Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Good Law Project are trying to force HMG to release details of how Sunak's hedge fund made large profits from Moderna. Government ordered to disclose Sunak’s hedge fund emails - Good Law Project GOODLAWPROJECT.ORG Good Law Project has won a battle with the Treasury after it tried to suppress emails between Rishi Sunak and the hedge fund he founded.  
    • Nick Wallis has written up the first day of Angela van den Bogerd's evidence to the inquiry. I thought she was awful. She's decided to go with being not bright enough to spot what was happening over Fujitsu altering entries on the Horizon system, rather than covering up important facts. She's there today as well. The First Lady of Flat Earth – Post Office Scandal WWW.POSTOFFICESCANDAL.UK Angela van den Bogerd, on oath once more It is possible that Angela van den Bogerd and her senior colleagues (Rodric Williams, Mark Davies, Susan...  
    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

LloydsTSB Collections Department


weedom
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5763 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

I've just been reading this...

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/lloyds-bank/81799-issues-raised-llloyds-bank.html

 

 

I had a conversation with an asian advisor in the LloydsTSB Collection Dept some time ago. He told me that these charges are a punitive measure.

 

From memory:

 

(heated debate for 15 minutes, then)

 

WeeDom: You still haven't told me what this charge actually covers... what am I paying for?

Advisor: You're not paying for anything... it's a punitive charge for being overdrawn.

WeeDom: A "Punitive" Charge? So you're punishing me for not having enough money?

Advisor: No, sir. It's not a punishment.

WeeDom: That's what punitive means! Can I just confirm... this is a punitive charge, so you're stating that Lloyds is punishing me for being in financial difficulties?

Advisor: It's not a punishment, it's a punitive charge.

WeeDom: ...

 

I think I diaried the conversation, I'll dig out last years notes.

 

The advisor went on to say that LloydsTSB were there to help me, and would loan me the money to pay the charges. He seemed genuinely surprised when I didn't appreciate his generosity.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 11 months later...

Yes it might look wrong, but I can tell when i'm diverted to another country call centre, and not to a British Asian working in this country.

 

Might be the cracky line, or that somethings not quite right.

 

What I do know is that, lots of British people lose their jobs to call centre staff far far away, because the company wants to save costs, and don't want you complaining.....what better than to put someone on the other end of the phone who doesn't give a toss about our laws or culture and most importantly how we speak to each other (not like their robot speak!!).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh dear...

 

The Army Surplus store appears to be fresh out of tin hats.......

omnia praesumuntur legitime facta donec probetur in contrarium

 

 

Please note: I am not a member of the legal profession, all advice given is purely my opinion, if in doubt consult a professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say that the fact that the banks use call centres based in foreign countries is a direct representation of how important their customers are.

 

They would rather employ someone who speaks broken English, in a country thousands of miles away who has no understanding of our culture, or in many cases the geography of our towns. For instance when dealing with '3's' Indian call centre I was asked if I would be able to pick my new phone up from the depot in Reading - I live in Yorkshire.

 

The point is that you can be as politically correct as you like but the second you call customer service and you speak to someone who is clearly in a different country you are immediately irritated. Not at that person but at the fact that the banks don't even care enough to employ someone who has the necessary English and understanding of customer service in this country to deal with any issues you may raise.

 

In WeeDoms instance I don't think the reference to an 'asian' is being used to be detrimental to the member of staff involved or in a racist way, but merely indicates the familiar annoyance we all encounter when we can not speak to an advisor in this country.

 

It seems to me we are all a little too politically correct these days.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

I've just come back to this forum after being untroubled by the Collections Centre for a while. They've raised their despotic heads again, so now I'm active here again,for a while. Selfish, I know, but hopefully I'll raise a few grins and, with luck,a few good points.

 

First off, I deeply resent the implication that I am "racist". I'm not going to try to back that up with examples of how not-racist I am. Just accept it,or call me a liar to my face.

 

The biggest single problem is language barriers/difficulties - day in, day out, foreign advisors deal with people who they cannot understand due to language difficulties (Geordie? Aberdonian?) and this is bound to fuel frustration on their part. I have dealt with customers, in my last job, who have been through the "Asian Helpdesk" experience, and I have felt deep frustration coming from both ends of the telephone line. The Asian helpdesk can't understand the (broken? certainly dialectal) English of customers, and the customer can't understand the broken English of the advisor.

 

No-one, from a customer service point of view or from the employees point of view, is helped by this.

 

Importantly, empathy is intrinsically hampered. When I was working in a call center for a UK telco, dealing with UK people, I could put myself in their shoes. Little old lady unable to pay her bill - yeah, I could see the worry, the mottled carpet, the pension stretched. Young single mother calling from a call box cos her line wasn't working - yeah, I could see where she was coming from, I could understand why she was fearful of being isolated without a landline. I could, quite literally, put myself in their shoes because I had met "them" at some stage in my life.

 

The exact same problem applies to teenage school-leaver employees in UK call centres, in my experience. They can't empathise effectively, as they simply haven't been in enough situations to be able to. This is an important point - I would use the same disparaging tone if I was consistently required to deal with 17 year-old Collection Centre employees of LloydsTSB whose only point of escalation was another empathetically challenged 17 year old.

 

To summarise - the mention of the word "Asian" was meant to imply that the conversation was off to a bad start,and the advisor and I both knew it. I've had nothing but rudeness and incompetence (bred by language barriers and empathetic barriers) when dealing with the Collections Centre abroad, and nothing but courtesy and assistance when dealing with UK folks - be they of Asian descent or not. It's about empathy - and the Asian call centre staff, to a person, have displayed absolutely none.

 

This is not racist - simply a matter of bald, uncomfortable truth.

 

Cheers

WeeDom

(grrr... don't call me racist!!!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

it is not the call centre workers' fault, it is their (western) employers.

 

simple solution, don't open indian call centres (or Philippines), keep them here. Why not then?

 

(CLUE : maybe it's the low cost of wages (around £100 a month), office space, and everything else).

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...