Hello everyone
I've just got my first response from Cahoot a few days after sending off my LBA and I'm a little concerned with what seems like some "extra" bits in their reply.
The first part is the standard
"We do not accept that cahoot charges are unfair under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999......." blah blah blah, but at the end of the reply I get this:
"
Please be assured I have carried out a full investigation for you and I hope you feel I have offered a fair response to all of the issues you've raised. I will keep your file pen for the next 8 weeks and if I don't hear from you within that time, I will assume that everything is resolved and will close your file. If you remain dissatisfied though you can find details of how to take your complaint further within Abbey at legal T&Ts under the heading 'Complaints policy'. The complaints policy also explains your ultimate right to refer your complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service. "
Following that link reveals a complaints procedure that first involves the parent group Abbey and then the Financial Ombudsman Service. According to CAG and everything I've read on these forums I'm at the stage now where I should wait out the time I gave in my LBA (even though they have responded within that time) and then I should file my claim and take them to court. I was fine with that but I'm a bit worried now because if I file a claim now I'm basically ignoring possible opportunities to resolve my problem by going through Cahoot's recommended complaints procedure. I know that I'm highly unlikely to get a satisfactory outcome by following that procedure but if I ignore it and just go straight to court won't I look a bit rash and unreasonable in the courts' eyes and unwilling to try and resolve the issue with the bank before going straight into litigation? Courts aren't too fond of people who litigate at the drop of a hat, I know, I used to work in one!
The other concern I have is that Cahoot's own recommendation of a next step is to take the matter up with Abbey, this implies that I should be taking Abbey to court and not Cahoot doesn't it? There certainly seems to be a lot more clear cut success stories in the Abbey forums, the Cahoot claims all seem to have been contested and those that have got as far as judgement by defaults seem to have had their judgments ignored. Perhaps this is why.
Has anybody else had this in their response from Cahoot?
Slink v Cahoot 
