Thanks freakyleaky. My main question is what does my son need to say at the hearing. Does he just read out the skeleton argument or should he have some other speech which is shorter and covers the main points?

Which announcement? I have been looking at lots of forums and haven't spotted an announcement.

Is there anyone out there? I don't seem to get any responses to my posts. My son's appeal against a stay has a hearing at the local court on 23rd October. Does he just read out the statement that was attached to the appeal? Should he be preparing something shorter and less generic? Does he need to bring copies of the European Convention on Human Rights and the Civil Procedure rules for the judge and the defendants? Please, please could someone help we don't even know what happens when he goes to court.

I agree with Dougal16T about the class action and asked about this in another thread some time ago (sorry can't remember which one ). In the letter to crfx250 from the FSA they mention "a public document (agreement of 25 July 2007 between the OFT, the FSA and the litigant banks and building society)" where can one see this document? It is the first time that I have heard that the FSA were involved in the agreement between the banks/building society and the OFT. Why do they get to "agree" between them without consulting consumers?

Could you please PM me the letter from the OFT? Also do you know which EC directive they are referring to and where I could get a copy.

Do the OFT guidelines Section 2.8k cover businesses? Is there a link to the guidelines somewhere?

Don't know if this the right place to ask but anyway. If a bank annually increases an overdraft limit without informing the account holder, other than by printing it on their statement after the fact, are they in breach of the CCA?

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/nationwide/112997-macca-nationwide.html Sent an application for removal of stay on 10th September and have today received a Notice of Transfer of Proceedings. They have transferred the case to Colchester (just as far from me as Northampton!) I called Colchester and they said that it was a common mistake as there was a town with the same name as my home town but that they would automatically transfer it to my local court. It also had two Orders from Northampton County Court. ORDER 1 It is ordered that: 1) The Claimant's letter stands as an application for leave to lift the stay 2) No fee payable 3) Transfer to Claimant's home County Court Note: Any party affected by this Order may under Rule 3.3 (5) apply to have it set aside, varied or stayed. Such a party must apply under Rule 23.2 within 14 days of service of this order. ORDER 2 It is ordered that: 1. The filing of an allocation questionnaire be dispensed with in this case unless the District Judge at the court of transfer orders otherwise. ** Note: Any party affected by this Order may under Rule 3.3 (5) apply to have it set aside, varied or stayed. Such a party must apply under Rule 23.2 within 14 days of service of this order. ** Please note that an allocation fee may be payable in this instance. Please contact the court of transfer for further details. What happens next?

I rang the court before sending off the application for removal of stay and they said that I didn't have to pay as the judge had given leave to appeal in the document notifying us of the stay.

Had the same letter from Nationwide on 7th August followed by a letter from the court dated 29th August. Have sent off application to remove a stay. see: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/nationwide/112997-macca-nationwide.html

I have never had to do a personal statement to creditors - is there somewhere he can get help to do this?

My son has tried to get his credit report from both Equifax and Experian. Experian - filled in the form and got as far as trying to confirm address when told that couldn't go any further, please call a number. Called the number and told them that he didn't want to continue the service beyond the 30 days so please cancel his card. Haven't had the free report from them yet (6 days so far). Equifax - started filling in form but couldn't progress as site kept insisting that his surname wasn't "valid". We have a two word surname without a hyphen which seems perfectly OK on birth certificate, electoral roll, passport, building society account, etc. A bit of a Catch 22 as he can't register to request a report and both phone help and email require you to register - looks like snail mail is the only route!!

Called the court to ask how to apply to have the stay removed and was told to fill in N244 and append a statement as to why we were appealing - payment not necessary as Judge had given leave to apply. Sent off the forms (statement as found on http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/17065-application-removal-stay-updated.html) and form on 09/09/07 by fax and registered post and have received no response as yet. In the meantime my son has tried to open a Student Account with a bank and has been refused as well as being advised not to try and open one elsewhere as it will show on his credit report each time. Not much hair left now - tearing it out in chunks:mad:

Could someone tell me if my son can claim hardship. He is about to start university and has already been granted a bursary by the university as a result of our low income. He should also be receiving a full loan and a maintenance grant but we haven't had this confirmed as yet. He has been trying to claim £374 from the Nationwide (http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/nationwide/112997-macca-nationwide.html) but has had his action stayed. He was given leave to appeal the stay which he did on 9th September but didn't mention hardship and hasn't heard back from the court. He has researched all the student accounts and come up with a few that look OK so applied to one of them to open an account and they refused him. They said it was to do with his credit rating but there is no record of them having looked at his credit report. They also advised him not to apply elsewhere as it would leave a marker on his credit report each time he did. At this point in time he is so fed up that all he wants is his default notice removed so that he can at least open another account. Nationwide have also continued to charge him so now the amount is up to £490 including costs and interest. Does receiving a maintenance grant for university count as benefit?

I filled in a complaint against the Nationwide Building Society on the FSA website and got a waffle response from them. The link is: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/114177-fsa-waiver-preventing-claims.html I am not very conversant with the law - but isn't there something called a "Class Action" where a group of people get together and take a company to court? Or is that in the States?

I have had a response to my complaint about the Nationwide Building Society made through the FSA. This is what they say: Your attention is drawn to the warning notice at the end of this message. Dear casiemcdw Thank you for completing our online complaints form on 14 September 2007. You have complained about the FSA's decision in principle to grant firms, who apply for it, a waiver from the time limits contained in the FSA's complaints-handling rules in relation to unauthorised overdraft charges. We explain the reasons for the FSA making this decision in some detail below. Your complaint We are unable to investigate your complaint under our formal complaints scheme. This is because the legislation under which we operate does not require us to investigate complaints about how the FSA carries out its function of granting waivers of rules to individual firms. If you are dissatisfied with our decision not to investigate your complaint, you can refer it to the Complaints Commissioner, who may decide to carry out his own investigation. To contact him, please write to: Office of the Complaints Commissioner 8th Floor, City Tower 40 Basinghall Street London EC2V 5DE Telephone: 020 7562 5530 Email: [email protected] You should refer your complaint to the Complaints Commissioner within three months of the date of this email, although a referral outside of this three month time limit may, where there are adequate reasons for the delay, still be considered by the Complaints Commissioner. FSA's reasons for granting this waiver Although we are unable to investigate your letter formally as a complaint under the complaints scheme, we would like to set out some background to the FSA's decision to waive temporarily FSA rules requiring firms to handle customer complaints within particular deadlines. The FSA made this decision in the best interests of all consumers so that all consumer complaints could be dealt with in a fair and consistent way going forward. Background For some time some customers of banks and building societies have been complaining about the charges they have paid for going into unauthorised overdrafts. Some institutions have settled with their customers, without admitting liability, and a large number of further complaints are in the pipeline. However, the law in this area is not clear and the current situation provides neither certainty nor consistency for consumers or current account providers. In these circumstances the Office of Fair Trading and some firms have decided to initiate a test case in the High Court to resolve legal uncertainties on the level, fairness and lawfulness of these charges. In order to facilitate this process the FSA has issued a waiver of its complaints-handling rules as they apply to complaints about unauthorised overdraft charges. Current system of dealing with complaints The FSA has also monitored how banks and building societies have been handling complaints about unauthorised overdraft charges. Its aim was to find out whether firms were treating these complaints promptly, fairly and consistently, as required by FSA complaints-handling rules. The FSA saw significant shortcomings in some firms' handling of complaints about unauthorised overdraft charges, which is leading to inconsistent outcomes for complainants. The FSA is clear that the way in which complaints have been handled in the recent past - against a background of uncertainty about what the legal position is on these charges - is unsatisfactory and not in the interest of all consumers. When the legal position on these charges has been clarified, firms will be required to deal with complaints within the normal timetable in a fair and consistent way. In the meantime, the FSA is requiring firms to acknowledge any further complaints they receive on this issue within five days, to keep records of such complaints, and to be prepared to deal with them once the FSA lifts the waiver. To protect consumers' interests while the test case proceeds, the waiver contains a number of conditions that firms must adhere to. The FSA will review the waiver at the end of September to ensure, among other things, that firms are complying with its conditions. The FSA can revoke the waiver at any time if it considers that it is no longer appropriate because, for example, the test case is not progressing or if a delay in the resolution of the test case is likely to cause undue risk to consumers. Special treatment of cases of financial hardship In making the decision on the waiver, the FSA has particularly considered consumers facing financial difficulty. High street banks and building societies subscribe to the Banking Code that covers how firms deal with cases of financial difficulty; the Ombudsmen also considers the Code when making its decisions. The waiver does not apply to complaints about the way that banks and building societies have dealt with financial difficulty. The waiver requires firms to identify such complaints and to progress them throughout the waiver period. If these complaints cannot be resolved, the Ombudsman will be able to consider them. Time-barring The FSA has also imposed a condition in the waiver to preserve consumers' rights so as to prevent complaints becoming time-barred. This means that the clock stopped when the waiver was granted and will start again when the test case is resolved or when the waiver is removed. So, for example, if a consumer was applying to reclaim charges for the last six years and the test case took one year, that year would not count. Similarly, the waiver will not cause you to become time-barred from taking your complaint to the Ombudsman. For customers wishing to bring a complaint to the Scottish courts, the position is slightly different, and the frequently asked questions on our website explain this more fully. I hope that this is helpful. If you would like more information, you can find answers to frequently asked questions on unauthorised overdraft charges on our website at http://www.moneymadeclear.fsa.gov.uk We hope that this is helpful. Yours sincerely Daniel Lewsey Complaints Handler Company Secretariat I particularly like the Statement that: The FSA made this decision in the best interests of all consumers.... How is it in the best interests of all consumers when people in dire financial difficulties are going to have to wait, possibly for years, before they can have their claims settled?

I don't know if this is where to let you know about an email sent to my MP (who doesn't appear on the list) but here goes anyway Email sent: 07/09/07 to Mark Oaten, Liberal MP for Winchester through http://www.writetothem.com No response yet.

Not only can you can complain ABOUT the FSA you can also complain THROUGH the FSA about your bank's behaviour. Making a complaint : FSA Money made clear guides Innundate them with complaints and they will have to act. I have done this as well as writing to my MP. The more we get out there the more likely we will get a result.

Having looked through the documentation again prior to applying for a removal of stay I noticed that the defence listed on the Defence and Counterclaim form signed on the 22nd August was: "We intend to defend this claim and will file a full defence within 28 days of the stay of proceedings expiring." What I found interesting was that the letter from the Court had a date for the order of stay of 29th August. Why was the Nationwide be so sure that the court would issue a stay a week before they did in order for it to become part of their defence statement? Is it legal if the stay hadn't actually been put in place at the time?

I am trying to help my 19 year old son reclaim nearly £400 from Nationwide. He originally wrote to them on 27th May 2007 and got the usual "You knew the charges when you signed up..." malarky (actually he was only 16 then - not sure if that counts as he was under age!). Wrote again on 9th July giving 14 days to respond. Got no response so did a MCOL claim on 3rd August. Received a letter 7th August from Nationwide saying that they were applying for a stay of action. He received a letter from Northampton County Court saying: Without hearing it is ordered that: 1) Following the filing of a defence or holding defence the claim shall be stayed pending the judgement in the Office Fair Trading Test. 2) Liberty to apply with an explanation. Note: Any party affected by this Order may under Rule 3.3 (5) apply to have it set aside, varied or stayed. Such a party must apply under Rule 23.2 within 14 days of service of this order. Order dated 29/08/07 Having read loads of stuff on the forum I now realise that the MCOL PoC was inadequate as it didn't include his Account number and also there wasn't enough room to put in all the interest charges as well. In view of the fact that the Nationwide are continuing to charge him penalities and interest, should he apply to amend his claim and add the extra money as well as including his account number? If so, what sort of wording should be used to do this? He would also like to apply to have the stay removed. I assume that we can append the wording from this forum to the N244 asking to amend the claim? It is particularly important to him that this is sorted quickly as he is about to start University and wants to apply for a Student Account but is concerned that his problems with the Nationwide will affect his credit rating and therefore reduce his overdraft allowance.