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.
following a couple of years interupted employment, I decided to go back to school and re-train as a teacher (something i had hoped to do for years!)
As my wife is still at home looking after our youngest, and I have no income other than the odd student loan, housing benefit, tax credit, and child benefit. With a mix of changing circumstances etc, I fell into failed DDs, failed SOs and using an unathorised OD on both my account, and my wifes.
We each wrote an initial letter of request to Lloyds, supplying info claiming hardship status, and a list of charges over the past few years.
We each got a standard letter from LTSB saying that the complaint appears to relate to the level, fairness, or lawfulness of the charges. They also acknowledged that we were experiencing Financial Difficulties (i noticed they didn't admitt the "hardship").
The rest of the letter says that they intend putting this on hold pending the "test case" and informing us that if we claim through the court, they will get the case postponed.
They included a brochure about complaining to the Ombudsman.
What is the current advice? I have tried reading through the forums, but there doesn't seem to be too much specific advice here. Do we carry on with an lba, or do we just complain to the ombudsman?
I sent them details of income and expenditure forms, and details of rent arrears, water board arrears, and council tax arrears.
I phoned them today and they told me that they believe they are "handling my claim under hardship rules" by putting my claim on hold and simply passing my details to the collections team so that they can try and work out a repayment solution for the charges on my account - i pointed out that i had already proved that I was not able to afford any repayments and that the previous charges had been a contributory factor in water and rent arrears, but it seemed to fall on deaf ears.
I called the fos for their advice. They believe that Lloyds are not playing by the rules (the hardship waiver should take us outside of the court case, not simply give us assistance until the resolution), but because of the wording of the Lloyds reply, they were unsure if it constituted a final standpoint or not.
Then called lloyds again who said that they believe I am suffering hardship, reiterated that they were helping by refering the case to collections, and then said they couldn't send me a notice of their final position because the case was now on hold - grrrrr
Called FOS again who are writing to lloyds today to tell them to sort their act out and make it clear what their position is.
Not sure whether to progress with lba as if it does actually get to court, the court will simply put it on hold anyway.
Am i better off just progressing the FOS process for now?
i only have a lloydstsb account - i got caught up in a failed business a few years ago and have found it very difficult to open an alternative account since, so kind of stuck with them.
I am VERY slowly making a dent in the council tax arrears (only because i started doing this whilst i was working and they had sent around the bailiffs who were offering to help me by taking my car off my hands). I have not been able to do anything with the rent or water.
The arrears are a little tricky, but i explained it to them in this way - The overall arrears are getting bigger, although there are some arrears (council tax as an example) where i have been able to eat into - but only by using a student loan to do this - the student loan was taken to support my studies, as of yet, I have been unable to do this as I needed to make a dent in the rent arrears. It will be december before the student loan "runs out" and the arrears start escalating across the board
The arrears are a little tricky, but i explained it to them in this way - The overall arrears are getting bigger, although there are some arrears (council tax as an example) where i have been able to eat into - but only by using a student loan to do this - the student loan was taken to support my studies, as of yet, I have been unable to do this as I needed to make a dent in the rent arrears. It will be december before the student loan "runs out" and the arrears start escalating across the board
Have you cancelled all non essential direct debits?
don't have any non essential DDs - i'm legally obliged to have insurance on a motor vehicle, pay TV license, and I have one set up to pay a loan repayment.
I'm sorry that you feel that there is no specific advice here. I think that maybe one of the problems is that you have come to the hardship forum and maybe you should have started your thread in the Lloyds bank forum.
I'm afraid that if you are thinking of claiming back hardship money from the bank then you are someone else who has been suckered into this FSA/bank industry conthat hardship consideration is available. There are some limited hardship refunds of course that by and large the whole scheme is simply a cosmetic exercise which is pushed in front of the media from time to time to try and lay the suspicions that the fsa waiver is one-sided and hardhearted.
The hardship provisions are also calculated to deflect you from the real business of just going ahead and making your claim. Maybe the existence of this hardship forum has had the same effect. I'm sorry.
Don't bother about hardship. It is all too late anyway. The Supreme Court will be handing down their judgement very soon. And then maybe it will be a question of cleaning up the mess.
My best suggestion to you is put in the lba and make your claim. Even when repayment schemes are agreed and the repayment business starts it will take ages. Furthermore I don't expect the banks to be honest about it. I fully expect that repayments will be in the form of a differential between the charge that you paid and some allegedly "fair rate". there will also be some provision for compensation that it may not fully reflect your loss. You can be certain that it will be whatever the banks think they can get away with.
Put in your claim, use our template, don't hang around. By putting a court claim you will move yourself up the queue.
Just read this thread as in a similar position myself with Lloyds and getting nowhere, so filing an N1 with court. If you have water arrears check with your water company to see if they have a customer assistance fund for hardship cases. I know Thames Water do. Good Luck
But of course this was always going to happen wasnt it? Banks not doing anything about hardship claims, because there is no reason for them to do anything!
what did the morons who gave the banks a way out of paying back claims without also putting all bank charges on hold think was going to happen?
This one took a bit of a twist - lol. Whilst talking to the bank last Friday, I requested a new complaint be raised. Last September they made a mistake on my account which left me out of pocket by £375. They quickly reimbursed the £300 but it took until the December to get the remaining £75.
In discussing the legality or otherwise of the current charging structure, I agreed that i'd have no objection if I could use the same charging structure against lloydstsb - The nice lady on the phone went all quiet when I pointed out that £75 over 93 days = £1300+
I'm sorry that you feel that there is no specific advice here. I think that maybe one of the problems is that you have come to the hardship forum and maybe you should have started your thread in the Lloyds bank forum.
And most of the stuff on financial hardship here is pretty sub standard to be honest. I mostly post on Hardship cases because I have taken the time to deal with literally thousands of them on internet forums, mostly MSE.
I'm afraid that if you are thinking of claiming back hardship money from the bank then you are someone else who has been suckered into this FSA/bank industry conthat hardship consideration is available.
Yet there is no other way of alleviating financial hardship since going to the courts will mean the case is stayed so you still get no further forward and the same result remains. Each claim is not seen in any higher regard so it must be the choice of the individual if they want the expense or non expense if they are on benefits or struggling of filing at court. In all likelihood when there is a settlement of claims it would be reasonable for an end date to be given for claims already within the system.
There are some limited hardship refunds of course that by and large the whole scheme is simply a cosmetic exercise which is pushed in front of the media from time to time to try and lay the suspicions that the FSA waiver is one-sided and hardhearted.
One post got £13,000.00 back recently from RBS. Furthermore, it isn't pushed in front of the media whatsoever, in fact, the opposite is the case yet without any real substance. 35 complaints against the application of the FSA Waiver on Bank Charges since August 2008 up to September 2009 is hardly going to change things. In fact, when you were asking for the waiver to be got rid of there was exactly 0 complaints.
Yes there are huge amounts of people going through the banks and the fos on the basis of financial hardship and to a degree, I can understand that people are desparate to get their money back. Yet, there are times where the claim on financial hardship is without merit or their argument is simply that the bank said NO, or the bank didn't refund anything or they only offered a small amount. I don't always agree with a decision by the FOS and I don't believe they always get it right but argued in the right manner you can get successes which I see almost every single day on MSE whilst on here you state at times to reject the offer and not negotiate the offer which can be done and can be increased if you just take the time to really look deeply at the claim itself.
The hardship provisions are also calculated to deflect you from the real business of just going ahead and making your claim.
Bankfodder, let's actually look at exactly why the FSA Waiver came into place. If the Test case had continued on without it then we would have had more Barwick cases potentially where the bank do not turn up and it is up to the judge to decide. Furthermore, the county court system was being overrun, for want of a better word, by claims for bank charges. In fact, to be blunt with you, the hardship provisions were not in the original FSA Waiver so the fact you say that it was to deflect from the real business of just going ahead and making a claim is really nonsensical since it was over a year before the hardship provisions came into the waiver.
Maybe the existence of this hardship forum has had the same effect. I'm sorry.
I actively asked for a hardship forum on CAG because I felt it was an active way to understand the way hardship worked and the way that hardship claims could ultimately be won. I felt there were members of site team who understood and was passionate about getting money paid back under financial hardship. In fact, I told you of the £500 provision in a round about way before it went into the FSA Waiver. Unfortunately, I no longer believe that Hardship cases can be won in any large quantities on CAG and the fact that there is a hardship forum on a site can allow you to understand the way a bank deals with financial hardship cases and therefore push harder on certain banks who may be being difficult to force their hand and make an offer even if it is an interim one. With the new hardship guide here I really thought that finally you were taking these sorts of claims seriously. Yet again, I was mistaken. It is full of personal comment, basic errors for example "payouts even though the person is not on benefits" and show a real lack of understanding of the FSA Waiver and how to argue a case. In fact, you speculated that the Income and Expenditure was shared which surprisingly was the one piece of information that is 100% accurate. If a claimant goes to the FOS then the bank have to pass that information to them and the FSA can ask to look at hardship cases from any firm within the FSA Waiver at any time.
Don't bother about hardship. It is all too late anyway.
For here it definitely is.
The Supreme Court will be handing down their judgement very soon.
On whether the law applies to bank charges so we are still in all likelihood 12 months away from something that will lead to payouts so please let's stop being influenced by the press that the Supreme Court are deciding on the fairness of bank charges cos they aren't
And then maybe it will be a question of cleaning up the mess.
My best suggestion to you is put in the lba and make your claim. Even when repayment schemes are agreed and the repayment business starts it will take ages.
What about if their hardship worsens in the meantime? What should they do?
Furthermore I don't expect the banks to be honest about it. I fully expect that repayments will be in the form of a differential between the charge that you paid and some allegedly "fair rate".
With the above view the OFT test case was a waste of time. You yourself knows that a term that is deemed as unenforceable is unenforceable in its entirety. If the Bank loses the OFT test case preliminary issues they still have to fight the case on the secondary issues. There can be no payout on the basis you have said because if historical charges were unfair then the term did not exist and it is 100% payout. Remember, there is still unresolved issues around credit card reclaiming since you would still advise people to claim 100% of the charges and I would be of the same opinion if such a decision was made that was not confirmed in a court of law. We both would agree that ONLY a court can decide the issue of fairness, limitations, and ultimately restitution. No half way house would justify the OFT test case.
there will also be some provision for compensation that it may not fully reflect your loss. You can be certain that it will be whatever the banks think they can get away with.
Again, the secondary issues should mop up most of these issues. Ultimately we could have consumer litigation for years if some of them are not resolved once we have a decision from the Supreme Court.
Put in your claim, use our template, don't hang around. By putting a court claim you will move yourself up the queue.
That's the thing, BankFodder, it doesn't really move it up, down or left or right. You are in the queue the date your claim is received and those who haven't gone to court are not disadvantaged by not doing so. I think there are advantages and disadvantages to doing so.
I don't think we will ever agree 100% on some issues BankFodder but ultimately, our end game is the same.
A fairer system of bank charging and the repayment of charges that are unfair. Ultimately, we both will win even if we have a scrapes and bruises during the process
This one took a bit of a twist - lol. Whilst talking to the bank last Friday, I requested a new complaint be raised. Last September they made a mistake on my account which left me out of pocket by £375. They quickly reimbursed the £300 but it took until the December to get the remaining £75.
In discussing the legality or otherwise of the current charging structure, I agreed that i'd have no objection if I could use the same charging structure against lloydstsb - The nice lady on the phone went all quiet when I pointed out that £75 over 93 days = £1300+
We'll see - haha
Stevep, you cannot charge the bank the same as they charge you as there is no provisions within the contract for doing so. I think there is only 1 case ever where I have seen the customer(HSBC was the bank) use a variation of contract which stood up in court where the bank were forced to accept a provision not already initiated by themselves.
LloydsTSB confusion with hardship case(s)
, supplying info claiming hardship status, and a list of charges over the past few years.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by stevep
