Had my visit at a different branch this time. Result - Shocked. Bank charges due for next 2 months have been wiped off (£300+) and didnt try and sell me anything ! Another colleague gave me a quote for a remorgage but I asked for it and she wasnt pushy at all. Credit to their profession and I told em so. I've had at least £650 charges over the last couple of months... and more before that... now waiting for that £10 fee to turn up for SAR.

Not wanting to get into an argument - I'm aware they may have been for a similar offer by another supplier (most offers of this type have common terms) Regardless of the current market state a sales person is NOT at liberty to state that prices are not going to come down unless he is certain that they are not (which he cannot be).

I understand that they are essentially stores full of salespeople. That I can understand and appreciate, and if thats how they advertised themselves i would simply have told the lady that i wasnt interested in any additional products right now. Luring me into the branch (wasting my time) with a false promise of being able to assist me with my situation (which we know is unlikely) is in my opinion deceitful. For the avoidance of doubt I spent time working in both a straight sales environtment (shop floor sales) and several years (still there) in customer service (yes... call/correspondence centre's) where sales through service were/are rife, and depressingly for me given more importance than actually resolving issues and helping customers... Rest assured that if she's honest, she'll get no hassle from me. At the least she should be able to provide me with details of the charges.

There arent many other possibilities that dont become impossible to determine without checking the details held on the pre-payment system. Another possibility might be a debt that was 'loaded' onto the prepayment meter from a prior or previous credit account that was to be cleared as part of the prepayment scheme - that the meter hadnt been set to collect - that would remain unpaid and payable when the account was closed. I've just listed posibilites that i'm aware of and could be easily identified, unfortunately pre-payment accounts building up 'debt' can usually be easily identified with the relevant systems. Without those systems it's not really possible for me to give anymore information. Have you spoken to your provider about querying this bill ? if so what was their explanation or justification for the charges being over and above what you 'pre-paid' for ? I might be able to translate any gibberish you get from the 'darkside'.

If i recall, the terms were that the tariff could be changed... but if you changed suppliers within the original time period (usually 12 months) the fees would be applied. *this may have been an offer made by a different supplier... All said and done - if this was an outbound sales call then a recording of the call should usually be kept as a matter of course. Log a complaint about misleading information given by the sales agent, as although this may have been true to the best of his knowledge, it turned out to be incorrect. They have a duty to provide accurate information when describing benefits and drawbacks of an agreement, speculation does not constitute accurate information.

At the very least I shall ensure that despite her best efforts, attempts to sell me something are futile, and I wonder just how much of their time I can consume... I've a particular chip on my shoulder about sales through service or as i prefer to think of it 'taking advantage of a captive audience'.

I would say that you definately have cause to complain regarding the data protection breach as personal information was addressed to an individual not given prior authority to access said information. That said I would find it hard to believe that they would be responsible for any fraudulent activities regarding your bank details, and proving that would be a different matter entirely.

Sound advice, taking it on board. Have an appointment with them again on friday thanks to a pro-active letter they sent... but this time i'm armed with some experience and facts... Will see how this goes.

There are essentially 2 'common' reasons why a balance could build up on a prepayment meter. a) You use your emergency credit button. Many people dont realise that when using emergency credit the meter cannot collect a standing charge, the suppliers know how much standing charge is due and will bill you for the difference on a closing or interim statement. or b) You have a token meter, token meter's are supposed to have been recalibrated when price rises were implemented - logistically this was a nightmare as many meter's were not accessible at the time of repeated engineer visits etc. This issue has been taken to the ombudsman and they have a specific policy concerning the back-billing of these charges I will edit with the correct figures when i get my hands on them but i seem to remember up to £90. Please note that if you have a token meter currently it will(should) be replaced with a key/card meter on it's next recertification or any exchange. C.B.A

In short, no. If the debt had been built up before you moved in, when your landlord contacted npower concerning the change of occupants they would have requested a copy of the tenancy agreement showing you had taken responsibility. The fact that the warrant visit took place implies that either a) npower did not receive the tenancy agreement at all (perhaps ask the landlord for the date he sent the tenancy agreement - a blank look probably means it didnt happen) or equally likely b) they received the tenancy agreement however it did not arrive in sufficient time to allow it to be processed and the changes to be made prior the visit. (this would be indicated by further contact from npower advising of your shiny new account) As far as i know the people responsible for the warrant visit would be required to check with npower for updates before any action is taken (this usually occurrs immediately prior to the visit) to ensure that 'last minute changes to circumstances' can be taken into consideration. All of the above is a little 'horse bolted, but lock the gate for the hell of it' So, Write in to npower - with a copy of your tenancy agreement (must show landlord + tenant signatures) and outline your wish to have the details concerning the property and your tenancy updated. Also advise that as you were clearly not responsible for the debt that resulted in the prepayment meter being fitted you would like it removing as soon as possible. Provide a contact number and times you are available during the correspondence departments opening times (08:00-17:00 Mon-Thu, 08:00-16:30 Fri) and you 'should' get a phone call to arrange the appointment. Worst case you might get a letter advising details have been amended and a number to contact to arrange the exchange. This should resolve the issues with the 'minimum fuss' - i use that term with artistic licence For your records - and your own future sanity please take a meter reading from the old and new meters on the date of ANY change for your own records in case of 'confusion'.

Hi guys, Firstly I'd like to let you know how grateful I am about finding this site, without which i dont think i'd have found any of the information that will allow me to proceed with my claim vs Lloyds. Before I go about putting together the charges details of my claim I thought I'd better substanciate which charges I am entitled to claim for. Warning : Mini-rant follows, but i felt it needed as although i know the bank charges are being contested now under the 'unfair charges' I need to clarify wether personal circumstances affect the unfairness. Through admittedly poor diligence on my part I have incurred failed direct debit and unauthorised borrowing charges. Due to my budget and my outgoings the current cycle of charges looks to continue, this has happened to me twice - the first time I received a pro-active call from my 'account manager' and visited my branch to discuss my situation, naively I assumed that this was to help me - at the time I ended up with my overdraft cleared BUT additional outgoings in the form of a loan. This was accepted on advice from my branch manager that "a quick injection of cash is the only solution". The second time (currently happening) I noticed on more than one occasion that direct debits had been refused (and charged for) on a first attempt, then allowed (and charged for under unauthorised borrowing). This to me appeared to e a way of maximising their income by circumventing the 'maximum per billing period' for both sets of charges. I then have visited my local branch to query how and when the banks decide when they are going to:- a) Reject a direct debit and charge the failed direct debit fee. or b) Accept the direct debit and charge an un-authorised borrowing fee. As the above information has not been made clear in any documentation I have received from the bank, the response I got was that they did not know in branch. I asked for the details of who I would contact to request this information and was told "nobody will be able to tell you that, all you need to know is that there is enough money in the bank to cover the charges" the implication being that my money management was solely to blame. The above answer is the main driving factor behind me taking this further. Given that the the above charges are 'according to the banks' categorically not penalties, and 'a service' i pay for, i found it objectionable that they were unable to give me information pertaining to that service that would allow me to account or budget for it's use. Now I understand from reading the forums, that it's likely that 'manual intervention' is the likely mechanic behind the decision to allow or deny direct debits, and if this is the case would the above behavior be the 'unfair' part, or the actual financial cost of the charges. Would I be right in assuming that both direct debit and unauthorised borrowing charges would be part of this claim, and given the ambiguity of the information provided could I also include failed direct debit charges incurred through companies I had direct debits set up for as I have never been in a position to determine wether or not said service would be provided before the decision was made ? My apologies for the legnthy post but I hadnt seen any information concerning what about the charges are being considered 'unfair' and wether any of the above information is helpful... Thanks in advance C.B.A