Hey,

I apologise if this does not belong in this particular sub forum!

More than likely I can't do this, but if you've previously accepted a 'gesture of goodwill' payment to settle a complaint... can you actually turn around and say I no longer accept this as a settlement, return the payment to the creditor? Some of these payments made to me are now quite old, but I did accept a recent payment only a week or so ago...

This was/is mainly connected to payday loan companies... as i've already raised the issue of unaffordable lending, continued borrowing etc and settled they won't investigate.

I made a massive mistake accepting small 'gesture of goodwill' payments, and now the FOS will not investigate updated complaints because of this!

It certainly is another lesson learned!

Thread moved to the appropriate forum..please continue to post here to your thread.

Regards

Andy

Realistically IMHO when it comes to complaints (And boy ive raised LOTS!)

Id say that realistically you can't do what you mentioned above.

Realistically IMHO when it comes to complaints (And boy ive raised LOTS!)

Id say that realistically you can't do what you mentioned above.

I thought as much... I might try a new complaint angle, or just harass them

But I will give it a shot with the recent company that paid!

Hi There

Just one thing, if previous information that wasnt assessed in a complaint before comes to light, you can reopen a complaint or raise a new one.

What you're really asking is: whether accepting a gesture of goodwill in order to discontinue a claim, amounts to a binding contract that the matter is settled there and then.

In my view, if the gesture is something that they should have done in law anyway, then I don't see that your acceptance of it can create any binding obligation to continue.

We are looking at some pretty basic contractual principles here. A contract is made by an exchange of consideration. Consideration means that you part with something of value in return for something of value which the other side has parted with.

It's a very well established principle that performing an existing duty does not amount to consideration. This means that if somebody owes you money and eventually they say well I'll give you the money I owe you but only if you drop all future claims, then your promise is not binding on you because they were obliged to give you the money anyway. There is no new value.

So you haven't told us much about this gesture of goodwill, but if you have suddenly realised that the money they offered you was money which they were obliged to pay to you anyway, then no – it does not bind you to them in anyway and you are free to continue with the claim if you wish.

Of course the people you are dealing with won't understand that and they will howl – but if it went to court, then as long as you have a decent argument for your money, you will win. A judge would never uphold a gesture of goodwill if it was comprised of money which was already owed.

Additionally, I have my own view that a "gesture of goodwill" is precisely that – a matter of goodwill. It is never intended to be legally binding and that is the second reason why I think that you would probably be clear to continue a claim. Once again, the other side will howl – but so what.

bot too other foot

we've seen numerous DCA's accept GOGW's on debts

only to sell the remainder on and the next DCA takes the debtor to court.

so can you IMHO!!

What you're really asking is: whether accepting a gesture of goodwill in order to discontinue a claim, amounts to a binding contract that the matter is settled there and then.

 

In my view, if the gesture is something that they should have done in law anyway, then I don't see that your acceptance of it can create any binding obligation to continue.

 

We are looking at some pretty basic contractual principles here. A contract is made by an exchange of consideration. Consideration means that you part with something of value in return for something of value which the other side has parted with.

 

It's a very well established principle that performing an existing duty does not amount to consideration. This means that if somebody owes you money and eventually they say well I'll give you the money I owe you but only if you drop all future claims, then your promise is not binding on you because they were obliged to give you the money anyway. There is no new value.

 

So you haven't told us much about this gesture of goodwill, but if you have suddenly realised that the money they offered you was money which they were obliged to pay to you anyway, then no – it does not bind you to them in anyway and you are free to continue with the claim if you wish.

 

Of course the people you are dealing with won't understand that and they will howl – but if it went to court, then as long as you have a decent argument for your money, you will win. A judge would never uphold a gesture of goodwill if it was comprised of money which was already owed.

 

Additionally, I have my own view that a "gesture of goodwill" is precisely that – a matter of goodwill. It is never intended to be legally binding and that is the second reason why I think that you would probably be clear to continue a claim. Once again, the other side will howl – but so what.

Hey,

These gesture of goodwill payments relate to payday loan (I know! I Know!) complaints I made around 2014/2015. All final responses issued to me stated they were unable to uphold my complaint, but offered a gesture of goodwill payment in full and final settlement of my complaint.

As i've always been bitter over my experiences with these payday loan companies, I recently issued new complaints over unaffordable lending and so on. Instand Cash Loans (Money Shop, Payday Express, Payday UK) firstly tried to not investigate my complaints, and they also referenced the previous gesture of goodwill payment. I escalated the Money Shop complaint to the FOS but they refused to investigate e.g. as I had previously accepted a payment in full and final settlement. I feel I will get the same response from them if I escalate the Payday Express and Payday UK complaints.

Court routes are out of the question for this particular case, so should I just call it a day on these complaints?

The FOS told me:

Any cheques or payments that are "goodwill payment" can be banked and you can still take the complaint to the FOS.

"in full and final settlement of your complaint" cannot be banked if you want the FOS to look at it.

In your instance,

the final phrase that was dropped in was "full and final settlement" and its that what has got you in the ambiguity.

When the FOS say they won't take it on,

that’s an opinion and you are legally entitled to a final decision from an Ombudsman.

However, its rare for final decisions to overturn the initial opinion.

I would tread carefully as if you put in another complaint that goes to the FOS,

Instant Cash Loans will point out to the ombudsman that this has already been considered and so is out of jurisdiction and out of time if over 6 months.

Even if the complaints are completely different,

the FOS are eager not to do any work and will agree with the companies dispute claim.

You disagree with the adjudicator and ask for a final decision and find the ombudsman has completely ignored all of your case submission and before you know it, case is determined in the banks favour.

End of the road.