Jump to content

Giveitback

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    222
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About Giveitback

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. DTR, like you, I couldn't have gone to uni without the loan, and I agree, it's really hard for people to maintain an account. By "people", I mean the SLC. I'll happily pay back the loan when it is due, but at the moment, it's not. Strangely though SLC are really good at losing documents that I send to themm, ignoring letters and generally breaching their contractula obligations. Since I started sending everything recorded mail, less letters have gone missing, but before I did, I was assured that "since every letter is scanned on arrival, there's absolutely no chance that my letter ever arrived". I could understand if this happened on one occassion, but it seems more like a monthly occurrence. During one harrassing call, I was told a letter hadn't arrived. I replied that I knew it had, and could even detail the date, time and who signed for it. I was greeted by silence then a mutter that there might have been a mistake. (No admission though that a mistake might have been made on another occasion) Sure, there may be some people on here who are looking for a loophole, but I'm certain there are more who have had to deal with a company that really has no idea what it is doing.
  2. excellent news!! I think I might have to do something similar. I'm back being chased by SLC again - it seems to go round in a cycle and has done for over 3 years. Interesting change of tack you've done there - might have do something similar, although I don't get calls, because I've made sure they don't get my number.
  3. has anyone managed to collect a host of leaflets over the years from banks explaining their charges?
  4. I believe Inverness sheriff court is not granting sists.
  5. thanks everyone - back to reading and readng and reading again
  6. This is the part that bothers me though... Intriguingly, the OFT revealed that it actually agrees with part of the banks' arguments. They claim that their charges are not penalties, but are fees for a service - for running a current account while it is in the red. "In most instances we would probably agree with the banks' arguments that these are not penalties as defined in common law," said Mr Elithorne. But he insisted that the OFT Still believes the charges are unfair - even if they are "fees for a service".
  7. Thanks, been away a while and haven't made it through everything
  8. Now obviously, most of us have been/ are trying reclaiming, and hopefully not incurring any more charges, but could we turn the stays against them? This just came to me tonight. If we automatically can't reclaim, couldn't we argue that they automatically can't charge right now? haven't thought it thru further, but it's an idea?
  9. i had to call in the sherriffs officers for Hbos, worked though. They went in, spoke loudly, and walked out with a bank draft, plus costs.
  10. My guess - they're not that bothered, but if you take photos of it, and argue your point, you might find they admit you're right
  11. Hi I got a letter through the other day which had some T&C changes in it. Tucked away at the end was something indicating that they might start taking the charge from any bank account you have - regardless of which incurred the charge. Time to start tracking multiple statements? I'll try to bring the T&Cs with me tomorrow so I can put the details here.
  12. thanks mpul. Any idea what the gross monthly income level is currently? ie the amount below which you are entitled to defer?
  13. rang them, they said that they couldn't send me one as my account is in arrears, I need to speck to smith lawson. Smith lawson said I need to speak to someone else, and on it goes. Suspect I'll have to find an alternative route.
  14. does anyone have any blank deferment forms handy?
  15. erm, perhaps see what the NUS say then.. I'm not sure they're right
×
×
  • Create New...