gP
greg P
1 reviews | Active since May 2019
19 Feb 2020, 14:40
FNB - In Duplum: Common law
19 Feb 2020, 14:32 In Duplum: Common law FNB is trying to charge me interest that is more than my principle debt. According South African to common law - In Duplum: The amount repayable by the defaulting consumer is the outstanding amount as at the time at default, plus interest and fees which must be equal to the outstanding principal debt. Why is FNB bent on making me pay till infinity. Shocking How can i help you: really How can i make you pay and pay and pay should be the solgan RE: / Gregory Price LOAN ACCOUNT NR(S): FNB 0 (Split into overdraft ) Kindly note that the Debt Review Court Order was Granted and this account included in the court order and payments are being made as per the Granted Court Order. Our office conducted a recon and noted the following: Principal debt as per COB: R50 266.55 COB Date: 2014/07/15 Interest Rate: 14.01% per annum Service Fees: R109.00 per month Payments made under debt review: R80 995.48 (Excluding January payment) Latest Outstanding Balance received from your office: R27 893.78 In Duplum: The amount repayable by the defaulting consumer is the outstanding amount as at the time at default, plus interest and fees which must be equal to the outstanding principal debt. It appears that you offices did not take In Duplum into consideration. Please assist with revised updated balance and confirmation thereof. We trust you find the above mentioned in order
Helpful (0)
Replies (6)0
Replies (6)gP
greg P's updateReviewer Update
24 Feb 2020, 14:55 FNB thinks BS baffles brains
I am still pay more interest than the capital amount R50266. And FNB accepted the proposal on Oct 2014 but decided to use the court date one year latter Oct2015. Should the interest not be waived As per in duplim for the period from application to the court date.
Talk about greed. FNB is the greedy bank and is trying to feed me a lot of BS to circumvent and justify them over charging me interest. I bet the wealthy don’t get treated with same contempt.
Its be better not to be a responsible lender. Let your account default completely.
My payments to date are R85152.94 Capital Amount was R50226 double the capital amount is R100532 that a short fall of R15380 min and the interest from the first year should have be frozen.
I am soon going to stop paying this account then what
Dear Mr PriceWe acknowledge receipt of your complaint.Please be advised that A Form 17.1 (application for debt review) dated 14 July 2014 was received from debt counselor Hein Du Plessis (NCRDC1078). On 15 July 2014, a certificate of balance was issued to the debt counsellor reflecting the below outstanding balances: *** R46 863.08 at an interest rate of 22.10% per annum and a monthly fee of R100.00.*** R40 114.30 at an interest rate of 24.00% per annum. It must be noted that monthly fees on a transactional (cheque account) are not governed by the National Credit Act and do not form part of a credit agreement. Accordingly, these fees cannot be provided for in a re-arrangement proposal; at most the monthly account fee can be accommodated for in the consumer’s living expenses. CHEQUE ACCOUNT NUMBER 5.........5: The FirstRand Debt Review Centre received a proposal from the debt counsellor, which was rejected and a counter proposal was issued on 08 September 2014 for a monthly installment of R246.00 on an outstanding balance of R50 266.55 at an interest rate of 14.01% per annum repayable over a period of 96 months. On 11 September 2014, an amended cascading proposal was received from the debt counsellor which was accepted on 16 September 2014, for an initial monthly installment of R246.00 on an outstanding balance of R50 266.55 at an interest rate of 14.01% per annum repayable until the outstanding debt is settled. An updated provisional cascading proposal was received from the debt counsellor on 28 October 2014, the proposal was assessed as the outstanding balance on the account has increased and on 03 November 2014 a provisional proposal acceptance was issued for an initial monthly installment of R246.00 (repayment to cascade as per the detailed proposal) on an outstanding balance of R52 954.48 at an interest rate of 14.01% per annum repayable over a period of 80 months, or until the outstanding debt is settled in full whichever occurs first. A notice of set down was received on 27 March 2015, from the debt counsellor reflecting a court date of 21 May 2015. The legal proposal was accepted on 31 March 2015, an initial monthly installment of R246.00 (repayment to cascade as per the detailed proposal) on an outstanding balance of R58 664.82 at an interest rate of 18.00% per annum repayable over a period of 93 months, or until the outstanding debt is settled in full whichever occurs first. On 14 October 2015, a copy of the debt re-arrangement order was received which was granted on 08 October 2015 for the account to be restructured on a monthly installment of R246.00 on an outstanding balance of R50 266.55 at an interest rate of 14.01% per annum repayable over a period of 80 months. Further it must be noted the outstanding balance on the account as at the statement dated 24 October 2015, was R65 461.87 as opposed to what was stipulated on the order namely R50 266.55. Transaction history on the cheque account from inception of debt review to date is noted below: Date | Payments | Interest | M/Fee
201407 | 0.00 | 845.87 | 100.00
201408 | 0.00 | 932.46 | 100.00
201409 | 0.00 | 965.53 | 100.00
201410 | 246.00 | 962.11 | 100.00
201411 | 246.00 | 1015.22 | 100.00
201412 | 246.00 | 971.22 | 100.00
201501 | 246.00 | 1059.27 | 100.00
201502 | 246.00 | 1116.47 | 100.00
201503 | 370.00 | 998.31 | 100.00
201504 | 565.00 | 1123.05 | 100.00
201505 | 565.00 | 1107.52 | 100.00
201506 | 565.00 | 1162.88 | 100.00
201507 | 565.00 | 1144.93 | 100.00
201508 | 565.00 | 1215.19 | 100.00
201509 | 565.00 | 1235.02 | 100.00
201510 | 565.00 | 1175.95 | 100.00
201511 | 565.00 | 1320.69 | 100.00
201512 | 565.00 | 1229.28 | 100.00
201601 | 565.00 | 1372.03 | 100.00
201602 | 565.00 | 1373.00 | 100.00
201603 | 565.00 | 1268.42 | 100.00
201604 | 565.00 | 1478.67 | 100.00
201605 | 565.00 | 1403.47 | 100.00
201606 | 565.00 | 1469.85 | 100.00
201607 | 565.00 | 1441.95 | 100.00
201608 | 602.00 | 1510.55 | 100.00
201609 | 602.00 | 1431.96 | 100.00
201610 | 602.00 | 1599.11 | 100.00
201611 | 602.00 | 1570.59 | 100.00
201612 | 1779.00 | 1481.11 | 100.00
201701 | 1779.00 | 1630.26 | 100.00
201702 | 1779.00 | 1578.04 | 100.00
201703 | 1779.00 | 1421.95 | 100.00
201704 | 1779.00 | 1570.71 | 100.00
201705 | 1779.00 | 1516.33 | 100.00
201706 | 1779.00 | 1515.46 | 100.00
201707 | 1779.00 | 1559.29 | 105.00
201708 | 1779.00 | 1544.47 | 105.00
201709 | 1779.00 | 1442.65 | 105.00
201710 | 1779.00 | 1585.96 | 105.00
201711 | 1779.00 | 1534.30 | 105.00
201712 | 1779.00 | 1384.07 | 105.00
201801 | 1779.00 | 1623.71 | 105.00
201802 | 1779.00 | 1476.14 | 105.00
201803 | 1779.00 | 1373.15 | 105.00
201804 | 1779.00 | 1549.47 | 105.00
201805 | 1779.00 | 1444.79 | 105.00
201806 | 1779.00 | 1491.25 | 105.00
201807 | 1779.00 | 1439.15 | 105.00
201808 | 1782.00 | 1469.22 | 105.00
201808 | 1782.00 | 1463.88 | 105.00
201810 | 1818.00 | 1413.40 | 105.00
201811 | 2589.00 | 1398.42 | 105.00
201812 | 2589.00 | 1387.83 | 105.00
201901 | 3863.84 | 1444.69 | 105.00
201902 | 2589.00 | 1367.06 | 105.00
201903 | 1782.00 | 1087.61 | 105.00
201904 | 0.00 | 471.48 | 77.00
201905 | 2535.43 | 0.00 | 105.105.0000
201906 | 753.43 | | 109.00
201907 | 753.43 | | 109.00
201908 | 770.43 | | 109.00
201909 | 753.43 | | 109.00
201910 | 1505.00 | | 109.00
201911 | 1505.00 | | 109.00
201912 | 2407.49 | | 109.00
202001 | | | 109.00
202002 | | | Attached hereto please find the cheque account statements from July 2014 to date marked as Annexure “D” for ease of reference. On 19 March 2019, an interest reconciliation was requested for interest charged from date of the granted order 08 October 2015 until March 2019, which revealed an amount of R31 344.29 being credited into the account on 12 April 2019. The overdraft facility was split from the cheque account on 16 April 2019, and the overdraft loan account number 4-...........017 was created. The accounts were split as follows: 5.......5 R9 797.*** R25 258.73 Payment history on the overdraft loan account noted below: Date | Payments | Interest
201904 | 0.00 |
201905 | 0.00 | 145.42
201906 | 0.00 | 302.28
201907 | 0.00 | 296.02
201908 | 0.00 | 309.40
201909 | 0.00 | 313.08
201910 | 0.00 | 306.59
201911 | 0.00 | 320.45
201912 | 0.00 | 313.81
202001 | 4157.46 | 328.00
202002 | 0.00 | 330.15 The current outstanding balance on the overdraft loan account as at date of this letter is R25 884.04. Reference is made to point 3 on the complaint letter, to which the FirstRand Debt Review Centre would like to take this opportunity to advise as follows: A debt re-arrangement proposal by a Debt Counsellor does not amend or vary a credit agreement. FNB has agreed at industry on a voluntary basis to amend or vary a credit agreement upon the acceptance of a final debt re-arrangement proposal as from 2015. it must be noted that the outstanding balance on the account as at the statement dated 24 October 2015 when the court order was granted, was R65 461.87 as opposed to what was stipulated on the order namely R50 266.55. The current outstanding balance on the cheque account number *** at date of this letter is zero and the account was closed on 04 February 2020. Kindly note that no interest was charged for account number *** from May 2019 until the account was closed off. Account number *** reflects an outstanding balance of R24,064.19 at the date of this communication. Account number *** did not reach induplum there was no default on the account and the account was also not terminated from the debt review process. Trust you find the above in order. Yours sincerely
I am still pay more interest than the capital amount R50266. And FNB accepted the proposal on Oct 2014 but decided to use the court date one year latter Oct2015. Should the interest not be waived As per in duplim for the period from application to the court date.
Talk about greed. FNB is the greedy bank and is trying to feed me a lot of BS to circumvent and justify them over charging me interest. I bet the wealthy don’t get treated with same contempt.
Its be better not to be a responsible lender. Let your account default completely.
My payments to date are R85152.94 Capital Amount was R50226 double the capital amount is R100532 that a short fall of R15380 min and the interest from the first year should have be frozen.
I am soon going to stop paying this account then what
Dear Mr PriceWe acknowledge receipt of your complaint.Please be advised that A Form 17.1 (application for debt review) dated 14 July 2014 was received from debt counselor Hein Du Plessis (NCRDC1078). On 15 July 2014, a certificate of balance was issued to the debt counsellor reflecting the below outstanding balances: *** R46 863.08 at an interest rate of 22.10% per annum and a monthly fee of R100.00.*** R40 114.30 at an interest rate of 24.00% per annum. It must be noted that monthly fees on a transactional (cheque account) are not governed by the National Credit Act and do not form part of a credit agreement. Accordingly, these fees cannot be provided for in a re-arrangement proposal; at most the monthly account fee can be accommodated for in the consumer’s living expenses. CHEQUE ACCOUNT NUMBER 5.........5: The FirstRand Debt Review Centre received a proposal from the debt counsellor, which was rejected and a counter proposal was issued on 08 September 2014 for a monthly installment of R246.00 on an outstanding balance of R50 266.55 at an interest rate of 14.01% per annum repayable over a period of 96 months. On 11 September 2014, an amended cascading proposal was received from the debt counsellor which was accepted on 16 September 2014, for an initial monthly installment of R246.00 on an outstanding balance of R50 266.55 at an interest rate of 14.01% per annum repayable until the outstanding debt is settled. An updated provisional cascading proposal was received from the debt counsellor on 28 October 2014, the proposal was assessed as the outstanding balance on the account has increased and on 03 November 2014 a provisional proposal acceptance was issued for an initial monthly installment of R246.00 (repayment to cascade as per the detailed proposal) on an outstanding balance of R52 954.48 at an interest rate of 14.01% per annum repayable over a period of 80 months, or until the outstanding debt is settled in full whichever occurs first. A notice of set down was received on 27 March 2015, from the debt counsellor reflecting a court date of 21 May 2015. The legal proposal was accepted on 31 March 2015, an initial monthly installment of R246.00 (repayment to cascade as per the detailed proposal) on an outstanding balance of R58 664.82 at an interest rate of 18.00% per annum repayable over a period of 93 months, or until the outstanding debt is settled in full whichever occurs first. On 14 October 2015, a copy of the debt re-arrangement order was received which was granted on 08 October 2015 for the account to be restructured on a monthly installment of R246.00 on an outstanding balance of R50 266.55 at an interest rate of 14.01% per annum repayable over a period of 80 months. Further it must be noted the outstanding balance on the account as at the statement dated 24 October 2015, was R65 461.87 as opposed to what was stipulated on the order namely R50 266.55. Transaction history on the cheque account from inception of debt review to date is noted below: Date | Payments | Interest | M/Fee
201407 | 0.00 | 845.87 | 100.00
201408 | 0.00 | 932.46 | 100.00
201409 | 0.00 | 965.53 | 100.00
201410 | 246.00 | 962.11 | 100.00
201411 | 246.00 | 1015.22 | 100.00
201412 | 246.00 | 971.22 | 100.00
201501 | 246.00 | 1059.27 | 100.00
201502 | 246.00 | 1116.47 | 100.00
201503 | 370.00 | 998.31 | 100.00
201504 | 565.00 | 1123.05 | 100.00
201505 | 565.00 | 1107.52 | 100.00
201506 | 565.00 | 1162.88 | 100.00
201507 | 565.00 | 1144.93 | 100.00
201508 | 565.00 | 1215.19 | 100.00
201509 | 565.00 | 1235.02 | 100.00
201510 | 565.00 | 1175.95 | 100.00
201511 | 565.00 | 1320.69 | 100.00
201512 | 565.00 | 1229.28 | 100.00
201601 | 565.00 | 1372.03 | 100.00
201602 | 565.00 | 1373.00 | 100.00
201603 | 565.00 | 1268.42 | 100.00
201604 | 565.00 | 1478.67 | 100.00
201605 | 565.00 | 1403.47 | 100.00
201606 | 565.00 | 1469.85 | 100.00
201607 | 565.00 | 1441.95 | 100.00
201608 | 602.00 | 1510.55 | 100.00
201609 | 602.00 | 1431.96 | 100.00
201610 | 602.00 | 1599.11 | 100.00
201611 | 602.00 | 1570.59 | 100.00
201612 | 1779.00 | 1481.11 | 100.00
201701 | 1779.00 | 1630.26 | 100.00
201702 | 1779.00 | 1578.04 | 100.00
201703 | 1779.00 | 1421.95 | 100.00
201704 | 1779.00 | 1570.71 | 100.00
201705 | 1779.00 | 1516.33 | 100.00
201706 | 1779.00 | 1515.46 | 100.00
201707 | 1779.00 | 1559.29 | 105.00
201708 | 1779.00 | 1544.47 | 105.00
201709 | 1779.00 | 1442.65 | 105.00
201710 | 1779.00 | 1585.96 | 105.00
201711 | 1779.00 | 1534.30 | 105.00
201712 | 1779.00 | 1384.07 | 105.00
201801 | 1779.00 | 1623.71 | 105.00
201802 | 1779.00 | 1476.14 | 105.00
201803 | 1779.00 | 1373.15 | 105.00
201804 | 1779.00 | 1549.47 | 105.00
201805 | 1779.00 | 1444.79 | 105.00
201806 | 1779.00 | 1491.25 | 105.00
201807 | 1779.00 | 1439.15 | 105.00
201808 | 1782.00 | 1469.22 | 105.00
201808 | 1782.00 | 1463.88 | 105.00
201810 | 1818.00 | 1413.40 | 105.00
201811 | 2589.00 | 1398.42 | 105.00
201812 | 2589.00 | 1387.83 | 105.00
201901 | 3863.84 | 1444.69 | 105.00
201902 | 2589.00 | 1367.06 | 105.00
201903 | 1782.00 | 1087.61 | 105.00
201904 | 0.00 | 471.48 | 77.00
201905 | 2535.43 | 0.00 | 105.105.0000
201906 | 753.43 | | 109.00
201907 | 753.43 | | 109.00
201908 | 770.43 | | 109.00
201909 | 753.43 | | 109.00
201910 | 1505.00 | | 109.00
201911 | 1505.00 | | 109.00
201912 | 2407.49 | | 109.00
202001 | | | 109.00
202002 | | | Attached hereto please find the cheque account statements from July 2014 to date marked as Annexure “D” for ease of reference. On 19 March 2019, an interest reconciliation was requested for interest charged from date of the granted order 08 October 2015 until March 2019, which revealed an amount of R31 344.29 being credited into the account on 12 April 2019. The overdraft facility was split from the cheque account on 16 April 2019, and the overdraft loan account number 4-...........017 was created. The accounts were split as follows: 5.......5 R9 797.*** R25 258.73 Payment history on the overdraft loan account noted below: Date | Payments | Interest
201904 | 0.00 |
201905 | 0.00 | 145.42
201906 | 0.00 | 302.28
201907 | 0.00 | 296.02
201908 | 0.00 | 309.40
201909 | 0.00 | 313.08
201910 | 0.00 | 306.59
201911 | 0.00 | 320.45
201912 | 0.00 | 313.81
202001 | 4157.46 | 328.00
202002 | 0.00 | 330.15 The current outstanding balance on the overdraft loan account as at date of this letter is R25 884.04. Reference is made to point 3 on the complaint letter, to which the FirstRand Debt Review Centre would like to take this opportunity to advise as follows: A debt re-arrangement proposal by a Debt Counsellor does not amend or vary a credit agreement. FNB has agreed at industry on a voluntary basis to amend or vary a credit agreement upon the acceptance of a final debt re-arrangement proposal as from 2015. it must be noted that the outstanding balance on the account as at the statement dated 24 October 2015 when the court order was granted, was R65 461.87 as opposed to what was stipulated on the order namely R50 266.55. The current outstanding balance on the cheque account number *** at date of this letter is zero and the account was closed on 04 February 2020. Kindly note that no interest was charged for account number *** from May 2019 until the account was closed off. Account number *** reflects an outstanding balance of R24,064.19 at the date of this communication. Account number *** did not reach induplum there was no default on the account and the account was also not terminated from the debt review process. Trust you find the above in order. Yours sincerely
gP
greg P's update24 Feb 2020, 14:55
Reviewer Update
FNB thinks BS baffles brains
I am still pay more interest than the capital amount R50266. And FNB accepted the proposal on Oct 2014 but decided to use the court date one year latter Oct2015. Should the interest not be waived As per in duplim for the period from application to the court date.
Talk about greed. FNB is the greedy bank and is trying to feed me a lot of BS to circumvent and justify them over charging me interest. I bet the wealthy don’t get treated with same contempt.
Its be better not to be a responsible lender. Let your account default completely.
My payments to date are R85152.94 Capital Amount was R50226 double the capital amount is R100532 that a short fall of R15380 min and the interest from the first year should have be frozen.
I am soon going to stop paying this account then what
Dear Mr PriceWe acknowledge receipt of your complaint.Please be advised that A Form 17.1 (application for debt review) dated 14 July 2014 was received from debt counselor Hein Du Plessis (NCRDC1078). On 15 July 2014, a certificate of balance was issued to the debt counsellor reflecting the below outstanding balances: *** R46 863.08 at an interest rate of 22.10% per annum and a monthly fee of R100.00.*** R40 114.30 at an interest rate of 24.00% per annum. It must be noted that monthly fees on a transactional (cheque account) are not governed by the National Credit Act and do not form part of a credit agreement. Accordingly, these fees cannot be provided for in a re-arrangement proposal; at most the monthly account fee can be accommodated for in the consumer’s living expenses. CHEQUE ACCOUNT NUMBER 5.........5: The FirstRand Debt Review Centre received a proposal from the debt counsellor, which was rejected and a counter proposal was issued on 08 September 2014 for a monthly installment of R246.00 on an outstanding balance of R50 266.55 at an interest rate of 14.01% per annum repayable over a period of 96 months. On 11 September 2014, an amended cascading proposal was received from the debt counsellor which was accepted on 16 September 2014, for an initial monthly installment of R246.00 on an outstanding balance of R50 266.55 at an interest rate of 14.01% per annum repayable until the outstanding debt is settled. An updated provisional cascading proposal was received from the debt counsellor on 28 October 2014, the proposal was assessed as the outstanding balance on the account has increased and on 03 November 2014 a provisional proposal acceptance was issued for an initial monthly installment of R246.00 (repayment to cascade as per the detailed proposal) on an outstanding balance of R52 954.48 at an interest rate of 14.01% per annum repayable over a period of 80 months, or until the outstanding debt is settled in full whichever occurs first. A notice of set down was received on 27 March 2015, from the debt counsellor reflecting a court date of 21 May 2015. The legal proposal was accepted on 31 March 2015, an initial monthly installment of R246.00 (repayment to cascade as per the detailed proposal) on an outstanding balance of R58 664.82 at an interest rate of 18.00% per annum repayable over a period of 93 months, or until the outstanding debt is settled in full whichever occurs first. On 14 October 2015, a copy of the debt re-arrangement order was received which was granted on 08 October 2015 for the account to be restructured on a monthly installment of R246.00 on an outstanding balance of R50 266.55 at an interest rate of 14.01% per annum repayable over a period of 80 months. Further it must be noted the outstanding balance on the account as at the statement dated 24 October 2015, was R65 461.87 as opposed to what was stipulated on the order namely R50 266.55. Transaction history on the cheque account from inception of debt review to date is noted below: Date | Payments | Interest | M/Fee
201407 | 0.00 | 845.87 | 100.00
201408 | 0.00 | 932.46 | 100.00
201409 | 0.00 | 965.53 | 100.00
201410 | 246.00 | 962.11 | 100.00
201411 | 246.00 | 1015.22 | 100.00
201412 | 246.00 | 971.22 | 100.00
201501 | 246.00 | 1059.27 | 100.00
201502 | 246.00 | 1116.47 | 100.00
201503 | 370.00 | 998.31 | 100.00
201504 | 565.00 | 1123.05 | 100.00
201505 | 565.00 | 1107.52 | 100.00
201506 | 565.00 | 1162.88 | 100.00
201507 | 565.00 | 1144.93 | 100.00
201508 | 565.00 | 1215.19 | 100.00
201509 | 565.00 | 1235.02 | 100.00
201510 | 565.00 | 1175.95 | 100.00
201511 | 565.00 | 1320.69 | 100.00
201512 | 565.00 | 1229.28 | 100.00
201601 | 565.00 | 1372.03 | 100.00
201602 | 565.00 | 1373.00 | 100.00
201603 | 565.00 | 1268.42 | 100.00
201604 | 565.00 | 1478.67 | 100.00
201605 | 565.00 | 1403.47 | 100.00
201606 | 565.00 | 1469.85 | 100.00
201607 | 565.00 | 1441.95 | 100.00
201608 | 602.00 | 1510.55 | 100.00
201609 | 602.00 | 1431.96 | 100.00
201610 | 602.00 | 1599.11 | 100.00
201611 | 602.00 | 1570.59 | 100.00
201612 | 1779.00 | 1481.11 | 100.00
201701 | 1779.00 | 1630.26 | 100.00
201702 | 1779.00 | 1578.04 | 100.00
201703 | 1779.00 | 1421.95 | 100.00
201704 | 1779.00 | 1570.71 | 100.00
201705 | 1779.00 | 1516.33 | 100.00
201706 | 1779.00 | 1515.46 | 100.00
201707 | 1779.00 | 1559.29 | 105.00
201708 | 1779.00 | 1544.47 | 105.00
201709 | 1779.00 | 1442.65 | 105.00
201710 | 1779.00 | 1585.96 | 105.00
201711 | 1779.00 | 1534.30 | 105.00
201712 | 1779.00 | 1384.07 | 105.00
201801 | 1779.00 | 1623.71 | 105.00
201802 | 1779.00 | 1476.14 | 105.00
201803 | 1779.00 | 1373.15 | 105.00
201804 | 1779.00 | 1549.47 | 105.00
201805 | 1779.00 | 1444.79 | 105.00
201806 | 1779.00 | 1491.25 | 105.00
201807 | 1779.00 | 1439.15 | 105.00
201808 | 1782.00 | 1469.22 | 105.00
201808 | 1782.00 | 1463.88 | 105.00
201810 | 1818.00 | 1413.40 | 105.00
201811 | 2589.00 | 1398.42 | 105.00
201812 | 2589.00 | 1387.83 | 105.00
201901 | 3863.84 | 1444.69 | 105.00
201902 | 2589.00 | 1367.06 | 105.00
201903 | 1782.00 | 1087.61 | 105.00
201904 | 0.00 | 471.48 | 77.00
201905 | 2535.43 | 0.00 | 105.105.0000
201906 | 753.43 | | 109.00
201907 | 753.43 | | 109.00
201908 | 770.43 | | 109.00
201909 | 753.43 | | 109.00
201910 | 1505.00 | | 109.00
201911 | 1505.00 | | 109.00
201912 | 2407.49 | | 109.00
202001 | | | 109.00
202002 | | | Attached hereto please find the cheque account statements from July 2014 to date marked as Annexure “D” for ease of reference. On 19 March 2019, an interest reconciliation was requested for interest charged from date of the granted order 08 October 2015 until March 2019, which revealed an amount of R31 344.29 being credited into the account on 12 April 2019. The overdraft facility was split from the cheque account on 16 April 2019, and the overdraft loan account number 4-...........017 was created. The accounts were split as follows: 5.......5 R9 797.*** R25 258.73 Payment history on the overdraft loan account noted below: Date | Payments | Interest
201904 | 0.00 |
201905 | 0.00 | 145.42
201906 | 0.00 | 302.28
201907 | 0.00 | 296.02
201908 | 0.00 | 309.40
201909 | 0.00 | 313.08
201910 | 0.00 | 306.59
201911 | 0.00 | 320.45
201912 | 0.00 | 313.81
202001 | 4157.46 | 328.00
202002 | 0.00 | 330.15 The current outstanding balance on the overdraft loan account as at date of this letter is R25 884.04. Reference is made to point 3 on the complaint letter, to which the FirstRand Debt Review Centre would like to take this opportunity to advise as follows: A debt re-arrangement proposal by a Debt Counsellor does not amend or vary a credit agreement. FNB has agreed at industry on a voluntary basis to amend or vary a credit agreement upon the acceptance of a final debt re-arrangement proposal as from 2015. it must be noted that the outstanding balance on the account as at the statement dated 24 October 2015 when the court order was granted, was R65 461.87 as opposed to what was stipulated on the order namely R50 266.55. The current outstanding balance on the cheque account number *** at date of this letter is zero and the account was closed on 04 February 2020. Kindly note that no interest was charged for account number *** from May 2019 until the account was closed off. Account number *** reflects an outstanding balance of R24,064.19 at the date of this communication. Account number *** did not reach induplum there was no default on the account and the account was also not terminated from the debt review process. Trust you find the above in order. Yours sincerely
I am still pay more interest than the capital amount R50266. And FNB accepted the proposal on Oct 2014 but decided to use the court date one year latter Oct2015. Should the interest not be waived As per in duplim for the period from application to the court date.
Talk about greed. FNB is the greedy bank and is trying to feed me a lot of BS to circumvent and justify them over charging me interest. I bet the wealthy don’t get treated with same contempt.
Its be better not to be a responsible lender. Let your account default completely.
My payments to date are R85152.94 Capital Amount was R50226 double the capital amount is R100532 that a short fall of R15380 min and the interest from the first year should have be frozen.
I am soon going to stop paying this account then what
Dear Mr PriceWe acknowledge receipt of your complaint.Please be advised that A Form 17.1 (application for debt review) dated 14 July 2014 was received from debt counselor Hein Du Plessis (NCRDC1078). On 15 July 2014, a certificate of balance was issued to the debt counsellor reflecting the below outstanding balances: *** R46 863.08 at an interest rate of 22.10% per annum and a monthly fee of R100.00.*** R40 114.30 at an interest rate of 24.00% per annum. It must be noted that monthly fees on a transactional (cheque account) are not governed by the National Credit Act and do not form part of a credit agreement. Accordingly, these fees cannot be provided for in a re-arrangement proposal; at most the monthly account fee can be accommodated for in the consumer’s living expenses. CHEQUE ACCOUNT NUMBER 5.........5: The FirstRand Debt Review Centre received a proposal from the debt counsellor, which was rejected and a counter proposal was issued on 08 September 2014 for a monthly installment of R246.00 on an outstanding balance of R50 266.55 at an interest rate of 14.01% per annum repayable over a period of 96 months. On 11 September 2014, an amended cascading proposal was received from the debt counsellor which was accepted on 16 September 2014, for an initial monthly installment of R246.00 on an outstanding balance of R50 266.55 at an interest rate of 14.01% per annum repayable until the outstanding debt is settled. An updated provisional cascading proposal was received from the debt counsellor on 28 October 2014, the proposal was assessed as the outstanding balance on the account has increased and on 03 November 2014 a provisional proposal acceptance was issued for an initial monthly installment of R246.00 (repayment to cascade as per the detailed proposal) on an outstanding balance of R52 954.48 at an interest rate of 14.01% per annum repayable over a period of 80 months, or until the outstanding debt is settled in full whichever occurs first. A notice of set down was received on 27 March 2015, from the debt counsellor reflecting a court date of 21 May 2015. The legal proposal was accepted on 31 March 2015, an initial monthly installment of R246.00 (repayment to cascade as per the detailed proposal) on an outstanding balance of R58 664.82 at an interest rate of 18.00% per annum repayable over a period of 93 months, or until the outstanding debt is settled in full whichever occurs first. On 14 October 2015, a copy of the debt re-arrangement order was received which was granted on 08 October 2015 for the account to be restructured on a monthly installment of R246.00 on an outstanding balance of R50 266.55 at an interest rate of 14.01% per annum repayable over a period of 80 months. Further it must be noted the outstanding balance on the account as at the statement dated 24 October 2015, was R65 461.87 as opposed to what was stipulated on the order namely R50 266.55. Transaction history on the cheque account from inception of debt review to date is noted below: Date | Payments | Interest | M/Fee
201407 | 0.00 | 845.87 | 100.00
201408 | 0.00 | 932.46 | 100.00
201409 | 0.00 | 965.53 | 100.00
201410 | 246.00 | 962.11 | 100.00
201411 | 246.00 | 1015.22 | 100.00
201412 | 246.00 | 971.22 | 100.00
201501 | 246.00 | 1059.27 | 100.00
201502 | 246.00 | 1116.47 | 100.00
201503 | 370.00 | 998.31 | 100.00
201504 | 565.00 | 1123.05 | 100.00
201505 | 565.00 | 1107.52 | 100.00
201506 | 565.00 | 1162.88 | 100.00
201507 | 565.00 | 1144.93 | 100.00
201508 | 565.00 | 1215.19 | 100.00
201509 | 565.00 | 1235.02 | 100.00
201510 | 565.00 | 1175.95 | 100.00
201511 | 565.00 | 1320.69 | 100.00
201512 | 565.00 | 1229.28 | 100.00
201601 | 565.00 | 1372.03 | 100.00
201602 | 565.00 | 1373.00 | 100.00
201603 | 565.00 | 1268.42 | 100.00
201604 | 565.00 | 1478.67 | 100.00
201605 | 565.00 | 1403.47 | 100.00
201606 | 565.00 | 1469.85 | 100.00
201607 | 565.00 | 1441.95 | 100.00
201608 | 602.00 | 1510.55 | 100.00
201609 | 602.00 | 1431.96 | 100.00
201610 | 602.00 | 1599.11 | 100.00
201611 | 602.00 | 1570.59 | 100.00
201612 | 1779.00 | 1481.11 | 100.00
201701 | 1779.00 | 1630.26 | 100.00
201702 | 1779.00 | 1578.04 | 100.00
201703 | 1779.00 | 1421.95 | 100.00
201704 | 1779.00 | 1570.71 | 100.00
201705 | 1779.00 | 1516.33 | 100.00
201706 | 1779.00 | 1515.46 | 100.00
201707 | 1779.00 | 1559.29 | 105.00
201708 | 1779.00 | 1544.47 | 105.00
201709 | 1779.00 | 1442.65 | 105.00
201710 | 1779.00 | 1585.96 | 105.00
201711 | 1779.00 | 1534.30 | 105.00
201712 | 1779.00 | 1384.07 | 105.00
201801 | 1779.00 | 1623.71 | 105.00
201802 | 1779.00 | 1476.14 | 105.00
201803 | 1779.00 | 1373.15 | 105.00
201804 | 1779.00 | 1549.47 | 105.00
201805 | 1779.00 | 1444.79 | 105.00
201806 | 1779.00 | 1491.25 | 105.00
201807 | 1779.00 | 1439.15 | 105.00
201808 | 1782.00 | 1469.22 | 105.00
201808 | 1782.00 | 1463.88 | 105.00
201810 | 1818.00 | 1413.40 | 105.00
201811 | 2589.00 | 1398.42 | 105.00
201812 | 2589.00 | 1387.83 | 105.00
201901 | 3863.84 | 1444.69 | 105.00
201902 | 2589.00 | 1367.06 | 105.00
201903 | 1782.00 | 1087.61 | 105.00
201904 | 0.00 | 471.48 | 77.00
201905 | 2535.43 | 0.00 | 105.105.0000
201906 | 753.43 | | 109.00
201907 | 753.43 | | 109.00
201908 | 770.43 | | 109.00
201909 | 753.43 | | 109.00
201910 | 1505.00 | | 109.00
201911 | 1505.00 | | 109.00
201912 | 2407.49 | | 109.00
202001 | | | 109.00
202002 | | | Attached hereto please find the cheque account statements from July 2014 to date marked as Annexure “D” for ease of reference. On 19 March 2019, an interest reconciliation was requested for interest charged from date of the granted order 08 October 2015 until March 2019, which revealed an amount of R31 344.29 being credited into the account on 12 April 2019. The overdraft facility was split from the cheque account on 16 April 2019, and the overdraft loan account number 4-...........017 was created. The accounts were split as follows: 5.......5 R9 797.*** R25 258.73 Payment history on the overdraft loan account noted below: Date | Payments | Interest
201904 | 0.00 |
201905 | 0.00 | 145.42
201906 | 0.00 | 302.28
201907 | 0.00 | 296.02
201908 | 0.00 | 309.40
201909 | 0.00 | 313.08
201910 | 0.00 | 306.59
201911 | 0.00 | 320.45
201912 | 0.00 | 313.81
202001 | 4157.46 | 328.00
202002 | 0.00 | 330.15 The current outstanding balance on the overdraft loan account as at date of this letter is R25 884.04. Reference is made to point 3 on the complaint letter, to which the FirstRand Debt Review Centre would like to take this opportunity to advise as follows: A debt re-arrangement proposal by a Debt Counsellor does not amend or vary a credit agreement. FNB has agreed at industry on a voluntary basis to amend or vary a credit agreement upon the acceptance of a final debt re-arrangement proposal as from 2015. it must be noted that the outstanding balance on the account as at the statement dated 24 October 2015 when the court order was granted, was R65 461.87 as opposed to what was stipulated on the order namely R50 266.55. The current outstanding balance on the cheque account number *** at date of this letter is zero and the account was closed on 04 February 2020. Kindly note that no interest was charged for account number *** from May 2019 until the account was closed off. Account number *** reflects an outstanding balance of R24,064.19 at the date of this communication. Account number *** did not reach induplum there was no default on the account and the account was also not terminated from the debt review process. Trust you find the above in order. Yours sincerely
gP
greg P's updateReviewer Update
24 Feb 2020, 15:23 FINANCE AND BANKING CONSTITUTIONAL COURT CHANGES THE APPLICATION OF THE COMMON LAW IN DUPLUM RULE The in duplum rule is a common law rule that provides that arrear interest ceases to accrue once the sum of the unpaid (accrued) interest equals the amount of capital outstanding at the time (and not the amount of capital originally advanced). "In duplum" directly translates to "double the amount". Some have understood the in duplum rule to mean that it applies to arrear or default interest - in other words, interest accruing on amounts that are due and payable but not paid on due date. In Paulsen v Slip Knot Investments (434/13) [2014] ZASCA 16, the Supreme Court of Appeal made it clear that the in duplum restriction merely refers to accumulated interest on the (capital) amount in arrears. It is clear that the effect of the in duplum rule is therefore that interest ceases to accrue once the sum of the unpaid (accrued) interest equals the amount of the outstanding capital, whether or not any capital and/or interest is payable at the time. Previously the in duplum rule was qualifi ed in that it was suspended pendente lite (during the pendency of litigation), in other words, even if the duplum had been reached prior to litigation commencing, interest would accumulate afresh on the outstanding capital from the date of service of the summons or application papers. However, the constitutional court in Paulsen and Another v Slip Knot Investments 777 (Pty) Limited [2015] ZACC 5, has now overruled previous authority and held that the suspension of the in duplum rule pendente lite indiscriminately targets all debtors and that debtors may be entirely drained by the accumulation of interest during the pendency of litigation. The constitutional court held that there are strong public policy considerations in favour of maintaining the operation of the in duplum rule even if litigation has been commenced. Therefore, the law currently is that the in duplum rule permits interest to run anew only from the date the court issues judgment in favour of the creditor and the judgment debt is due and payable, and not from commencement of litigation proceedings. In summary, the in duplum rule provides that a creditor is entitled to the following: ■ repayment of the unpaid capital sum; ■ interest on the unpaid capital sum at the contract rate up to an amount equal to the unpaid capital sum (in duplum); and ■ interest on the aggregate of the above amounts (unpaid capital and accrued interest up to an amount equal to the unpaid capital sum), at the contract rate from the date of judgment of the court to date of payment by the debtor. Mezzanine lenders in particular should be mindful of the application of the in duplum rule. Mezzanine lenders typically provide loans to borrowers who are not able to obtain funding from banks, and such loans typically carry higher risk and high interest rates. Often the funding transactions are structured such that the loans (capital and interest) will only become repayable after some time, during which period interest accrues on a compounded basis. During the tenure of such loans, it sometimes happens that the aggregate accrued and unpaid interest reaches the amount of the unpaid capital. At this point interest ceases to accrue until, for instance, an interest payment is made and the aggregate accrued (and unpaid) interest is again less than the unpaid capital. Izak Lessing
gP
greg P's update24 Feb 2020, 15:23
Reviewer Update
FINANCE AND BANKING CONSTITUTIONAL COURT CHANGES THE APPLICATION OF THE COMMON LAW IN DUPLUM RULE The in duplum rule is a common law rule that provides that arrear interest ceases to accrue once the sum of the unpaid (accrued) interest equals the amount of capital outstanding at the time (and not the amount of capital originally advanced). "In duplum" directly translates to "double the amount". Some have understood the in duplum rule to mean that it applies to arrear or default interest - in other words, interest accruing on amounts that are due and payable but not paid on due date. In Paulsen v Slip Knot Investments (434/13) [2014] ZASCA 16, the Supreme Court of Appeal made it clear that the in duplum restriction merely refers to accumulated interest on the (capital) amount in arrears. It is clear that the effect of the in duplum rule is therefore that interest ceases to accrue once the sum of the unpaid (accrued) interest equals the amount of the outstanding capital, whether or not any capital and/or interest is payable at the time. Previously the in duplum rule was qualifi ed in that it was suspended pendente lite (during the pendency of litigation), in other words, even if the duplum had been reached prior to litigation commencing, interest would accumulate afresh on the outstanding capital from the date of service of the summons or application papers. However, the constitutional court in Paulsen and Another v Slip Knot Investments 777 (Pty) Limited [2015] ZACC 5, has now overruled previous authority and held that the suspension of the in duplum rule pendente lite indiscriminately targets all debtors and that debtors may be entirely drained by the accumulation of interest during the pendency of litigation. The constitutional court held that there are strong public policy considerations in favour of maintaining the operation of the in duplum rule even if litigation has been commenced. Therefore, the law currently is that the in duplum rule permits interest to run anew only from the date the court issues judgment in favour of the creditor and the judgment debt is due and payable, and not from commencement of litigation proceedings. In summary, the in duplum rule provides that a creditor is entitled to the following: ■ repayment of the unpaid capital sum; ■ interest on the unpaid capital sum at the contract rate up to an amount equal to the unpaid capital sum (in duplum); and ■ interest on the aggregate of the above amounts (unpaid capital and accrued interest up to an amount equal to the unpaid capital sum), at the contract rate from the date of judgment of the court to date of payment by the debtor. Mezzanine lenders in particular should be mindful of the application of the in duplum rule. Mezzanine lenders typically provide loans to borrowers who are not able to obtain funding from banks, and such loans typically carry higher risk and high interest rates. Often the funding transactions are structured such that the loans (capital and interest) will only become repayable after some time, during which period interest accrues on a compounded basis. During the tenure of such loans, it sometimes happens that the aggregate accrued and unpaid interest reaches the amount of the unpaid capital. At this point interest ceases to accrue until, for instance, an interest payment is made and the aggregate accrued (and unpaid) interest is again less than the unpaid capital. Izak Lessing
gP
greg P's updateReviewer Update
24 Feb 2020, 16:17ABSA Bank Charge me 0 % interest on my Credit Card R28000 outstanding on 10 October 2014
Thank you ABSA
ABSA does help you and they dontnot try ruin your life
Thank you ABSA Bank will do business with you in the future
Thank you ABSA
ABSA does help you and they dontnot try ruin your life
Thank you ABSA Bank will do business with you in the future
gP
greg P's update24 Feb 2020, 16:17
Reviewer Update
ABSA Bank Charge me 0 % interest on my Credit Card R28000 outstanding on 10 October 2014
Thank you ABSA
ABSA does help you and they dontnot try ruin your life
Thank you ABSA Bank will do business with you in the future
Thank you ABSA
ABSA does help you and they dontnot try ruin your life
Thank you ABSA Bank will do business with you in the future
gP
greg P's updateReviewer Update
27 Feb 2020, 15:20 greg P:
Thank you ABSA Bank will do business with you in the future
Thank you ABSA Bank will do business with you in the future
gP
greg P's update27 Feb 2020, 15:20
Reviewer Update
greg P:
Thank you ABSA Bank will do business with you in the future
Thank you ABSA Bank will do business with you in the future
gP
greg P's updateReviewer Update
29 Feb 2020, 12:18 I hate FNB so much that there is no rating that I can give them, that will do them justice. ABSA BANK on the other hand I can't thank them enough for waiving my interest I owed them on my CC. ABSA BANK helped me change to ABSA BANK they will help you. I hope more people start to understanding In Duplum: Common law to stop bank like FNB taking us for a fools. 19 Feb 2020, 14:40 FNB - In Duplum: Common law 19 Feb 2020, 14:32 In Duplum: Common law: FNB is trying to charge me interest that is more than my principle debt. According South African to common law - In Duplum: The amount repayable by the defaulting consumer is the outstanding amount as at the time at default, plus interest and fees which must be equal to the outstanding principal debt. Why is FNB bent on making me pay till infinity. Shocking How can i help you: really How can i make you pay and pay and pay should be the solgan RE: / Gregory Price LOAN ACCOUNT NR(S): FNB 0 (Split into overdraft ) Kindly note that the Debt Review Court Order was Granted and this account included in the court order and payments are being made as per the Granted Court Order. Our office conducted a recon and noted the following: Principal debt as per COB: R50 266.55 COB Date: 2014/07/15 Interest Rate: 14.01% per annum Service Fees: R109.00 per month Payments made under debt review: R80 995.48 (Excluding January and February payments) Latest Outstanding Balance received from your office: R27 893.78 In Duplum: The amount repayable by the defaulting consumer is the outstanding amount as at the time at default, plus interest and fees which must be equal to the outstanding principal debt. It appears that you offices did not take In Duplum into consideration. Please assist with revised updated balance and confirmation thereof. We trust you find the above mentioned in order
gP
greg P's update29 Feb 2020, 12:18
Reviewer Update
I hate FNB so much that there is no rating that I can give them, that will do them justice. ABSA BANK on the other hand I can't thank them enough for waiving my interest I owed them on my CC. ABSA BANK helped me change to ABSA BANK they will help you. I hope more people start to understanding In Duplum: Common law to stop bank like FNB taking us for a fools. 19 Feb 2020, 14:40 FNB - In Duplum: Common law 19 Feb 2020, 14:32 In Duplum: Common law: FNB is trying to charge me interest that is more than my principle debt. According South African to common law - In Duplum: The amount repayable by the defaulting consumer is the outstanding amount as at the time at default, plus interest and fees which must be equal to the outstanding principal debt. Why is FNB bent on making me pay till infinity. Shocking How can i help you: really How can i make you pay and pay and pay should be the solgan RE: / Gregory Price LOAN ACCOUNT NR(S): FNB 0 (Split into overdraft ) Kindly note that the Debt Review Court Order was Granted and this account included in the court order and payments are being made as per the Granted Court Order. Our office conducted a recon and noted the following: Principal debt as per COB: R50 266.55 COB Date: 2014/07/15 Interest Rate: 14.01% per annum Service Fees: R109.00 per month Payments made under debt review: R80 995.48 (Excluding January and February payments) Latest Outstanding Balance received from your office: R27 893.78 In Duplum: The amount repayable by the defaulting consumer is the outstanding amount as at the time at default, plus interest and fees which must be equal to the outstanding principal debt. It appears that you offices did not take In Duplum into consideration. Please assist with revised updated balance and confirmation thereof. We trust you find the above mentioned in order
gP
greg P's updateReviewer Update
29 Feb 2020, 13:11 FNB (First National Bank)
44,841 reviews | TrustIndex 2.5 | Ranked #11 WOW they should not use the term how can we help you. If i read throught the rating for FNB i have to wonder why they get away with so much
and nothing is done about it. Maybe Zondo should investigate FNB, Big business can and will do what they like to us as we are unable to fight back. Banks Like FNB have the money to fight in fact they are fighting us with our Money.
44,841 reviews | TrustIndex 2.5 | Ranked #11 WOW they should not use the term how can we help you. If i read throught the rating for FNB i have to wonder why they get away with so much
and nothing is done about it. Maybe Zondo should investigate FNB, Big business can and will do what they like to us as we are unable to fight back. Banks Like FNB have the money to fight in fact they are fighting us with our Money.
gP
greg P's update29 Feb 2020, 13:11
Reviewer Update
FNB (First National Bank)
44,841 reviews | TrustIndex 2.5 | Ranked #11 WOW they should not use the term how can we help you. If i read throught the rating for FNB i have to wonder why they get away with so much
and nothing is done about it. Maybe Zondo should investigate FNB, Big business can and will do what they like to us as we are unable to fight back. Banks Like FNB have the money to fight in fact they are fighting us with our Money.
44,841 reviews | TrustIndex 2.5 | Ranked #11 WOW they should not use the term how can we help you. If i read throught the rating for FNB i have to wonder why they get away with so much
and nothing is done about it. Maybe Zondo should investigate FNB, Big business can and will do what they like to us as we are unable to fight back. Banks Like FNB have the money to fight in fact they are fighting us with our Money.