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.
It is clear that the document manipulation system introduced by RBS employee Jane Fraser produces documents which are neither a "copy" nor "true".
Is there any right-thinking person in the whole of the United Kingdom who would say that this new RBS practice is acceptable?
We do not condone debt avoidance merely by the exploitation of loopholes - but similarly we do not condone debt enforcement by the means of manufacturing certain elements and purporting to meet requirement put in place by a British Parliament
What does it say about the RBS and about British banking generally that this "creative" system has not only been introduced by the RBS but also officially lauded and congratulated.
Would any bank admit to this kind of practice? Would the RBS have been prepared to talk about this openly in the absence of the leaked memo?
Please don't pm me about specific questions unless you have posted and it has not been dealt with or unless the matter is confidential. Please include a link to the post you want me to look at. If you have received a defence, contact me.
Advice & opinions of BankFodder, The Consumer Action Group and The Bank Action Group are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Use your own judgment. Seek advice of a qualified insured professional if you have any doubts.
This is outrageous. I cant believe that the OFT actually appear to condone the position taken by RBS. I wrote to RBS about 18 months back for a copy of the agreement and in their first response they admitted that they couldnt supply a copy and had "discharged" the debt - I didnt even ask them to write it off.
I'm in a similar position with HSBC and trying to argue that I'm prepared to pay off the principal but not the interest they have charged over the last 7 years, ie. no agreement = no right to charge interest. They are not accepting and the fight goes on.
Interestingly, RBS and HSBC point blank refuse to remove Defaults they have filed against me.
All comments are my personal views - if in doubt then seek professional advice. If you think i've helped then please tip my scales.
You may receive different advice to your query as people have different experiences and opinions. Please use your own judgement in deciding whose advice to take.
If in doubt seek advice from a qualified insured professional. Any advice I have offered you is done so on an informal basis, without prejudice or liability.
If you think I have been helpful PLEASE click the scales
It is clear that the document manipulation system introduced by RBS employee Jane Fraser produces documents which are neither a "copy" nor "true".
Is there any right-thinking person in the whole of the United Kingdom who would say that this new RBS practice is acceptable?
We do not condone debt avoidance merely by the exploitation of loopholes - but similarly we do not condone debt enforcement by the means of manufacturing certain elements and purporting to meet requirement put in place by a British Parliament
What does it say about the RBS and about British banking generally that this "creative" system has not only been introduced by the RBS but also officially lauded and congratulated.
Would any bank admit to this kind of practice? Would the RBS have been prepared to talk about this openly in the absence of the leaked memo?
Draw your own conclusions.
Check out the next installment in the Guardian tomorrow.
as you can see RBS was up to "no good" almost 300 years ago
what is it they say anbout leopards and spots ??
"Competition with the Bank of Scotland
Competition between the Old and New Banks was fierce, and centred on the issue of banknotes. The policy of the Royal Bank was to either drive the Bank of Scotland out of business or to take it over on favourable terms.
The Royal Bank built up large holdings of the Bank of Scotland's notes, which it acquired in exchange for its own notes, and then suddenly presented them to the Bank of Scotland for payment. To pay for these notes the Bank of Scotland was forced to call in its loans and, in March 1728, to suspend payments. The suspension relieved the immediate pressure on the Bank of Scotland at the cost of substantial damage to its reputation, and gave the Royal Bank a clear space to expand its own business, although the Royal Bank's increased note issue also made it more vulnerable to the same tactics.
Despite talk of a merger with the Bank of Scotland, the Royal Bank did not possess the wherewithal to complete the deal. By September 1728 the Bank of Scotland was able to start redeeming its notes again, with interest, and in March 1729 it restarted lending. To prevent similar attacks in the future, the Bank of Scotland put an "option clause" on its notes, giving it the right to make the notes interest-bearing while delaying payment for six months; the Royal Bank followed suit. Both banks eventually decided that the policy they had followed was mutually self-destructive and a truce was arranged, but it still took until 1751 before the two banks agreed to accept each other's notes"
Anyone who needs help with RBS & their 'reconstructed' documents should contact Paul Walton again a member of this site who may have further advice to give as a result of the Sunday Times ex'pose
I think this might have happened to me. My original debt was £13,000. I have been repaying £150.00 per month for 5 years. My debt is still £13,000. I'm about to stop paying as this could go on forever. Any advice would be welcome.
I think this might have happened to me. My original debt was £13,000. I have been repaying £150.00 per month for 5 years. My debt is still £13,000. I'm about to stop paying as this could go on forever. Any advice would be welcome.
Confer with fellow members Mr Paul Walton or Sparkie as, after paying £150 for 5 years & still owing the same amount, it does appear you have been conned like them & they will be able to help & advise your next step 1 of which I think will be advising you to contact your MP
In the meantime until your ready to go to war continue to make the payments otherwise they will seek a charging order which can only complicate matters for you
I would take JonCris's advice ...BUT CONTACT YOUR MP immediately and tell him to have a word with Mr John Healey MP (Paul W's MP) & Andrew MIller MP ( my MP) who are completely aware of what RBS are doing...it looks as if you are another victim of RBS's " Router Accounting" system which is under investigation by those MP's and ....also The Sunday Times, contact Paul Walton by PM and give him your e-mail address and I would imagine you will be contacted by the Sunday Times journalists.
Thanks for the advice everyone. It's such a relief that someone appears to be listening at last. I will contact my MP but I am ready to fight and I have plenty of documentary evidence to support my case. I have stopped my standing order but could someone tell me what a "charge" is and how it will affect me. I do not own any property and I am not married although I am living with my partner. Incidentally, I have asked the bank ,on three occasions over the years, to send me details of the charges and interest they have added to both accounts. The letters were sent by recorded delivery and with a postal order for the required account (I'm not allowed a chequebook because of this debt). RBS sent me records for the overdraft but not the loan account on the third time of asking.
Has anybody used this memo as ammunition with RBS? I have a Mint card (was RBS Adavanta) from 1997 and the application form they sent me was not countersigned by RBS and I am thereofre going to write the standard letter back )also no 'overleaf' conditions as referred to in the declaration part.
Also have an RBS card which I sent the CCA letter on 9th March - no reply at all so far. Should I wait 30 days until they are breaking the law, or should I write now?
Also me & my husband both have Tesco Credit Cards (also RBS) and they look OK on the face of it except my husband's application has our old address pre-printed on it, so no mention of our address at the time of taking the card (March 2000). Also, no 'overleaf' details as above.
My Tesco card looks moew watertight on the face of it, but has no overleaf terms either.
All 3 of them sent me copy terms & condition leaflets from original tiem and current, so they are obviously trying to cover all bases now.
Thanks very much x
RBS becoming "inventive" with your documents?
employee Jane Fraser produces documents which are neither a "copy" nor "true".
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by BankFodder
Re: RBS becoming "inventive" with your documents?
