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.
As promised in the 'Complaining to the fos' thread, I'm starting a new one for complaining about the FOS. Though I'm happy to co-ordinate a joint complaint, I can't do it without input from the rest of the forum.
The general complaints that I've seen mentioned are
1. How long it takes
2. No obligation to follow the law
3. Bias towards the Banks/DCAs
4. Decisions which are patently unfair to the consumer, e.g. automatically paying compensation awarded to the Bank/DCA to reduce a debt without any proof that the debt is owed or proof of any right to collect
I'm sure we can add to that list as we go along.
The present suggestion is that we submit a joint complaint to Watchdog. I'm not sure what it will achieve, if anything, but we can only try. It might be worth submitting a copy of any complaint to our own MPs too, though I know for a fact that my MP is a complete waste of time. Again any other suggestions of who to complain to would be welcome.
For now I would suggest that if you want to be included in a joint complaint you post a (brief) summary of the nature of your complaints.
I'll start drafting something to be sent to Watchdog and/or whoever else we come up with, then post for amendments and suggestions.
I am not an expert in law, finance or any related field, I just read a lot. Any advice is based solely on what I've read so please don't take it as gospel without checking it out yourself.
I prefer not to give advice by PM. If you want me to look at something, send me a link to your thread, and if I can help I'll reply on there.
Stating that HSBC were in their rights to call my phone number up to 9 times a day, and that it WASN'T harrassment, despite making a written request....
PLEASE NOTE - I am not a legal expert, what is stated is my own opinion and from what I have learnt from this forum and my own experiences.
IF WE HAVE BEEN HELPFUL -PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE GIVE A DONATION TO HELP US TO CONTINUE HELPING YOU
I AM HAPPY TO RECEIVE PM's AND I WILL RESPOND IF I FEEL I CAN ASSIST BUT WHEN YOU DO CAN YOU PLEASE PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD ON WHICH YOU WOULD LIKE ME TO COMMENT - THANK YOU
IMPORTANT - If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.
Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.
Private message facilities are offered for users to communicate issues that are/or could be seen to be inappropriate for posting on the main forum.Site rules explain this in more detail.
If you are approached by private message with a view to asking you to visit another website,please inform the site team via the report icon.
When companies have been given 40 days to deal with an official complaint, why does the fos give them additional 8 weeks to respond, when it have been given documentary evidence that you have followed the legal requirements? That is after a significant delay in being able to deal with a complaint.
I'm subbing - go for it RMW!!
I'm waiting to hear from the Adjudicator re. a huge dispute, but don't hold out much hope. From what I've experienced so far they just seem biased and make value judgements on behalf of the banks.
We will not be intimidated.
'The pen is mightier than the sword'. Petition to Outlaw Debt Sale and Purchase
- can't read/post much as eye strain's v.bad.
VIVA CAG!!!
as the fos has been reviewed by the courts and academic writers I'm not sure that this will go anywhere.
They give plenty of time on the basis of the 'enough rope to hang themselves' and because they need to follow the rules of natural justice, especially as the decisions are binding. just like set asides of ccjs if they went quicker then they'd be subject to alot of set aside 'hearings'.
As for the obligation to follow the law, often this is open to interpretation and it is not the role of adr to follow the law specifically, if you want this you go to the courts, not fos. You go to fos if you want an alternative approach to your dispute that may nod towards the law. In places this is of benefit, for eg where laws of evidence etc are concerned. You'd be amazed how many consumers label everything without prejudice...
can't comment on the last two, but I'd wager that the banks also feel that they are bias, hence the judicial reviews etc. I used to have alot to do with ADR (in another field) and I was always struck how both sides were adamant that the adjudicator was bias. Go figure.
The present suggestion is that we submit a joint complaint to Watchdog. I'm not sure what it will achieve, if anything, but we can only try.
It was only a suggestion. I just thought that perhaps some public humiliation might help kick start them or the FSA/government into making some changes - it sometimes works.
It might also help highten public awareness of the concept of requesting CCA's etc. I know that before I found this forum I just assumed I had to either keep paying or declare myself bankrupt and hand over everything I own.
Also had one DCA asking my ex what my details were when I asked him to deal with it (as he should ref our divorce). They asked him what my income was, what assests I had and told him I had already agreed to pay £5 a month when all I did was ask for the paperwork as I didn't recognise it!
I have had 3 complaints returned from the fos the 4th is still being investigated.
HSBC - Credit card. Apparently a blank template form is sufficient. They accepted HSBC's word that they had halted collection activity which was totally untrue.
Barclay Card - both Visa and Mastercard: Documents provided are application mailer forms with no prescribed terms on either document. FOS ignored the part of the complaint where telephone calls were almost hourly both silent and human. They also ignored the aggressive tactics used by Mercers, B/Cs inhouse agents. Their reply advised that it "would be unreasonable for the FOS to cease its debt recovery action in respect of the accounts and that they will not make a finding on the enforceability of the credit agreement.
Halifax - FOS response "From the information you have provided, you are not complaining about a financial loss. Therefore the FOS cannot help you" ??
On the all of the above, a final paragraph was added in that only a court could advise the enforceablity of the documents.
HSBC, personal loan and PPI mis selling on 3 separate occasions. Complaint first made in May. Beginning of November, I was advised the complaint had been allocated to an adjudicator. End of NOvember, I was advised as the complaint was complex, it was being passed on to a specialist department. Nothing heard since.
1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy -HERE
2: Take back control of your finances -Debt Diaries
3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors?Read Here
When the Liberals and Conservatives were in opposition, they both agreed that banks should pay back high bank charges to customers. Nothing seems to have happened since they came into power as a coalition. PPI Insurance has been sorted. Now they should turn their attention to bank charges and help customers get exorbitant charges refunded.
Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.
PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE
as the fos has been reviewed by the courts and academic writers I'm not sure that this will go anywhere.
They give plenty of time on the basis of the 'enough rope to hang themselves' and because they need to follow the rules of natural justice, especially as the decisions are binding. just like set asides of ccjs if they went quicker then they'd be subject to alot of set aside 'hearings'.
I've actually found that once your case does get allocated, the adjudicator does get pretty stroppy with the Bank/DCA if they don't respond fairly promptly plus they do also give the consumer a bit of leeway.
As for the obligation to follow the law, often this is open to interpretation and it is not the role of adr to follow the law specifically, if you want this you go to the courts, not fos. You go to fos if you want an alternative approach to your dispute that may nod towards the law. In places this is of benefit, for eg where laws of evidence etc are concerned. You'd be amazed how many consumers label everything without prejudice...
Totally agree on the evidence point, however there are numerous complaints that I've read where the FOS have actually done the opposite to what the law states, e.g. paying damages awarded to the consumer to someone else (not even the bank being complained about) without any agreement from the consumer that they should do so.
can't comment on the last two, but I'd wager that the banks also feel that they are bias, hence the judicial reviews etc. I used to have alot to do with ADR (in another field) and I was always struck how both sides were adamant that the adjudicator was bias. Go figure.
To at least some extent I think the FOS are right in refusing to adjudicate on e.g. whether an agreement is enforceable as that is something that should quite rightly be decided by a court. However there is case law that they do have to follow the Banking Code (see the cases library) and I would argue that they should also therefore follow the OFT guidelines on debt collection. They don't, or don't always. Actually I think the biggest problem with the FOS is inconsistency. If we don't know whether or not they are going to follow the law or a particular set of guidelines, how do we know if it's worth the effort of complaining? Just imagine if the courts were not obliged to all use the same rules .....
RMW
I am not an expert in law, finance or any related field, I just read a lot. Any advice is based solely on what I've read so please don't take it as gospel without checking it out yourself.
I prefer not to give advice by PM. If you want me to look at something, send me a link to your thread, and if I can help I'll reply on there.
Someone correct me if I am wrong, ( I dont think so)
The fos is a body that is within the remit of the new FOI (Freedom of information). So, providing you are specific in your request, such as, lets say a DCA you're getting grief off. You can request pertinent questions as to what investigations the FOS have made into that particular DCA and why.
Now the trick is to try and make sure it wont cost the FOS more than £450 to give you the info.
This may well help someone who is going to court and would like to point out to the honourable judge of previous misdemeanors by that DCA ( or bank etc.)
I've used the American version personally and the chief judge here threw out the case.
So, maybe a little thought.
Natwest - No CCA agreement at all re loan 6 yrs ago, defaulted on CCA and SAR requests, making demands and threats for payments despite defaults & grievances raised, Breach of OFT guidelines, CPUTR 2008 and Banking Code S13, incorrectly serving default notices under cca despite there being no agreement, unlawfully moving sums from current account without consent (despite there being no cca agreement thus no right of set-off), setting up standing order without consent. fos response = banks actions reasonable despite no agreement
Natwest - No CCA agreement at all re loan 6 yrs ago, defaulted on CCA and Subject access request requests, making demands and threats for payments despite defaults & grievances raised, Breach of OFT guidelines, CPUTR 2008 and Banking Code S13, incorrectly serving default notices under cca despite there being no agreement, unlawfully moving sums from current account without consent (despite there being no cca agreement thus no right of set-off), setting up standing order without consent. fos response = banks actions reasonable despite no agreement
That's shocking, tem.
We will not be intimidated.
'The pen is mightier than the sword'. Petition to Outlaw Debt Sale and Purchase
- can't read/post much as eye strain's v.bad.
VIVA CAG!!!
Someone correct me if I am wrong, ( I dont think so)
The fos is a body that is within the remit of the new FOI (Freedom of information).
Ok I will. You are wrong,
The Freedom of Information Act does not apply to the Financial Ombudsman Service. The Freedom of Information Act ONLY applies to public authorities.
The Financial Ombudsman Service is not a public authority.
The Financial Ombudsman Service is not a government department
The Financial Ombudsman Service is not a government agency.
The Financial Ombudsman Service is in fact is in fact a limited company....
And have a look who the board members are; our board
Make sure you do not post anything which identifies you. Although we can remove certain things from the site unless it's done in a timely manner everything you post will appear in Google cache & we do not have any control over that.
I'm in on this! fos is rubbish! Rang them about barclaycard who haven't bothered to deal with complaints at all and they just give them another couple of months to do so!! Agreed that we're entitled to see a CCA but don't seem keen on enforcing our right to be sent one, complete bias towards banks, in fact everyone you complain to can't be arsed to stop the behaviour. No-one I've spoken to about the harassment calls is interested, lots of sympathy but no actual action.
Luckily it doesn't put me off, I like a battle, won my charges back off Halifax with just 2 letters!! I can do this in the end with or without the FOS.
Watchdog-I actually think it would be a good idea, maybe not the FOS but about how DCAs behave, it's right up their street and they've been looking at some of them recently anyway.
The adjudicators have no training whatsoever in consumer credit disputes. They are alright if a direct debit has gone missing or your granny didn't get her interest on her savings but if a bank breaks all the consumer credit laws, they are completely out of their depth. Totally useless. They make assumptions which have no basis in fact whatsoever. I have a case with them at the moment, now into it's second year, which, after strong legal argument and the benefits of my experience as a senior manager (in arguing about communication within a bank) has finally gone to an Ombudsman. The adjudicator was going to close the case after my initial complaint. What of people who haven't had my experience? I don't hold out much hope for any change in decision. It went to the Ombudsman 2 months ago and I haven't heard a peep since. It's been with them so long it has grown a beard and the bank I am complaining about disappeared from the horizon last March - Ha! Two things - they take months to give you any reply yet want you to reply in 7 days and I undestand the banks get to see what you are saying and are given a chance to respond to it but you never get to see what THEY are saying. Totally biased in favour of the banks and they ignore the law completely.
And have a look who the board members are; our board
One wonders when the lessons identified from the FSA fiasco will be applied?
The other problem is that many of fos's employees are from the financial sector - presumably the ones who couldn't get aboard the bonus bus - who seem to view cases from a banker's viewpoint.
By coincidence my employer has a similar board of non-executive directors; it's a nightmare. They may be some of the great and the good, but they have no real experience of what we do, though some once worked in the general area. If we go to them with problems, they are invariably reassured by senior management, even if what they're told is utter bolleaux, and I suspect that the same might be applied here.
Complaints about the FOS
' thread, I'm starting a new one for complaining about the FOS. Though I'm happy to co-ordinate a joint complaint, I can't do it without input from the rest of the forum.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by reallymadwoman
. I just thought that perhaps some public humiliation might help kick start them or the FSA/government into making some changes - it sometimes works.
