be so lucky. So watch out for this nasty little credit card sting - and stick to direct debits whenever you can!

  
  

  Using this little-known trick, companies can take automatic payments from your credit card - even after you've closed it down!

  Imagine this. You pay off your credit card, close down the account and cut up the card. All is settled until months later, out of the blue, you get a statement from the credit card provider, demanding payment for a new transaction on the card. It's for a 'recurring payment' - and it's one of the slimiest credit card stings ever hidden in the small print.

  How recurring payments work

  On the surface, a recurring payment works in exactly the same way as a direct debit. You authorise a company to take regular payments - say, for an annual subscription or service - from your credit card. Simple, easy, convenient... until you want to cancel it.

  Unlike a direct debit, a recurring payment does not automatically cease to exist when you close your account down. You cannot even cancel it by notifying your credit card provider that you want it to stop. The only way to cancel a recurring payment is to ask the original merchant you set it up with to stop taking the payments.

  A dangerous system

  As if that wasn't enough, there are two big dangers associated with this method of payment:

• You and you alone are responsible for keeping a record of all the recurring payments you have set up on your card. The credit card provider will not keep track of them. And if you don't know which companies are authorised to take recurring payments from your card, then you will not be able to cancel the payments.
• If you cancel the account and then, say, move house, your statement will go to your old address. So you will have no way of knowing that a new payment has been taken from your card, and that you need to pay it off. This could lead to a black mark being placed on your credit record, which could cause you serious problems if you try to take out a new card or borrow a mortgage in the future.

So if you're ever faced with the option of making a regular payment by credit card or direct debit, my advice would be to choose the direct debit route every time.

Too late

If this advice comes a little too late for you - as it did for one lovemoney.com reader, Neil D. - then what can you do about it?

Neil wrote in to lovemoney.com because, six months after cancelling an MBNA credit card, he received a statement stating that more than £90 had been paid from the card to a car breakdown company. This was for cover he no longer needed or wanted.

What to do

What should you do if you find yourself in this situation?

1. Dispute the payment with the company that took it.

Believe it or not, you are much more likely to get a refund this way than arguing with the credit card company that you closed the account or weren't aware that the payment would recur. Here's how to argue your case:

• A reputable company will send you a letter warning you that your subscription is up for renewal, and that payment will be taken on a particular date. If you didn't receive this letter, you have a case for disputing the payment.
• Depending on what you have bought, you should have a cooling off period of at least seven days, where you can cancel the policy or return the goods. Contact Consumer Direct to double-check your rights, if you find this cooling off period is disputed. You may even have longer than seven days.
• Finally, try explaining your situation calmly and reasonably. For example, Neil, our 66-year-old reader, no longer drives a car and therefore has no need for car breakdown cover. Clearly, he would not have renewed this cover voluntarily. Most reputable companies will take a reasonable attitude when there is a clear case for a refund like this. If they don't, you could try reporting them to a relevant regulator or trade body.

2.  Dispute the payment with the credit card provider.

If you fail to get a refund from the company that took the payment, it's still worth at least trying to get a refund from the credit card provider - although it may be difficult.

• If you have cancelled your card, you could argue that you hadn't realised that the payment would be taken. This is especially true if it is obvious, as in Neil's case, that you would never have knowingly renewed the subscription or service.
• Alternatively, do bear in mind you have Section 75 Protection for payments over £100. So if the product cost more than £100 and was misrepresented to you in any way, you could dispute the payment on these grounds.

Using these arguments, I am pleased to say Neil successfully managed to get his payment refunded - but only after Citizens Advice got involved.

Many of you with recurring payments on your cards may not be so lucky. So watch out for this nasty little credit card sting - and stick to direct debits whenever you can!

BEWARE THE CHEQUE SCAM OR TIT FOR TAT by our in-house would-be sucker
Every so often some idiot trickster tries to con us on the internet. This one came through our Skype connection. Now we regularly get young ladies from Ghana or other West African Countries trying to "chat". After a few minutes chatting they try to get us to send money to them. A polite No usually ends this. But in the last month one of our older directors had a so-called young 27 year old "lady" from Gauteng , South Africa . She sent an email with her pictures as shown above. One showing her breast.She claimed that she was in the Media Pr business and worked in the field of beauty products. She also said that she was hoping to visit England on behalf of her company, for whom she had worked for 6 months,  within the near future, if selected. Well the next week she went for an interview and , lo & behold, she got picked. On the day of selection she contacted our would be sucker and told him the good news.	She would be coming a week later. But there was one problem. She had to have money sent to England by her Company, whose headquarters were in Germany. Could our would-be sucker receive it for her. By now we knew a scam was coming. So we gave a dormant account name with 1p in it! 2 days later an envelope addressed to thecompany, posted special delivery, arrived.  It was, as shown above, in Euros in the sum of 2,250 Euros.	On the day of arrival it was banked & the bank stated that there could be up to 5 weeks to clear the cheque as it was in a foreign currency. So we sent a copy to the Connerz bank which now owns the CIMBBANK. Well the weekend passed and on Monday Miss Robinson said she was to come the following Thursday and could our would-be sucker advance her the £720 for her air ticket!  This is when the scam was confirmed as she said we should take it out of the proceeds of the cheque when it was cleared. We already knew it would never clear. So we asked her to get her travel agent to contact us.He never did. The details of Miss Robinson are below. It could have been an expensive view of a tit!
Email: Sharon Robinson sharon.robinson871@gmail.com.	Phone No +27833665908.	Skype No:Shally 435

 

• ---

Liberty is "when some perfectly respectable person gets up and says something everybody agrees to, " while "license is when some infernal scoundrel, who ought to be hanged anyway, gets up and says something that is true."  So  it was John Wilkes—radical journalist, member of Parliament, outlaw, prisoner, lord mayor of London, and self-described libertine in the 18th century. His life and career go a long way toward dispelling the superstition that liberty must advance hand in glove with order, guided by men of sterling moral character. Probably born in 1726 (the exact year is uncertain), Wilkes clashed with George III and his ministers  .  In John Wilkes, his new biography, Arthur H. Cash shows us  why lovers of liberty, at least, should celebrate this colourful Englishman. Cash tells his readers from the outset, "If you think the police have the right to arrest forty-nine people when they are looking for three, shut [this book] now." With this in mind Shitstirrers read this notice from the Arthur Daley's down at the Winchester Club to ourselves amongst others and realised that so-called "freedom of speech" and action is once more being challenged. So much in the spirit of John Wilkes's No 45 The North Briton we are hereby challenging the Winchester Club in their authority to try and curb freedom of speech . We have informed them and their Chairman of our actions and will publish any response or legal action that ensues.  At present we just publish their letter and our response. The relevant Members of Parliament in Hampshire are who  invited to look into this are: Aldershot    Gerald Howarth (Con), Basingstoke    Andrew Hunter (Con), East Hampshire    Michael Mates (Con), Eastleigh    David Chidgey (LDem), Fareham    Mark Hoban (Con), Gosport    Peter Viggers (Con), Havant    David Willetts (Con), New Forest East    Dr Julian Lewis (Con), New Forest West    Desmond Swayne (Con), North East Hampshire    Rt Hon James Arbuthnot (Con), North West Hampshire    Rt Hon Sir George Young Bt (Con), Portsmouth North    Syd Rapson BEM (Lab), Portsmouth South    Mike Hancock CBE (LDem), Romsey    Sandra Gidley (LDem), Southampton  Itchen    Rt Hon John Denham (Lab), Southampton, Test    Dr Alan Whitehead (Lab) and Winchester    Mark Oaten (LDem). Every Local Councillor  in Hampshire should question such action too. From The Winchester Club Our Response Email: drummondco@drummondco.idps.co.uk Website: www.ukinformedinvestor.co.uk    A.Havlin Esq. Legal Practice,Chief Executive’s Department The Castle WINCHESTER Hampshire SO23 8UJ Thursday, 20 November 2008 Ref: CL54080AH Dear Mr. Havlin YOUR NOTICE We thank you for your posted Notice received today   We still do not comprehend your blanket notice as most of the sites you mention have no mention or reference or carry any images in regards to Hampshire County Council whatsoever. Please inform us of any specific image or information that you consider unlawful. As the sites www.ukinformedinvestor.co.uk, www.wessextouristboard.co.uk and www.mercia.me.uk carry no mention of Hampshire or show any images of Hampshire other than one of many 1000s of click throughs to websites I cannot understand any relevance in this matter other than to intimidate. In fact the only page on all our sites that made any reference to the Hampshire County Council is www.wessex.me.uk/HampshireAttractions.html  We, shall comply with your notice in regards anything you specifically request to be changed or removed on that page as a courtesy, even though we did enquire in regards to this in 2003 before it was written and we acknowledge your assistance. The site was www.chardnet.co.uk at that time. So please identify that which you consider is your intellectual property and we will re-write and /or replace images. We await your further & better particulars on the relevant sites and then we will comply within 14 days on any proven breach of intellectual property  However we are quite prepared to accept legal proceedings and get a legal decision on the other matters, which we believe have no legal standings whatsoever. We have placed the following on the page mentioned above as follows: “This section has been a feature of this part of Wessex since it was written 4/5 years ago ( when our site was www.chardnet.co.uk). Unfortunately the Hampshire County Council has issued a NOTICE TO CEASE & DESIST IN USING AND/OR HYPERLINKING TO HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL'S TOURIST INFORMATION AND IMAGES ONTO/OR BY THIS SITE and others  & tried to influence 3rd parties. They claim that unspecified parts are their "intellectual "property & must be removed. But have failed to specify which parts. It is our intention to continue to show this search engine to assist visitors and defend our right of free speech. We have, until now, published an acknowledgement to Hampshire County Council just here and referred people to their site. This it seems has created offence as have our other sites, which have been specified, which are financial, legal and commercial and have never shown anything pertaining to Hampshire County Council. Our sites have been on-line since 1999 and date back through other means of media to 1972. These thumbnails are a means of direction to the various websites and are not a copy of "War & Peace" lifted from Tolstoy! No charges have ever been levied for our information services. We shall be publishing the correspondence for readers to judge on our Shitstirrers of Wessex page and the UK Informed Investor will now be mentioning it on their Watchdog page. It shall also be brought to the notice of people of influence. We always name names. Details of our breach(es) of "Intellectual" Property "MAY BE"  available from the Tony Havlin, Jeff Pattison and Andrew Smith at The Castle Winchester, Hampshire SO23 8UJ. Tel:01962 841841. Fax: 01962 840215 Email: Tony.havlin@hants.gov.uk. Once identified they will be replaced by this notice as requested and all the thumbnails will be rounded off. We apologise to the attraction owners if this means they have fewer visitors as over 35 million page visits to our sites  have been made, and over 25 million in 2008 so far. The domain names of www.wessex.me.uk and www.wessextouristboard.org.uk have been properly registered. There is no legal definition of the words "Tourist Board" or prohibition for the use of such titles  or a law to prohibit hyper-linking from the site as they have tried to intimate. If so we note they are listed on many other search engines with hyper-links. Maybe the Government will stop the "Ministry of Sound" nightclub or the "Ministry of Cakes" in Taunton, Somerset.  We also point out that we have complied with The Consumer Protection (Distance Selling) Regulations by placing the “contact us” hyperlink on each page and that hyperlink goes to the page where the details are lodged. As for the name Wessex Tourist Board. This has been properly registered and accepted. We shall not desist from using the name unless so ordered by a Court of Law. Please advise us of any legislation that you believe enhances your telling us to desist from using that name.  We have for many years now been assisting readers both by email and on the telephone with information in regards to Tourism in both Wessex and Mercia. Especially when local tourist offices are closed on Saturday afternoons and Sundays. This has been done free of charge and courteously.  We fail to see what this has to do with the Hampshire County Council. As we do not charge the matter of fees is immaterial. We are a firm of European Tax and Legal advisers who have created reference pages as a service and it is in the fields of legal and tax advice that we have charged since 1966. The fees are dependant on the advice we give and the work done. Interference with us carrying on our legitimate business , if this continues, will be counterclaimed if you continue to proceed with legal action. It has always been our intention to work in harmony and co-operation and a simple call or request in the first instance would have been dealt with to everyone’s satisfaction. You made no such approach . We are still open to constructive discussion. We do reserve the right to publish the correspondence on our sites for the consideration of our readers, as we always do whether it be with large corporations, local councils, Insurance Companies, Government Offices or the public. We have a “Watchdog Column” on our financial site, which is usually picked up by the media.  Assuring you of our services at all times. Faithfully yours, Drummond & Co.   The Wessex Tourist Board Kiosks will be opening at Easter 2009 in conjunction with a major Hotel Group. They will be open 7 days a week 9am-9pm and will include services to visitors never before available from Tourist Offices. There will be three in Hampshire!

   

So, you're fed up dealing with "Customer Services" on general-purpose contact e-mail addresses. Are you not getting replies, or not getting the replies you want? Time to take it to the top! Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) are very reluctant to publish their e-mail addresses. This page attempts to redress the balance by publishing the e-mail addresses for the CEOs of some UK companies, government and other organisations. We believe in letting the "little people" get noticed.

Compiled @

http://www.connectotel.com/marcus/ceoemail.html

Sector	Company Name	CEO Name	CEO E-mail Address	Website
Biotech
	Monsanto	Hugh Grant, Chief Executive	hugh.grant@monsanto.com
Consulting
	Accenture	Joe Forehand, Chief Executive	joe.w.forehand@accenture.com
Entertainment
	Disney	George Mitchell, Chairman	george.mitchell@piperrudnick.com
	Kodak	Antonio Perez, CEO	Antonio.Perez@kodak.com
Finance
	Citizens Bank	Lawrence Fish, Chief Executive Officer
Internet
	EBay	John Donahoe, President and CEO	john.donahoe@ebay.com	http://www.ebay.com
	Network Solutions	Champ Mitchell, Chief Executive Officer	Cmitchell@networksolutions.com
News
	Bloomberg	Michael Bloomberg, Chief Executive Officer	Mbloomberg@bloomberg.net

CAPQUEST DEBT RECOVERY
 SERVICES LTD

Buchanan Clark & Wells Ltd

BCW Ltd