Apparently the last letter was a final response (it did not say this) anyway they have reconsidered and have basically stuck two fingers up, well why should they just pay? Anyway off on my hols for a couple of weeks and i'll write my complaint to the Ombudsman when I get home. On a side note Barlcaycard have written to me to say they are still collecting information and don't have an update. At least they are taking their time before they reject me! Carl.

Thanks for the sanity check, I should have learned after my section 75 claim with Barclaycard that they try and make you lose confidence in yourself. Carl.

Nope, no transcript of calls just screen dumps from their computer system. The only thing I can see is a list of actions on the system and something saying 'tele-app letter 1 produced' on the 4/9/2002, followed by 'CAAP Populated' 12 days later. This would have been about the time it would have taken to have received a pre-approved form completed it and sent it back. I would so like to know how this organisation worked, seems very smoke and mirrors. I remain adamant that applied via a pre-approved form. It strikes me that if they already had my name and address (as they obviously purchased lists of them) they could have generated the initial form (the one where they say I applied on the 4/9) sent it to me as 'pre-approved' then the 'CAAP populated' action was to fill in the stuff I sent back. Carl.

Just wondered about their blatant lie where they had said I'd applied over the phone and I would have been read T's and C's at that time. 1. I never buy anything over the phone. 2. I remember applying via a pre-approved mailshot. 3. The printout in the SAR show fields left incomplete or filled in question unanswered, these questions would have been asked during a telephone application and point to this being a pre-approved leaflet application. 4. Conveinently there is no scanned copy of this form in the SAR, but this was definiitely the method of application. 5. I had been signed off with Anxiety and Stress that year and at no time was I asked about pre-existing medical conditions, there certainly wasn't anything on the form. These are the facts, could I challenge them to produce the voice transscript of the supposed call to prove that the terms were read to me? Obviously this won't exist but what is the ombudsman likely to make of this? Also say my memory has failed me (****ed off as they are even making me doubt myself now) and they miraculously produce a tape, surely when the PPi question was asked they would be legally obligated to ask about pre-existing medical conditions? Carl.

Good point, I have got a copy of the questionaire ready to go but didn't send it on the first letter. On my other claim Barclaycard played ball and sent out a questionaire to be filled in and was expecting CPOne to send one, they didn't but I will send a completed one in. Maybe the subtle turning of the screw is better than the all out assault as far as the FSA descision goes, I just wanted them to know that I knew that they had already been fined and I wasn't going to let them off lightly. Carl.

I will go with a letter to them to explain that they have made an error and copy the information that I have from the SAR and use that as evidence. Will also state that at no time was anything asked of me about any previous medical conditions. Should I also state the fact that 'As Capital One have already been found guilty of mis-selling PPI and been fined by the FSA that should this matter go to court a precident has been set and they WILL lose'? Carl.

SAR done and received. Sent the standard letter and got the response that it would be investigated. Have now received the standard brush off letter saying that it was sold to me during a telephone conversation on 4/4/2002, which it wasn't it was a standard mailshot, but this was missing from the SAR, also the document received with the SAR is a signed credit agreement on the 9/9/2002 with no PPI T's and C's. I had been signed off this very year for illness, stress releated anxiety, so would have been excluded from PPI claims due to this reason. At the end they say they have concluded their investigation and that they have concluded that they are not at fault. I guess this is the standard brush off letter, but they have not included the original filled in form, but have included copies of where the data is entered on to a computer screen. Now you can tell that this was entered from a mail shot form as there are various fields left blank or saying 'unanswered' where if an operator who was speaking to me would have completed these. Should this form a part of my argument agains't them? Now I'm not sure what my next step should be, is another letter is in order disputing their findings, and as they have not sent the questionaire as yet, which I believed that they were legally obliged to do should I also point this out? Or should I forget them and go straight to the ombudsman with a complaint? Carl.

Got a big stack of paperwork back today from Barclaycard and included was the original application form from 2002 which was Morgan Stanley, this is where it get interesting, yes I did tick the box is 2002 to request ppi, but there are no T's and C's on the form for the ppi so nothing is explained, so I guess this means it was missold? Also at around the year 2006 Barclaycard took on the business from MS and automatically applied an AXA ppi policy to my account, again without consultation, so as I had had time off due to stress I guess this was missold as well. I guess whatI need to know now is: 1. as the MS application never explained the T&C's is it mis-selling? 2. as Barclaycard never consulted and just changed the policy is that mis-selling? 3. are Barclaycard liable for both PPi claims or just the AXA part? Still waiting for the Capital One stuff to appear but they have always been the provider and have already been prosecuted for mis-selling so that should be a bit more open and shut. Carl.

Thanks and thanks. That was the letter I was going for so have already saved off the template ready for printing and dispatch tomorrow. Carl.

Well DX I looked at the news the other day and thought that basically when I filled in the applications there were no real explanations of the exclusions in the PPI (and I have a medical condition that pre-existed both cards and at least one of the loans), so I guess that's when the 6 years start. Anyway I have the address for the Barclaycard DPA letter but try as I might I can't find the page where the address for the Capital One letter is (was on a page with a list of address for cards and banks), can you help? Also which SAR letter should I use, I found two will either do? Sorry can't link until 20 posts. Thanks.

In my earlier years I have had several loans, card and store credit agreements where I had taken out the PPI as I thought that it was required to get accepted, now I know that this is not the case. I would like to know how far back I can go with my claims and also what happens when providers change (Barclaycard took on the Goldfish Credit card business who in turn had taken it on from Morgan Stanley I believe), would the current provider hold the records of the previous companies and would they be liable for all PPI claims? From memory I need to serve data protection requests on: Northern Rock The AA Lloyds TSB Barclaycard Capital One How far back can I claim, the Lloyds Loans were 15 years ago, would I get this information and would they pay? Should I just go for the two current credit card providers I have been with for about 10years (can I get corrspondnace that far back with my request?) or serve data protection requests on all of the providers? Thanks, Carl.

Spent most of Saturday exchanging mails with a customer service rep who refuses to do anything. I am taking this up with my CC company and going for a refund under section 75. To add insult to injury a normal product (not a re-furbished one) from the same invoice has failed this evening, this being my youngest sons DVD player, this also wont read discs I am hoping they will accept a return of this one. I am really not ammused. Carl.

Phoned them, they stone walled me so I contacted consumer direct, they said it was a pretty open and shut case and that ebuyer are liable, refurbished item or not. Unfortunately ebuyer don't seem to agree. The enote conversation I have been having the guy obviously doesn't grasp that a warranty is different to statutary rights, so it looks like I am in for a bit of a fight with them. This is more out of principle that the need for a new product really as I could go to Richer sounds and replace the product today if I was inclined. Why should ebuyer get away with pushing out crap to consumers to make a fast buck? Carl.

15 Months ago I purchased some items from ebuyer which included a LCD TV/DVD Combi for my eldest son, it has fine until yesterday when the DVD player stopped reading discs (the discs can be read in our standby 7 year old Logix supermarket special). When I brought this is was listed as grade A and one year warranty. Now my question is do I have any recourse? IMO I do, the SOGA 1975 says a product should be fit for purpose and I would expect a minimum of 5 years service from a TV/DVD player and they should either offer to repair or replace regardless of any caveats. I haven't made any contact yet but should I try softly, softly first or just go in all guns blazing? Cheers, Carl.

One thing that is specific in my contract is the job role at the start, I can categorically prove that this in no longer the job I do. How could that be enforceable if such a major part is incorrect? If they do start to get funny I have an alternative plan. Carl.