Written by John Kruse, one of the leading experts on Bailiff Law, this consumer friendly guide is essential reading for anyone who comes into contact with a bailiff.
The book is easy to understand and clearly explains the rights
a bailiff has, and also what they cannot do when collecting debts and repossessing goods etc.
Well the FSA finally got around the reviewing the widely derided 'waiver'.
Nothing to see here - please move along says the FSA. Lets look at it in a bit more detail:
An effective stay of proceedings in the courts of England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland is in place;
- Well Yes but as far as I understand this has nothing to do with the
waiver. The FSA simply wrote to the Master of Rolls who then
wrote to county court judges suggesting that they ignored bank
cases - regardless of the legal conditions contained within. And much
to the delight of the FSA they did.
The Financial Ombudsman Service (fos) is likewise staying cases about unauthorised overdraft charges;
Fair enough - The FSA asked the FOS to roll over and play dead -
and they did.
Firms granted the waiver are complying with its conditions, including the need for clear communications with customers and appropriate handling of financial difficulty cases; and
Err - no. Lloyds changed their charges. Many people will now be worse off as a result. And I can think of no one who has had a case of
financial hardship dealt with since the waiver. And by dealt with I mean a return of money to their account. There is only one way to help someone in financial hardship - give them their stolen money back and stop future charges. Anything else is window dressing. If I'm wrong will
someone please post and prove me wrong (I hope you will).
The continuation of the waiver remains appropriate to assist the test case.
If by appropiate you mean that it allows the banks to be completely
let off the hook while letting the misery of charges continue then YES
great job FSA. Thanks for treating customers fairly!
"The FSA will be closely monitoring how any change made by a firm will affect customers in practice and whether this amounts to a breach of the waiver."
Ahhhhh - this was the purpose of the review. And customers are getting nailed by charges and suffering terribly as a result. Banks are basically doing what they like. What is the point of a review if you just say that you will continue reviewing.. especially when conforonted by so many breaches...........bonker s.
And I can think of no one who has had a case of
financial hardship dealt with since the waiver. And by dealt with I mean a return of money to their account.
Err, i got all my partners charges back for last 6 years from Lloyds without even doing a schedule. After initially refusing, they offered all charges when i wrote a hardship letter because of our 'financial position'. They paid direct into account the next day their letter came. I got them to confirm in writing that all charges from 20 June 2007 going back 6 years have been paid (just in case more turn up) and they have stated so. No interest was paid.
RBS are looking at my financial situation as are HSBC and have stated they will reduce the debt (only HSBC) or pay the charges. There is no debt to RBS as its my personal account i use all the time.
A response to the FSA waiver review
judges suggesting that they ignored bank
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by alecmac18
