Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Documents arrived today dated 27th March.  This is a cc taken out a long time ago (2008) and they don't seem to have been able to provide a copy of a CCA agreement, just reams of print outs of lines of texts from old bank statements, default notices etc.   
    • Documents finally arrived today from PRA group.  New day have sent me lots of paperwork, copies of default letters and statements, print out of what looks like a CCA that would have been completed on online, IP address as signature.  This debt is not too old, so possible this is the true copy of agreement ?  Not sure what my defence would be beyond irresponsible lending. 
    • pers i wouldn't.. all you need to know is in the posts of that thread....that being section 127(3) of the CCA refers. if under a CCA return, the 'creditor' claims its a recon, it must not contain any details like a sig, tickbox, or typed name (whether you signed physically or by online tickbox) 1. those are not necessary in a recon, so why inc them? (faked??) 2, it cant thus be a recon!!, it must be a copy of the 'original' from the original creditor, not from a debt buyers filing cabinet. they shouldn't not be 'mixing' some original docs from the OC with crap from their filing cabinet, claiming its ALL a recon! because some of it is faked. just remember there are far more docs like NOA and a DN that are as equally important to a court claim of 'this debt is enforceable'. never rely solely upon the dodgy agreement argument.
    • India has thousands of small gold refineries which are facing more competition from big players.View the full article
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 160 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

Bank of Scotland Unauthorised OD Letter


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1850 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Below is the text of a standard unauthorised OD letter issued by the Bank of Scotland. Note that they claim the first charge of £30 (I think it's £39 now) is to "cover our costs" but the additional £28 charge is not itemised.

 

Is this the same text as used by Halifax?

 

John

 

**

 

Dear

 

Your overdraft limit: £000.00

 

We have paid the item(s) shown below even though this means your account is now overdrawn by more than your overdraft limit.

 

To cover our costs, we make a charge of £30 (maximum 1 charge per day) for any item we pay when your account is overdrawn in excess of any agreed limit. We will take this money from your account seven days from the date of this letter. If this causes you to have an unauthorised overdraft, we will also charge you interest at the unauthorised rate, and a monthly unauthorised overdraft fee of £28*. However, if your unauthorised overdraft is £30 or less the unauthorised overdraft charge will not be applied.

 

We appreciate that nobody likes paying charges and we'd like to help you avoid them in future. To help you we've provided an online banking service that allows you to view an up to date statement of your account, details of your standing orders and direct debits and much more. For full details of the service log on to http://www.bankofscotland.co.uk.

 

Should you wish to discuss your borrowing needs, you can make an appointment by visiting any branch. Alternatively, you can discuss your requirements by calling our telephone banking service 24 hours a day. You'll find the number at the top of this letter.

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

 

Garry R D Kettle

Manager

Personal Banking Services

Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent letter and well spotted. "Cover our costs" is unequivocal. And if it is wrong then it seems to me to be little other than downright dishonest and a deception. I'm not ranting when I use these words. I think that would be a reasonable inference.

 

I think that you would be justified in asking them to give a detailed breakdown of the costs and that if they fail to do so then you will take action to recover the money.

 

It is clear that they are not claiming the charge in order to pay for a service so they have closed of that line of argument even before they get into court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

it is identical, even the same garry r d kettle. furthermore they say "seven days"... breaching the banking code. i never spotted that before, another zone of attack.

 

btw mods - shouldnt BOS and halifax be one forum?

 

Just to clear this one point up - The Royal Bank of Scotland issues are debated in this forum. There are many other banks that are owned by the RBOS group; Natwest for instance, but these banks all have their own forums. So to clarify, if the matter is The Royal Bank of Scotland then it belongs in this forum. If it's Halifax, Natwest or any of the other banks owned by the RBOS GROUP, their discussions belong in the forums set up for those particular banks, as some of their individual policies may differ from the RBOS.

 

Hope this clears things up.

 

-=Vixy=-

Link to post
Share on other sites

it is identical, even the same garry r d kettle. furthermore they say "seven days"... breaching the banking code. i never spotted that before, another zone of attack.

 

btw mods - shouldnt BOS and halifax be one forum?

 

Just to clear this one point up - The Royal Bank of Scotland issues are debated in this forum. There are many other banks that are owned by the RBOS group; Natwest for instance, but these banks all have their own forums. So to clarify, if the matter is The Royal Bank of Scotland then it belongs in this forum. If it's Halifax, Natwest or any of the other banks owned by the RBOS GROUP, their discussions belong in the forums set up for those particular banks, as some of their individual policies may differ from the RBOS.

 

Hope this clears things up.

 

-=Vixy=-

 

I'm afraid it doesn't clear things up at all. The Royal Bank of Scotland and the Bank of Scotland are two completely seperate entities. If this forum is for RBoS, where do we discuss BoS? For that matter, what about the Clydesdale Bank?

 

Given the jurisdictional issues, I'd suggest a Scottish Banks forum. Also given that BoS specifically market their accounts to Scotland and Halifax accounts to the rest of the UK, I'd suggest that makes the most sense.

 

Know thy enemy!

 

John

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure the admin team will read your comments and create some more forums. When we initially set up, we set up forums for English banks because those were the ones we knew the identity of best - Having seen how we've grown in such a short time, it's oviously an oversight we need to correct.

 

If anybody living in Scotland can give us a more definitive list of Scottish banks, and who owns who up there, we can set up more forums to cope as it would appear that Scottish banks are as bad as English ones when it comes to the matters this group discusses.

 

Thanks in advance for your help, and for bringing it to our attention :)

 

-=Vixy=-

Link to post
Share on other sites

The BoS and the RBS were put here together because of jurisdictional issues when the acounts are based in Scottish branches of these banks.

I'm getting to see that it is more complicated than this because there are other Scottish banks - which could go into Other Institutions but on the other hand it seems very reasonable to have a Scottish Banks forums. However, what happens where customers of those Scottish Banks open their accounts in English/Welsh branches and so come under E/W jusrisdiction. There is no problem about creating a new forum. I would rather rename the existing one and not increase the forums but I'd like a bit of advice on this, please.

 

And if anyone starts talking about yet other jurisdictions, then all I can say is that I feel a banning coming on! :evil:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
Below is the text of a standard unauthorised OD letter issued by the Bank of Scotland. Note that they claim the first charge of £30 (I think it's £39 now) is to "cover our costs" but the additional £28 charge is not itemised.

 

Is this the same text as used by Halifax?

 

John

 

**

 

Dear

 

Your overdraft limit: £000.00

 

We have paid the item(s) shown below even though this means your account is now overdrawn by more than your overdraft limit.

 

To cover our costs, we make a charge of £30 (maximum 1 charge per day) for any item we pay when your account is overdrawn in excess of any agreed limit.

Fishing through old statements etc I have 2 of these letters; one from 16th Feb 05 and the other from 20th July 05. The first is exactly as the one above; the 2nd says maximum 3 charges per day. WTF? How can their daily costs change from £30 to £90?

 

John, can you confirm the date of the letter you have copied the text from? I'm interested to see if I can prove that they increase the number of charges they hit you with as a punitive measure. If your letter is dated after 20th July I'd suggest the letters I have are evidence. I'll certainly be asking about this in my letter to my branch. (see my own thread)

Link to post
Share on other sites

This particular letter was dated June 20th.

 

I have reviewed the letters I have on my internet banking archive and can confirm that you are correct. They increased the daily charges from a maximum of 1 to a maximum of 3 around the begining of July 2005.

 

HTH

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 12 years later...

This topic was closed on 03/05/19.

If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support their.

If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened.

- Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1850 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...