Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by dax

  1. It is Midge, ive seen it before, but I still intend to write to FISA and point out all the conduct they dont conduct as what as what they really do..
  2. Well done Midge..every bit helps. we have the B word in common with eachother, after all..
  3. Hi Midge Have a look at the thread chrisking wrote also, the Blemain debate has opened up again there. I will call in the others to give updates too as you can see my oriogional thread was buried in the latter ones and feedback somewhat stopped. I had no more to add as im still trying to find a wizard to work out, how they work things out, Blemain style!
  4. this might help chris also from an oldpost of mine: found this already on the forum ...... If your secured loan is governed by CCA 1974 then s.95 (1) entitles you to a rebate of charges to credit. http://www.passprotect.studio400/ .me.uk/Consumer_Credit_Act_1974. PDF The Consumer Credit (settlement Information) Regulations 1983 requires the creditor to give a statement of amount required to pay off the loan and how this was calculated. The Consumer Credit (Early Settlement) Regulations 2004 (see link below) regulates the calculations and these cannot be contracted out of to the detriment of the consumer (s.173(1) CCA). So an ERC would be classed contracting out of the Regulations to the detriment of the consumer. These Regulations only apply to loan agreements taken out since 31st May 2005: The Consumer Credit (Early Settlement) Regulations 2004 If your loan was pre May 2005 the Consumer Credit (Rebate on Early Settlement) Regulations 1983 apply which contain the rule 78 which provides that creditors can charge upto six months interest on redemption. Anything over the 6 months interest would be regarded as a penalty and unenforceable.. However..Blemain Finance gave the Office Of Fair trading assurance in November 1997 that it would no longer use the rule of 78 when redeeming.
  5. I'm sooo drained by Blemain, and like you I feel I need legal advise before tackling them in a Court as they are used to loopholes in the law and clearly have no concern for their customers.
  6. This is the FSA report findings about Blemain: Financial Services Authority S Skip navigation 1 Home page 3 Site map 4 Search 6 Help 7 Complaints procedure 8 Terms and conditions 9 Contact us 0 Access key details My briefcase (0) | A-Z index | Accessibility Search Impartial information from the F S A, the UK’s financial watchdog No selling. No jargon. Just the facts. Home Guides Products explained Useful tools News About the FSA Help You are here > News > Unfair contracts > Mortgages – Repayment mortgage Unfair contracts Firm news Product news Unfair contracts Scams and swindles Stay safe Mortgages – Repayment mortgage Blemain Finance Ltd A term in Blemain's repayment mortgage contract said if a customer repaid their mortgage early, the firm would calculate the early repayment charge using a formula known as the 'Rule of 78'. Why did we think it was unfair? Because it could result in the customer paying a charge much higher than would reasonably compensate the firm for charges lost through early repayment. What has the firm done? They advised us that consumer mortgage contracts entered into since January 1998 have not contained the term. For mortgages entered into before 1998, Blemain advised us they use both the Rule of 78 and a different method to calculate the charge, with the customer paying the lower of the two. Other information Blemain provided us with documentation confirming they gave the Office of Fair Trading an informal assurance they would stop using the term in November 1997. This agreement formally adds to that assurance. They also advised us that by 31 December 2005 they had written to all non-commercial customers with contracts containing the term to tell them how they calculated settlement of those mortgages – as described above. If any of Blemain's customers still have concerns about a mortgage contract containing the term they should get in touch with the firm who will be happy to consider the matter further. Old term The Borrower may at any time repay the whole of the Principal Sum outstanding but in the event that such repayment shall take place prior to the expiration of the Repayment Period whether at the request of the Borrower or following exercise of the Lender's power of sale the Borrower shall pay the total sum of Principal and Interest calculated in accordance with the formula (known as the Rule of 78) an illustration of which is set out in the Schedule hereto. In addition the Lender shall be entitled but not required to add to the resultant figure an amount equal to six months interest or such lesser figure as may be lawfully permitted for such cases as where a variation of the Rate has been made in accordance with Clause 3 hereof and in such cases for the purposes of calculating the said figure in accordance with said formula the rate of interest shall be deemed to be the Rate as if no variation in accordance with Clause 3 hereof had been made. What next? Read more agreements from firms – see Unfair contracts. Read more about Mortgages. Read more about our work on Unfair contract terms. You may want to Add this page to briefcase Email this page Print this page Reviewed 27 April 2007; last updated 14 December 2006 Corporate home Cymraeg Privacy Terms and conditions Contact us var _rsCI="fsa"; /* client ID */ var _rsCG="0"; /* content group */ var _rsDN="//secure-uk.imrworldwide.com/"; /* data node */ var _rsCC=0; /* to turn on whether to check for existing cookie, 1=on */ _uacct = "UA-815273-1";_udn="fsa.gov.uk";urchinTracker();
  7. You see it sounds that theyve used that rule of 78 in your calculation as well as mine.
  8. How interesting that the Mirror are interested in your progress. Can we know why and how they are involved. It seems that everyone who has ever had dealings with Blemain finance, are stuck in the same dilemma of 'how did they work it out' and there are a few of us in here with that in common. I personally repaid them £6917.31 on a £5000 loan, £19665.06 on a £15000 loan and £24776.62 on a 19.000 loan, totalling £51412.99 in total repaid in one lump. Anything anyone can find out with this outfit, the better. I'm still not sure how you ended up having recourse with an insurance company, am I missing something or just dumb? I mean should we be therefore be chasing the insurance company for the answers instead of Blemain.
  9. Hi Groovy, yes it's the dreaded 'B' word I meant and i'm just sending letters off to the information commissioner (why not!) FISA and trading standards to get the ball rolling again..Though I will still be held up for weeks anyway through procedure no doubt, if they will be of any help at all. Have you seen chriskings thread about B too
  10. Hi Groovy, yes it's the dresded 'B' I meant and i'm just sending letters off to the information commissioner (why not!) FISA and trading standards to get the ball rolling again..Though I will still be held up for weeks anyway through procedure no doubt, if they will be of sny help at all. Have you seen chriskings thread about Blemain too
  11. Has anyone had any dealings with Alison at bailiff watchdog and if so, what transpired?
  12. Has anyone got the information commissioner to force comprehendable figures out of a bank/loan company or otherwise, that doesnt send the required and requested information, usually given after a SAR? If so, what did they do and what is within their powers to do to the company in question applicable. I Have been trying to deduce how loans were brought to redemption figures for months and given them to others to figure out to. No one can, which makes them miscalculated as far as I can see. Are there any accountants or mathematical wizards who would be prepared to take a look, and or offer advise?
  13. I have sent off a cop 26 but it has not yet been acknowledged. I recieved a reply to a letter I sent to the tax credits office disputing repayment of overpayments, but no referal was made to the fact that I had not appealed, opting for the cop 26 approach instead. Are these things dealt with in seperate departments which would explain the responce I recieved? Has anyone any idea also how long the procedure takes to get a reply after having submitted the COP 26?
  14. If you are not satisfied with the financial ombudsmans conclusions or feel that they have formed a biased opinion. Who can you complain to and is there a body above their head, to raise issues with?
  15. Hi Chrisking..it was inevitable that Blemain would show their face again. Ive been trying to tackle them for a year and got nowhere fast. Their calculations are un lawfull and how they behave is a disgrace. Keep us updated with how you progress, there's a few of us here wanting our money back. How much was the interest charged on your loans?
  16. Has anyone had a ticket refunded in the last six months from Barnet or Haringey council ?
  17. Hey bookworm ! Remember the estoppel scenario? The Halifax problem went to the financial ombudsman and guess what, they think the bank are in the right..I dont... rappelez-vous que je suis en France, dax........
  18. dax

    New Abbey claim

    Steve Cross wrote it...Is he someone everyone hears from?
  19. dax

    New Abbey claim

    well after sending the letter for the charges they owe, ive just got back the fob off, weve fully investigated your claim and its all kosher from our end. All charges were based on extra admin etc, dah dee dah! So they wont pay up unless they get up the court steps odviously... Id better send the next letter then. I strted this claim in November and now its April and theyve only just replied.
  20. The Financial Ombudsman are dealing with my Halifax claim too although its been there for months and theyve just written to say they are so busy, it will take many more weeks. Great result for you though and ill let you know how my complaint goes
  21. You know everybody has to start somewhere and petitions cant work unless eevrybody signs them. I'll sign, how do you do it, wheres the petition? Dax
  22. Look at the latest idea for the banks to perhaps retrieve some of the charges they have had to give back: The great credit card stings – how low can banks go? Advertisement dap("&PG=UK9PFR&AP=1089",300,250); By Naomi Caine March 07 2007 Are you using your credit card properly – or should that be profitably? After a year of bumper profits and unfair penalty charges, you could be forgiven for thinking that banks couldn’t stoop any lower. Wrong! One of our leading high street names has now sunk to even lower depths. Lloyds TSB has recently slapped some of its ‘naughtier’ customers with a “low usage fee”. They will now have to pay a penalty of £35 if they don’t regularly use their card. The bank reckons the fee will affect only about 1% of its customers, but it could still generate revenue of £1.79 million in one month alone, according to figures by Uswitch. It’s astonishing, isn’t it? Lloyds TSB recently announced profits of more than £4 billion, yet still it hits customers with sneaky charges. It’s also a bank that has bleated about bad debts, yet still it seems happy to encourage people to borrow on their credit card. Today's best deals on balance transfer credit cards Play your cards wrong Lloyds TSB is not alone in penalising customers who don’t play their cards right. MBNA has lately decided to charge customers with a Virgin card a £10 fee if they are in credit. Now is it just me, or is that tantamount to legalised theft? Nick White, director of financial services at uSwitch, says: “This will certainly open the floodgates for other credit card providers that are desperately trying to claw back the lost revenue following the OFT’s reduction of penalty charges last year. The worrying thing is, where will this end?” The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) last year ordered credit card firms to cut the penalty charges for late payment and breach of credit limits from the typical £20-£25 to a maximum of £12. Experts calculate that the OFT ruling cost the card firms about £300 million – and they have since been on a mission to recoup the lost income. Have your say about sneaky credit card charges on our message board Beware of the stealth charges The fees introduced by Lloyds TSB and MBNA are just the latest in a line of stealth charges that have crept up on customers since last summer. A number of firms, for example, have either introduced or raised their balance transfer fees. If you want to transfer a debt from one card to another, perhaps to take advantage of a cheaper rate or a 0% deal, you now typically have to pay a fee of 2.5%. The average increase in balance transfer fees since July could generate £363 million in the next year. Some lenders, including RBS and Marbles, have also abolished the cap on balance transfer fees, again boosting their income. Then there are changes to the payment systems. Many firms now allocate your monthly card payments to the cheapest debt first, so that you rack up interest at the higher rate. HSBC and its telephone subsidiary First Direct have both recently changed their systems so that customers pay off the cheapest debts first. Sainsbury’s Bank has also chopped its minimum repayment from 3% to 2.25%, so it will take you longer to pay off your debt and the bank will earn more in total interest. It’s never wise to withdraw cash on your credit card, but it’s now downright foolish. The interest rate is often extortionately high, and some lenders are piling on the pain by pushing up cash advance fees. RBS, for example, recently increased its cash advance fee from 2% to 2.5%. Capital One has also raised its fee from 2.5% to 3%. And don’t forget the fee if you use your credit card abroad. Most credit cards levy a 2.75% fee for each transaction made overseas, which means UK holidaymakers could end up paying an extra £258 million in fees this year, according to figures from the Post Office. The increase in charges has led some experts to suggest that cards will eventually charge an annual fee. Price Waterhouse Coopers in its latest report into credit cards predicts that it is “only a matter of time before annual fees on credit cards become the norm”. Raising the rates Credit card firms have not only been busy introducing stealth charges, but they have also raised the interest rates on credit cards. Barclaycard started the trend shortly after the OFT crackdown last year, followed by about 20 other card firms. Nationwide, for example, has pushed up the rate on its credit cards. Egg has also raised the rates for some customers. Recent research from uSwitch shows an average increase of 1% across interest rates for purchases between March 2006 and October from 15.2% to 16.2%. The firms certainly seem to have widened their profit margins over the last few years. In 1990, for example, the base rate was 15% and the typical interest rate on a credit card was almost 30%, so the mark up was 200%. Now, the base rate stands at 5.25% and the typical interest rate is about 15%, which means the mark up has soared to 300%. Jim Spowart, chairman of People’s Champion, says: “When you strip away the 0% deals, the interest rates for the majority of credit cards are well over 300% of the Bank of England’s base rate of 5.25%.” The OFT might have forced down penalty charges, but the banks have responded by pushing up other costs. Nick White says: “It appears that no matter what the OFT does to prevent banks ripping off their customers with “unfair” or “illegal” charges, banks will fight back by finding a way to recoup the lost revenue.” Therefore, now more than ever before, consumers should be keeping a very close eye on the small print and the correspondence they receive from their bank to make sure they are not being ripped off by underhand revenue generating tactics that simply add to the big banks’ already swollen profits. Join the debate about sneaky credit card charges on our message boards Related links Today's best rates on credit card balance transfers Today's best deals on credit cards
  23. Does it state what credit agreement it is regulated by under the consumer credit act and when did you take it out?
  24. First of all (as you sound new to the place) you need to perhaps read the whole of the above mortgage section threads to familiarise yourself with procedures, letters and pitfalls, especially with early redemption. There is I believe an Abbey address thread, either in the mortgage section or Abbey bank section containing all the appropriate contacts and including template letters to follow. Certainly your unpaid DD charges you can claim and perhaps if the mortgage account number was changed, you may need to make seperate claims, otherwise one containing all charges. Have a bit of a read over the weekend, both here and on the main pages of the forum and remember that you will be potentially entering into lots of legal jargon if you pursue something you dont quite understand, so fill yourself in first, to understand the procedures and keep us posted by posting updates so others can assist and advise.
  • Create New...