FSA and Hardship

[veester]

It would be nice to have a streamline process with "number" and "ID Tags" for forms; of course the post office has them.

In fact any organisation worth there salt has 'process' and 'forms' which are duly attached to said process.

As for hardship; its ironic that i've heard and have my own case were charges were refunded for a given period (6 months) at a branch level, after which i was told "policy is to only do so for this long", so the banks have a policy in place allready, but it is not encompassing enough for those in hardship - the FSA hardship guidlines provide some hope.

I would argue of course that the banks need to go the whole hog here and bite the bullet; well see eh!

	Hardship By and large the "harship" provision in the FSA waiver is a myth which is intended to create a sense that the banking industry is sufficiently well-intentioned to act fairly towards its customers even though their right of access to the courts has been blocked. In fact there are very few guidelines as to procedure and very little definition of "hardship". One unfortunate spin off is that many people in difficulty get their hopes up and go to considerable lengths to plead hardship to their bank in order to get a refund or partial refund of their bank charges only to be refused. Neither the courts nor the FOS have the power to order a bank to make a charges refund on the basis of hardship. We hear of some people obtaining a partial refund quite easily. Others have obtained money by being very persistent - but mostly we hear that people are refused. Even benefits claimants do not automatically receive hardship refunds. By all means try to get a bank charges refund on the basis of hardship - but don't bank on it!

[abroadgirl]

hello all
i am abroadgirl, I have been reading your thread with interest, i am with well was with abbey and it has been a long hard brawl i do have my own thread abroadgirl v abbey.
but abbey has accepted my hardship but they are still not paying me, i have EDIT at fos (case worker) fos refered my cas to a case worker as they said i had a case oh my have i had some replies from her, so she got them of me too, so when i went to court Youl will see how i got on in my thread) ty
the juge rung rings round abbeys rep, and said that he blamed abbey for my situation and that he had read my case with care, and that he in his order put to claim the sum of xxxxx with intrest,
he said dj edit that he had phoned abbey about lifting the the stay but abbey replied they would appeal as the test case was nr approching.....i was in cout 8th jan 2008
ty for reading
hugs
abg

	The Financial Ombudsman Service For the most part, don't bother. The Ombudsman is an industry arranged service which is under-resourced, takes too long, lacks clear transparency. You have no idea what evidence the FOS has received from the bank or how your complain has really been handled. The FOS is the preferred complaints route for the banking industry. The county court is to be preferred by consumers for its speed, openness, the quality of its awards and also because it will award 8% interest on top of any damages won by you. The Ombudsman should normally be used to solving little technical difficulties or customer service problems which you have expereinced with your bank.

	Bank Charges You should have started your claim for your bank charges by now. Don't wait. You should send your bank a Subject Acess Request asking for all personal data they hold on you - not just statements. You should calculate all of your bank charges and related interest as far back as 1995. You should send your bank a demand for a refund giving them 7 days. You should commence your legal action adding 8% statutory interest. If you wait for the outcome of the test case, you may not be able to claim like this. you may not be able to claim interest. You may only be offered the difference between the charge and the OFT "fair charge". The repayment scheme will try to limit you to refinds from 2001 only. A repayment scheme will not deal with any bank charges related defaults on the credit register whereas in a court action you can ask for these to be removed and to be compensated for the damage caused to you and your family by them. You should also write to the bank and to the CRA and put all charges related credit entries in disupte and warn them that you will want them removed from the Register when the test case is over. Warn them also that you are likely to be seeking compensation for these wrongful data entries. Full and final settlement Have you previously accepted a partial repayment of your bank charges in full settlement? You will still be able to claim the rest of your money back after the Test case is decided. Get all your information back to 1995 and put in your claim now.

	Hardship By and large the "harship" provision in the FSA waiver is a myth which is intended to create a sense that the banking industry is sufficiently well-intentioned to act fairly towards its customers even though their right of access to the courts has been blocked. In fact there are very few guidelines as to procedure and very little definition of "hardship". One unfortunate spin off is that many people in difficulty get their hopes up and go to considerable lengths to plead hardship to their bank in order to get a refund or partial refund of their bank charges only to be refused. Neither the courts nor the FOS have the power to order a bank to make a charges refund on the basis of hardship. We hear of some people obtaining a partial refund quite easily. Others have obtained money by being very persistent - but mostly we hear that people are refused. Even benefits claimants do not automatically receive hardship refunds. By all means try to get a bank charges refund on the basis of hardship - but don't bank on it!

	Are you letting your bank keep your money Are you giving away thousands of pounds?? Many people aren't claiming all of the money they are entitled to when they make their bank charges claims. You have been forced to pay unfair bank charges. Have you forgotten that your bank has charged you inteest on those charges? If you are overdrawn and the bank owes you charges - then your overdraft is made up of charges - money which you bank owes you. Yet you are paying interest to the bank - on your own money!!! Follow this link to see the discussions on this. You might even double th size of your claim.

[yourbank]

Veester, you are lucky because NatWest do not have that policy.
one question I have specifically for those who read this thread is to do with the hardship I&E forms. Are they simply in a set format or do they have your own unique reference on them?

	Hardship By and large the "harship" provision in the FSA waiver is a myth which is intended to create a sense that the banking industry is sufficiently well-intentioned to act fairly towards its customers even though their right of access to the courts has been blocked. In fact there are very few guidelines as to procedure and very little definition of "hardship". One unfortunate spin off is that many people in difficulty get their hopes up and go to considerable lengths to plead hardship to their bank in order to get a refund or partial refund of their bank charges only to be refused. Neither the courts nor the FOS have the power to order a bank to make a charges refund on the basis of hardship. We hear of some people obtaining a partial refund quite easily. Others have obtained money by being very persistent - but mostly we hear that people are refused. Even benefits claimants do not automatically receive hardship refunds. By all means try to get a bank charges refund on the basis of hardship - but don't bank on it!

[MARTIN3030]

Originally Posted by yourbank

I do think Martin has a valid point about being able to put within the forum, the I&E forms. The only reservation I have is whether the I&E forms have reference numbers on them when they are sent out or whether they are fairly standard templates. Could CAG approach banks with a view of alleviating the frustration of consumers in financial hardship by obtaining blank ones and therefore speeding up the response times of the bank? Would that be something that CAG would be able to do or morally feel that they could do?

Yes certainly-following it being made apparant in the last week or so that there was a need for this...I have been trying to organise it and its underway.
The banking codes revisions in March included the new guidance for hardship and so I think its reasonable to assume that this form the banks are using is pretty standard.We could quite easily confirm this by looking at them all.I am led to believe that these forms are openly available within the public domain,therefore I cannot see any problems in making them accessible to users of CAG.

	Hardship By and large the "harship" provision in the FSA waiver is a myth which is intended to create a sense that the banking industry is sufficiently well-intentioned to act fairly towards its customers even though their right of access to the courts has been blocked. In fact there are very few guidelines as to procedure and very little definition of "hardship". One unfortunate spin off is that many people in difficulty get their hopes up and go to considerable lengths to plead hardship to their bank in order to get a refund or partial refund of their bank charges only to be refused. Neither the courts nor the FOS have the power to order a bank to make a charges refund on the basis of hardship. We hear of some people obtaining a partial refund quite easily. Others have obtained money by being very persistent - but mostly we hear that people are refused. Even benefits claimants do not automatically receive hardship refunds. By all means try to get a bank charges refund on the basis of hardship - but don't bank on it!

[veester]

They are different forms for each bank from my personal experience

HSBC - No reference number, 1 very basic 2 column form

Nationwide - Unique reference number, 2 pages with pretty comprehensive listing.

I would be careful here though as all they are is I&E form; there is nothing to make it 'hardship' form, it is simply a doc sent out to anyone who needs to provide I&E.

There is no area or indeed any 'question asking you to explain' or provide a paragraph of reason for hardship; one still has to provision a letter and explanation on seperate paper.

	Hardship By and large the "harship" provision in the FSA waiver is a myth which is intended to create a sense that the banking industry is sufficiently well-intentioned to act fairly towards its customers even though their right of access to the courts has been blocked. In fact there are very few guidelines as to procedure and very little definition of "hardship". One unfortunate spin off is that many people in difficulty get their hopes up and go to considerable lengths to plead hardship to their bank in order to get a refund or partial refund of their bank charges only to be refused. Neither the courts nor the FOS have the power to order a bank to make a charges refund on the basis of hardship. We hear of some people obtaining a partial refund quite easily. Others have obtained money by being very persistent - but mostly we hear that people are refused. Even benefits claimants do not automatically receive hardship refunds. By all means try to get a bank charges refund on the basis of hardship - but don't bank on it!

[MARTIN3030]

Ah ha...Bingo.
I think I have found something.

The Form I have borrowed from a neigbour is headed ;
MAT/BBA COMMON FINANCIAL STATEMENT (V3)

one one side is Money advice trust-other side BBA logo

The questions on the form all have a number before the question (ie BF3)

There are supporting explanatory notes with the form,and also related info as to where the forms can be viewed and presumably downloaded.
These include;
BBA – British Bankers' Association - Home
FLA






Footnote;

The covering letter with the CFS in the case of HBOS merely is a consent to agree to them investigating under the Data Protection Act.

I have removed the link to MAT since they are concerned with offering services and support to those in the industry as opposed to individuals.

[yourbank]

Design an income and expenditure form for claimants. Add space for Name and account number. Possibly add a header....Hardship claim form or something to that effect and hey presto you have an LBA that can have maybe an additional line added to state that you wish your claim to be dealt with as a hardship claim and bingo, time for response reduced. Worth looking at new FOS waiver in conjunction to add additional weight to it possibly.

	Small Claims kit by Lawpack Sue your bank as many times as you like with just one Small Claims kit by Lawpack. Follow this link to read the review. The kit contains everything you need: instruction manual, templates, examples, forms and a comprehensive CDRom. Applies to England and Wales

	The Financial Ombudsman Service For the most part, don't bother. The Ombudsman is an industry arranged service which is under-resourced, takes too long, lacks clear transparency. You have no idea what evidence the FOS has received from the bank or how your complain has really been handled. The FOS is the preferred complaints route for the banking industry. The county court is to be preferred by consumers for its speed, openness, the quality of its awards and also because it will award 8% interest on top of any damages won by you. The Ombudsman should normally be used to solving little technical difficulties or customer service problems which you have expereinced with your bank.

	Hardship By and large the "harship" provision in the FSA waiver is a myth which is intended to create a sense that the banking industry is sufficiently well-intentioned to act fairly towards its customers even though their right of access to the courts has been blocked. In fact there are very few guidelines as to procedure and very little definition of "hardship". One unfortunate spin off is that many people in difficulty get their hopes up and go to considerable lengths to plead hardship to their bank in order to get a refund or partial refund of their bank charges only to be refused. Neither the courts nor the FOS have the power to order a bank to make a charges refund on the basis of hardship. We hear of some people obtaining a partial refund quite easily. Others have obtained money by being very persistent - but mostly we hear that people are refused. Even benefits claimants do not automatically receive hardship refunds. By all means try to get a bank charges refund on the basis of hardship - but don't bank on it!

[MARTIN3030]

Originally Posted by veester

They are different forms for each bank from my personal experience

HSBC - No reference number, 1 very basic 2 column form

Nationwide - Unique reference number, 2 pages with pretty comprehensive listing.

I would be careful here though as all they are is I&E form; there is nothing to make it 'hardship' form, it is simply a doc sent out to anyone who needs to provide I&E.

There is no area or indeed any 'question asking you to explain' or provide a paragraph of reason for hardship; one still has to provision a letter and explanation on seperate paper.

Agreed within itself theres nothing to acknowledge it as being a hardship form-its the information thats supplied within it that supports the criteria to be viewed as a hardship case.
If can be reasonably expected that the use of a form used by one bank and carrying the info as I have posted-should offer all the info (once completed) that they require to proceed.

The questions as to whether they should be of a specific bank issue should be irrelevant since any version will have boxes to insert your own reference numbers.

IMHO

	Hardship By and large the "harship" provision in the FSA waiver is a myth which is intended to create a sense that the banking industry is sufficiently well-intentioned to act fairly towards its customers even though their right of access to the courts has been blocked. In fact there are very few guidelines as to procedure and very little definition of "hardship". One unfortunate spin off is that many people in difficulty get their hopes up and go to considerable lengths to plead hardship to their bank in order to get a refund or partial refund of their bank charges only to be refused. Neither the courts nor the FOS have the power to order a bank to make a charges refund on the basis of hardship. We hear of some people obtaining a partial refund quite easily. Others have obtained money by being very persistent - but mostly we hear that people are refused. Even benefits claimants do not automatically receive hardship refunds. By all means try to get a bank charges refund on the basis of hardship - but don't bank on it!

[MARTIN3030]

Originally Posted by yourbank

Design an income and expenditure form for claimants. Add space for Name and account number. Possibly add a header....Hardship claim form or something to that effect and hey presto you have an LBA that can have maybe an additional line added to state that you wish your claim to be dealt with as a hardship claim and bingo, time for response reduced. Worth looking at new FOS waiver in conjunction to add additional weight to it possibly.

Onto it YB-great thinking

[veester]

Originally Posted by MARTIN3030

Agreed within itself theres nothing to acknowledge it as being a hardship form-its the information thats supplied within it that supports the criteria to be viewed as a hardship case.
If can be reasonably expected that the use of a form used by one bank and carrying the info as I have posted-should offer all the info (once completed) that they require to proceed.

Agreed, i think though causation is an important and complicated aspect, it opens pandoras box....

How to distinguish between illness - mental, emotional (a partner leaving/berevament), then how do you manage and attribute a correct remedial path with respect to financial difficulties.

Relief may need to be extended for quite some time in some cases.

To the layman it seems easy enough; grant relief as long as is needed, but i guess when you are in it for profit, its a different kettle of fish.

	Hardship By and large the "harship" provision in the FSA waiver is a myth which is intended to create a sense that the banking industry is sufficiently well-intentioned to act fairly towards its customers even though their right of access to the courts has been blocked. In fact there are very few guidelines as to procedure and very little definition of "hardship". One unfortunate spin off is that many people in difficulty get their hopes up and go to considerable lengths to plead hardship to their bank in order to get a refund or partial refund of their bank charges only to be refused. Neither the courts nor the FOS have the power to order a bank to make a charges refund on the basis of hardship. We hear of some people obtaining a partial refund quite easily. Others have obtained money by being very persistent - but mostly we hear that people are refused. Even benefits claimants do not automatically receive hardship refunds. By all means try to get a bank charges refund on the basis of hardship - but don't bank on it!

[ravenbluemoon]

Originally Posted by MARTIN3030

Onto it YB-great thinking

RE: Income/Expenditure sheet: I have one of these already made up as a fully working spreadsheet - PM me if you want a copy of it.

[MARTIN3030]

Thanks will do.Theres 3 team members working on this now so hopefully we can see something available soon.
Thanks to all who have been involved at this stage.

[yourbank]

nice to see a good kick up the backside works

[MARTIN3030]

Originally Posted by yourbank

nice to see a good kick up the backside works

...no kick up the backside YB....just being threatened with no coffee breaks till its sorted

[yourbank]

.......now that is very bad. Have you looked at your contract? pmsl.

[Mr lex]

Revenbluemoon and Yourbank, Many thanks for your input.

Lex

[MARTIN3030]

Originally Posted by yourbank

.......now that is very bad. Have you looked at your contract? pmsl.

Would you believe it- cant find it so will hand in Subject Access Request
wonder if there will be any discount off the tenner ?

	Subject Access Request A Subject Access Request is a demand which you can make to any organisation to disclose any personal information which they hold on you. The right to disclosure of data is provided by the Data Protection Act. There is no time limit. The organisation is obliged to reveal everything they have about you - which you ask for - as far back as you ask for. There are very few exceptions. It does not matter whether the data is held on microfiche, in an archive, on tape, in a cardex system, in sound recordings or in screen notes. Some companies are saying that they do not have to disclose where it would be difficult to do so - "disproportionate effort". This is untrue. Disproportionate effort refers to something else under the Act. If you are seeking bank charges information then you should ask for "all data held on you" and you should make it clear that you want everything as far back as it goes. Do not be put off by excuses. Do not accept being fobbed off. It is not in your bank's interest to make full disclosure to you. This means that it is in your interests to get it. If you have not started gathering your bank charges information yet, then you should start now. There will soon be a big rush once the OFT test case has been settled. Get all of your bank account informtion as far back as possible. At least as far back as 1995. If your bank says that they don't keep data as far back as this, don't accept it. Be persistent. They've got what you need in some form or other.

[yourbank]

Martin, doubt it, lol
Mr Lex, I have no choice but to help because it is what I do.

[yourbank]

Have found this from MSE claimant, an income and expenditure form from RBS with these words:
"If you fill out this form, we will have no option but to review your current status with the bank, ie we may cancel any direct debits, standing orders, overdrafts etc".

Interesting as I had not seen this before(I could be way off track here)

[MARTIN3030]

Ive not heard about that but I would not be suprised.
Having said that I think the FOS would take a very stern line if it could be shown that the banks were trying to manipulate the waiver criteria (in any sense) to intimidate claimants or initiate adverse actions such as this.In fact I will be contacting the FSA to get a comment about this.

On the other front-the draft temp that we propose to make available is more or less done.We just need to finish the covering letter to support it.

	The Financial Ombudsman Service For the most part, don't bother. The Ombudsman is an industry arranged service which is under-resourced, takes too long, lacks clear transparency. You have no idea what evidence the FOS has received from the bank or how your complain has really been handled. The FOS is the preferred complaints route for the banking industry. The county court is to be preferred by consumers for its speed, openness, the quality of its awards and also because it will award 8% interest on top of any damages won by you. The Ombudsman should normally be used to solving little technical difficulties or customer service problems which you have expereinced with your bank.

	FSA Waiver The FSA has granted a waiver to the finance industry in respect of bank charges claims. The waiver has been in place since July 2007 and will continue until the OFT test case is decided. The OFT test case will be heard by the House of Lords in June 2009. We are likley to get a decision before the end of the year. Under FSA rules, banks must normally deal with all complaints within 8 weeks. The FSA waiver has allowed banks to put bank charges claims on hold pending the outcome of the Test case. The FSA waiver is expremely one-sided as it allows banks to put claims on hold but it allows banks to continue levying charges. It also allows banks to continue enforcement action even in relation to disputed bank charges. The FSA waiver has been assisted by a general stay on charges-related County Court claims. You are still permitted to begin a County Court claim for the refund of your charges but your claim will be put on hold pending the outcome of the OFT test case. Despite this, we recommend very strongly that you begin a County Court claim now!! If you are on benefits, you will not have to pay court fees. You should start a County Court claim to recover your money straightaway.