I suppose it would not hurt to be specific, but I thought that the SAR would be more along the lines of 'show me all that you have'. Sometimes little gems are thrown up in the content. What I am really asking - I need to be 100% clear on what gives them a right to report to credit agency even while the amount is disputed. I guess the right to report will be in the agreement. I know for a fact that this agreement was done via telephone via an agent for T-Mobile, so I doubt that they have the signed paperwork. I can't use the Consumer Credit act - its not credit. Is there any similar law covering telecoms contracts?

I am hoping that we don't have to get all legal about it. I am hoping that through rational and reasonable discussion we can resolve this matter to satisfaction of both sides. The way things stand, both T-Mobile and I are losing out - T-Mobile have lost a customer, I will and actively do let my friends know about the shoddy mess...the old analogy where losing 1 customer costs you 100 potentials, because each 10 tell another ten. It holds true. Reputation Damage is very bad for any company. TMobile lose out because they could be getting some payment, rather than none. I lose out because they're reporting it on my credit file - to nobody's benefit. My strategy for the moment is work through the complaints procedure and then if we are no further forward after that, I will send them a Data Subject Access request - they have to honour it. Maybe just maybe, there will be an entry in there that shows my request ... If that doesn't transpire, my contention would stand. If there is nothing contrary to that contention either ... then I think that if it does go legal, the judge would likely weigh up both arguments in the absence of proof either way. My intent to pay would swing it, I feel. Too early to say at the moment. I have a couple of weeks to see what happens.

I asked that the first time I got the statement .. no joy Yes lame, what is the point of that - the t&c's didn't arrive until after I got home

Well ... apart from asking them what rates the tariff carries and does it defintively cover Turkey what else could I have done? I bet they won't have proof that they didn't. It's the only default on my record. I got declined for even the most basic of credit cards yesterday, seriously going to lessen my wedding celebration plans. Has to be that there is nothing else negative on there, so it will be deep breath and count to ten when dealing with them.

I will do that right away, and wait and see. In my requirements for resolution I will say that I would like the bill reduced to the level I agreed originally, subject to their current european tarriff. I will say that I want copies of the last statement so that I can verify that the call times x tarriff is OK. I will ask for time to pay that amount. I will say until such time that the complaint is in resolved please stop reporting this as a default on my credit file, or we go to law. Fair?

Hi All, I have a tricky situation. The background of it is like this. I have had some debt troubles in the past and thankfully these are mostly over now. There was one very problematic Default /CCJ from Cabot - but with the magnificent help of this site's members I managed to 'persuade' them that they were in the wrong. Now gone from my credit file. I have one other bad thing in my record and as it is fairly recent. I need a bit of advice to handle that one. OK so lets start at the begining. Year before last, I went out to Turkey to help my elderly mum move her appartment. As the old landline phone there was disconnected as part of the move, and the new one cannot be connected until you sign the lease paperwork, Mum was phoneless. I had a brain wave. I decided to call T-Mobile and have them activate Roaming. This was done. I specifically asked the operator to put me on a tarriff for Turkey. He even quoted me 'per minute rates to the uk' and 'per minute rate for internal calls'. As I recall, these were not too steep, so I agreed to that and told him to proceed. I used my phone quite a lot to sort stuff out, and to call home to my fiance. I thought nothing of it as I believd that I was on a reasonable tarriff. Lo and behold, the next statement from T-Mobile was £1138 for the previous month. I went straight on the phone to customer services. They said yes, they could see roaming had been added the month prior, and that there were many expensive 'foreign' calls, hence the size of the bill. I said, yes, I see that too and I confirmed that I had asked for that roaming to be applied, but it seemed that the tarriff hadn't been applied. I quoted back to them the rates that I had been given. The operator then informed me that these rates were the european tarriff. Turkey is not in Europe. I then said that I had specifically asked for a tarriff covering Turkey (because - you know - that's where I was at the time, and stuff ). The operator then said that must have been a mistake when setting it up. OK Then I said, what would be the rate for Turkey - could the bill be ammended to that rate for the calls that I had made, I would pay that instead. Deathly quiet, then after some moments a response; "No that wouldn't be possible." I asked why not - I want to pay for what I have used. Deathly quiet again, then the response - "T-Mobile do not have a roaming tarriff covering Turkey." The bill stands at flat rate. I said I refuse to pay that because I was informed that the pricing was different. I seem to recall that she said - 'the new tarriff would have been sent to your home address - it is binding on your contract'. Or somthing to that effect. (Handy that, considering err , I wasn't there, until I came back, after making the calls ). I asked how it could be a binding contract, if I hadn't had sight of the terms? Her answer was 'it is binding because I used the service, and that forms a legal acceptance of the terms of said contract' . I said that I would not have used the service if I had been accurately told the terms, which had not taken place, becuase there had been an error. As a gesture of goodwill could I pay the equivalent european tarriff, as in the one quoted to me at the time. I thought thats what I was going to have to pay (because they TOLD me thats what it would cost.) I think that was fair and just. Deathly quiet, then after some moments - No that wouldn't be possible, you used service in Turkey, so you have to pay for that service. I instructed them to terminate the 'service' immediately and flag this as a disputed account. They did terminate the services, but I feel thats more likely because I stopped the direct debit for the monthly bill. Time passed. No contact, no letters, nothing. But this account is still showing on my credit rating as a default. I don't think that is fair - their mistake, leading me to make an ill-informed choice regarding its usage. I recently got declined for a credit application - I don't often seek credit, prompting me to again look at the old credit reference report. I suspect because of this, as it is the only default remaining. Pleease Please aadvise me as to what is the best approach to get this removed / settled / sorted. I have the full intent to pay for what I agreed to orginally, but nothing more. I feel my life should not be blighted by an ill-informed choice I made based on inaccurate information pertaining to a service. Surely I can't be expected to pay such an extortionate amount for less than 2 weeks of mobile service? At least , don't report that amount as a default - it is in dispute.

Ok so if it is not to be a full and final settlement - what other type is there? I'm thinking of being cheeky and asking that we reduce the balance to one pound. Would that work? From what I understand having a balance on the account keeps the account in dispute and the contract in action. Would you help me to draft a letter to Wescot to be something along those lines. This is new territory, so all guidance is welcome...... Once this is sorted, I know that I will have to step up to the plate and get more active on here ... that is not a problem for me - i will make it a personal commitment.

I think that you have maybe misunderstood Sarah's comments a little. Nowhere in post 9 does she say that we must not settle - she merely indicates that Wesot can be stopped in their tracks. We will be taking this to it's full extent, but I would like to go by the book on this. 'The book' i'm talking about is the Banking Code, which is the standard that the FOS will apply when making their determination of HBOS' conduct.

That cannot be the position I'm afraid as we are aware that the loan has not yet come to term. We estimate that there are 18 payments left to go.

Sorry, I don't agree. I would refer you to both the Banking Code and the FOS Guidelines. Thus: If FOS determines that HBOS have acted improperly they will come down on them 'like a ton of bricks' (I quote my solicitor there) - The guidance from FOS is always to settle the debt and reclaim according to your statutory rights afterward. The banking code is aligned to that guidance. For the record, I don't think that mom can take much more of the worry - hence making the settlement will releive that burden. She worries that we may not win the case and couldn't take that. I know that we are in a strong position, but understand that it is extremely difficult to be positive when you are frightened. So that's the current thinking.

OK, My Mum,Her partner and myself all think that the best way forward for this would be to settle at the figure we have been given, and then press our rights as has been discussed previously. We have a slight concern that because we have also instructed a solicitor to enquire as to the true standing of the account. I hope that HBOS have the sense not to ignore an officer of the law. Our solicitor drafted a strong letter to HBOS. Now we wait for the results, but We feel that HBOS will now realise the seriousness of this matter and that it is not going to go away, and respond accordingly, and hopefully reasonably quickly. What do the forum feel? I say that no matter what our solictor does, our statutory rights can still be enforced. Anyone have any advice?

Well Sarah, As a scotsman I would use a claymore rather than a gun !!!!

Apologies for the nonsense, it has been removed for clarity. Had a brain wave - anyone point me in the direction of the rules surrounding the communication of the default?

Guys, This is far far worse than first thought. The balance is now £5298.xx I'm in way over my head, but I can swim real good - UPDATE The debt has NOT been assigned to Wescot, they are merely acting on behalf of HBOS. We have even been told by the Manager of the branch where the original loan was taken out

agreed. in 1974 the ratio of wealth to populous was 7:84. Let me explain that 7% of the populous owned 84% of the wealth. Who here thinks that the situation has improved?