Skinny rib - while MBNA varied their methods over time, through some evolutions and jumps and revisions - if you have a valid case you have a valid case, IMHO, even if required "automatic" reassessments covered a period, then your case with FOS is still valid if it is sill valid despite timing of a period mentioned in a general release. When the FCA took over from FSA, part of their reasoning for changing was to closer integrate with FOS, - as they stated anyway around the time. Problem is still though that FOS deal with individual cases and FCA only do big picture stuff so there are a lot of small but significant "group" cases that fall a bit between two stools. MBNA redress, I believe, through much prompting has arrived at the point, within FCA-FOS, to be considered a part of a big problem. Does all depend on what exactly they were up to when MBNA assessed your compensation previously - which of course is why you, as you know, rightly want sight of their calculations...

My problem could be that I didn't raise this with the FOS 6 months after receiving my redress in 2011.

It was only in May this year after reading this informative thread that I decided to query the calculations with MBNA directly.

Hopefully mine will be one of them as FOS' investigation into my complaint has been frozen for several months like the others on here . Should I contact FOS do you think

GS

Yes absolutely, especially as you are one of the mass complainants; keep the pressure up on both the FOS and FCA!!!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29026522

PPI was being discussed on BBC One Breakfast Television this morning; as above.

If, Mr. Wheatley wants to rebuild trust RE: the Banks, he needs to start regulation them correctly and;

walk the walk as opposed to talking the talk.

We are running out of patience...!!!

Just out of interest i was wondering if i should hold tight in claiming back PPI or if i should carry on regardless.I know there is some confusion regarding MBNA and the way the calculate but i am wanting to go for compound interest route.

Should i wait a little longer ??? Anybody

Or should i go for it and join the Que lol

Just out of interest i was wondering if i should hold tight in claiming back PPI or if i should carry on regardless.I know there is some confusion regarding MBNA and the way the calculate but i am wanting to go for compound interest route.

Should i wait a little longer ??? Anybody

Or should i go for it and join the Que lol

I would still complain, my complaint was upheld by the FOS in April/May this year, the offer from MBNA was a lot lower than expected. I rejected the offer stated my reasons and after seeing the calculation. My complaint is still with the FOS, and i get monthly updates stating this.

"As explained in my previous email, PPI credit card redress has recently been widely covered in the press. And as part of our close look at the way in which MBNA carries out its calculations, we wanted to make sure that we included this in our considerations.

We are still looking into the way MBNA carries out its calculations and as such I am not yet in a position to issue my opinion of your complaint."

I guess a lot of MBNA cases at the FOS are currently in limbo, it wouldn't be any harm to be sitting in the queue!

I would still complain, my complaint was upheld by the FOS in April/May this year, the offer from MBNA was a lot lower than expected. I rejected the offer stated my reasons and after seeing the calculation. My complaint is still with the FOS, and i get monthly updates stating this.

 

"As explained in my previous email, PPI credit card redress has recently been widely covered in the press. And as part of our close look at the way in which MBNA carries out its calculations, we wanted to make sure that we included this in our considerations.

 

We are still looking into the way MBNA carries out its calculations and as such I am not yet in a position to issue my opinion of your complaint."

 

I guess a lot of MBNA cases at the FOS are currently in limbo, it wouldn't be any harm to be sitting in the queue!

We have asked both the FOS & FCA;

why is it taking them such a long time (over 6 months) to ascertain what is primarily just a mathematical calculation? We made our mass complaint over six months ago and nothing appears to have moved on since that time.

It would appear that it is only since the Press became interested that the FCA decided to release their latest statement?

So, what exactly are the FCA/FOS doing; they have been provided with sufficient information which clearly prove that some MBNA calculations are incorrect!

I guess the reason for the delay is some highly paid QC or barrister is argueing over the meaning of consistently.

From the guidance

Another example where a consumer might have paid a different amount to their credit card account is where the consumer consistently made the minimum contractual credit card payment each month. In that case, it seems likely that instead of paying the same amount to their credit card account without PPI, the consumer might have paid the (slightly smaller) minimum payment rather than the amount they actually paid to their credit card with PPI.

I guess the reason for the delay is some highly paid QC or barrister is argueing over the meaning of consistently.

 

From the guidance

 

Another example where a consumer might have paid a different amount to their credit card account is where the consumer consistently made the minimum contractual credit card payment each month. In that case, it seems likely that instead of paying the same amount to their credit card account without PPI, the consumer might have paid the (slightly smaller) minimum payment rather than the amount they actually paid to their credit card with PPI.

There is no need for a highly paid Barrister to argue the legalese meaning of the word: Consistently.

As the FCA (formerly FSA) would be able to clarify the exact meaning;

the FSA drafted the guidance and must be able to define their legalese meaning of that Adverb!

One's patience is running out...

Hello all

Spoke to the FOS the other day to ask for an update on my account; apparently MBNA complaints are being dealt with at a senior level and they are awating responses from MBNA. As soon as they receive a response they will appoint an adjudicator to my complaint !

Which in my opinion means that MBNA know that FOS won't do anything till they reply so they are not replying ..............and we are all stuck in limbo..........

GS

GS

Have received a reply from FOS about our complaint on first read it looks like they are agreeing with mbna . Sorry on phone so I can't post a copy without personal details

GS

Hi GS

I knew we would be still messaging on here 2 years after the thread started.

Is this a reply as in a holding minion reply or is it a high born reply with all the bells and whistles?

My personnal experience of FOS is they try and get you to accept the least they possibly can away with. Hence why everyone is seeing them in such low esteem. They dont seem to fully understand the complaints and this one will be no exception.

What have they said you can do? I cant remember if you have pushed this to an Ombudsman yet.

It would appear that the MBNA complaint that GS has logged with the FOS is still at a low level, as he/she stated that same had not yet been allocated to an Adjudicator.

We have noticed that the FOS are of late attempting to deal with complaints on a team level via the telephone, prior to allocating to a FOS Adjudicator; these of course may have been outsourced. But we note that some complaints are being hurried through...

GS, it would be helpful if you can illuminate us a little more RE: your recent FOS/MBNA telephone conversation.

To date, we are all still waiting to hear back from Ms. Vicki McAusland of the FOS RE: OUR MASS COMPLAINT.

But we are in receipt of a recent communication from the FOS dated August 2014:

"...I would like to assure you that we are talking to MBNA about its approach, at a senior level. And as soon as we have an update, we will be in contact to let you know what progress has been made."

Finally, we are currently in process of preparing a presentation for the media, as a follow up to their recent coverage in June/July 2014 and the pronouncements subsequently made by Mr. Martin Wheatley, CEO of the FCA.

In our view, both the FCA and FOS have had more than sufficient time to fully investigate our most serious concerns about MBNA Limited.

G/S AMN / Ken & everyone.

G/S. IF your case it at the stage were the adjudicator has made an investigation and concluded there is nothing wrong with the calculations. Please look at pages 18/19/20 of this thread and remember without labouring a point that my case was turned down by the adjudicator REPEATEDLY ! they were convinced that MBNA redress calculations were correct even though they could not answer the questions i made having learnt so much on this thread on there redress methods such as surplus balances & 8% being paid on a debt balance. The adjudicator only decided to reverse their recommendation when i sent them copies of my statements having done a SAR which proved that type 'M' on their calculation sheet was a lie and that MBNA claimed i made consistent minimum payments to substantially cut my redress.

I hope my case has been an infulence for others and also not to give up. There are so many pitfalls on MBNA redress methods. Keep the faith i to at one time had given up and thought MBNA had got away with it with the backing of the FOS. So please keep the faith you are in the right place with great help.

Ken/ AMN / without reading too much into the recent publication on cases to be re-assesed by the FCA can we conclude that the FOS having had to get the go-ahead from the FCA will finally annouce what we have been waiting for ? Time certainly is up on this matter. I was also wondering if it would be the end of lenders in question being allowed to use alternative methods of calculations which has been the main root of this evil ? or i am doing wishfull thinking ? as usual comments welcome.

GS

Have received a reply from FOS about our complaint on first read it looks like they are agreeing with mbna . Sorry on phone so I can't post a copy without personal details

GS

WID

I am not party to FOS or FCA thinking. I tend to agree with AC that this is over 6 months and what we are cribbing about is simple maths which we have pointed them to. Its either wrong and MBNA should be getting a battering for what they have done or we are wrong and FOS should be politely telling us we have got it all wrong and this is why.

This limbo doesnt do the regulator or the poodle much good.

Unfortunately the letter I have received is from Vicki Mcausland. An adjudicateor to my claim was appointed in July last year but when the mass complaint went in. I was notified that they were having discussion with MBNA at a higher level and they would continue with the claim when those discussions had been completed.

Going out to an appt now - will post up the letter - when I get home.

GS

Just received the letter from FOS.

I don't know if Vicki McAusland composed it herself

but there are a lot of assumptions which she seems willing to accept as fact.

Here it is......

Exactly the same as the letter I have received.

GS, it would be helpful if you can illuminate us a little more RE: your recent FOS/MBNA telephone conversation

In the telephone call I had with them they just said that discussions were continuing on a higher level 0- I am assuming that this letter is after the discussions have concluded.

As suvin50 says there are a lot of assumptions in the letter; and there does not appear to be any mention of the different ways of calculating thta MBNA have used.

Are we going to reply as one to this letter after going through it. There still seem to be many questions - I for one am not very happy with the assumptions made as I did not make Min payment only for most of the term of my card and there are more issues in my case.

I'm sorry for not replying promptly but I do not seem to have notifications when a reply has been posted so I have to remember to check and a close member of our family has passed away in the last couple of weeks so life is a bit busy at the moment.

GS

GS

I also got an email with the letter attached advising that the complaint was being passed to an adjudicator. I, too, never made the minimum payment so hopefully they will look at each complaint on its own merits.

Just received the letter from FOS. I don't know if Vicki McAusland composed it herself but there are a lot of assumptions which she seems willing to accept as fact. Here it is......

Ms. McAusland, has missed the point, totally!

Her letter is just a general response, not impressed...

Ms. McAusland, has missed the point, totally!

Her letter is just a general response, not impressed...

So according to Ms McAusland if MBNA are correct can you not prove any of the F's or M's that MBNA have referred is not actually F's or M's? (On my own redress calc a payment is classified as an F but at the time it left a balance on the card, so how can it be an F).

Also another line of argument would be if MBNA have reduced the minimum payment to below their dominium limit. From my own records in 2007 the smallest amount I could pay off the card was £25, a M below this amount would have been impossible.

Think MBNA got her to roll over and tickled her belly, absolute disgrace.

AC

Press? No reason to protect either the regulator or FOS now.

AC

 

Press? No reason to protect either the regulator or FOS now.

Absolutely!!!

What a pity that they failed to take us seriously and after we have showed such courtesy and patience...

Absolutely!!!

 

What a pity that they failed to take us seriously and after we have showed such courtesy and patience...

Sounds interesting......good luck!

Just re read the letter GS did you only request that the calculation be in the format prescribed by the fos or did you highlight areas where the calculation in your circumstances was not appropriate?

HI

The reply I received from Vicki Mcausland was in relation to the same letter we all sent; burt n relation to my complaint I sent a huge bundle of information pointing out all the inconsistencies and also included a copy of my husband's spreadsheet which is totally different to mine and in his it also calculates the reimbursement differently to what he actually had received. I also have F and M's in strange places and the same amounts in a run of months can be treated differently in each month. The only time I paid the minimum was when I paid DDR for some 8 months. Also mentioned over limit charges and the fact that MBNA did not reimburse me the amount my account was in credit by after even their version of the calculation; if it was calculated correctly I should be even more in credit.

I agree it sounds like she is just repeating what she has been told by MBNA - she has totally missed the point.

Really worried that MBNA are going to get away with it now........with all that's happening around me at the moment I can't get my head around a reply to her .....

If the Lead Adjudicator doesn't get it what hope do we have. The courts ?

GS