apologies for lack of formatting

for info - FSA press release FSA/PN/073/2008 21 July 2008 The Financial Services Authority (FSA) today issued a new waiver from its complaints handling rules regarding unauthorised overdraft charges. The waiver replaces an existing one, which expires on 26 July 2008, and has been offered to those firms who signed up to the previous waiver. This represents approximately 98% of the market. Signatories will not be required to handle complaints relating to unauthorised overdraft charges within the time limits set out in the Dispute Resolution manual. The key points of the waiver include: * A duration of six months and a review early in 2009; * Continuation of the FSA’s consumer protection measures including record keeping requirements and a suspension of the limitation period for making a complaint; * Additional guidance on the identification of those complainants in financial difficulty; * Enhanced monitoring of firms focussing on consumers’ experience whilst the waiver is in place. Dan Waters, Director, Retail Policy, said: "The FSA continues to work closely with the OFT and banks in reaching a resolution on the fairness of unauthorised overdraft charges. Our objectives continue to be certainty over this complex issue, and a fair and consistent resolution of consumer complaints about unauthorised overdraft charges. The FSA has reviewed the prevailing circumstances and has decided to offer firms a new waiver. The waiver will be for six months, when we expect to have a decision from the Court of Appeal." The FSA can revoke the waiver at any time if it considers a waiver is no longer appropriate, for example, if it no longer provides adequate consumer protection, or material progress is not being made in the test case, or a firm fails to comply with the conditions set out in the waiver. The FSA first granted a waiver for 12 months from its complaints handling rules regarding unauthorised overdraft charges in July 2007. The waiver means that while it is in operation, any bank or building society granted the waiver will not be required to handle this type of complaint within the time limits set out in the FSA rules. The county courts have 'stayed' cases referred to them and the Financial Ombudsman Service has adopted a similar approach. Notes for editors 1. The waivers are available on the FSA website. 2. The FSA regulates the financial services industry and has four objectives under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000: maintaining market confidence; promoting public understanding of the financial system; securing the appropriate degree of protection for consumers; and fighting financial crime. 3. The FSA aims to promote efficient, orderly and fair markets, help retail consumers achieve a fair deal and improve its business capability and effectiveness.

The consumer groups main ones consulted will be Which and CAB etc. All stakeholders, which includes CAG and other consumer type forums and groups, have an opportunity to respond in the consultation document.

Hi Northstar Do your parents have the original paperwork from the court claim which led to the charging order ? You should be able to apply for a set aside if you believe there are charges on the account which are unfair, and if you believe the correct procedures werent followed....did you parents receive the N1 etc etc. The interim charging order will be changed into a final charging order at a hearing, so you will be able to make representations at that hearing. Do you know the terms of the original judgement - was it a forthwith or installment order with permission to seek charging order ? If you can type it up along with the POC off the original claim that would be of help. Do your parents have equity in their home. The charging order will just sit on their property as a second charge until they sell it. Depending what HFO agree that will either be it or they should negotiate payments with HFO to reduce it on a monthly basis. If you can negotiate with HFO for a reduced settlement prior to them applying for final charging order that could be a good idea, but I would still consider looking at reasons for a set aside. Mops xx

I believe that is all that is being asked for.

I agree smasher, when there are not many regualr active users on a site it can be difficult to get the advice and help you need especially for more complex claims and problems...and thats where you would refer them to elsewhere to obtain the right level of assistance. I dont think a think tank is a great idea either although some communication between admins might be sensible in however casual a form. I have seen many people asking advice across different forums, and most likely and hopefully, they are reading up elsewhere for further information and ideas. They either take a general view from all that of what to do, or they settle on one site to get more in depth advice in one place. The only difficulty with having such a large site is it is difficult to get more one on one tailored advice, and sometimes people can post in a few places on the site for the same problem and get overlooked, especially with urgent complex problems. unless you keep bumping your posts up you can get lost in the masses of posts. Some people do prefer a smaller community for their advice, and while the better resources may be elsewhere, they should be enabled to reach those resources easily and without problem. Like wise the members of a larger forum should be enabled to visit else where if there are better resources and more tailored advice elsewhere. Also some of the smaller sites are able to concentrate on specific issues better than the larger sites, as they have more time and generally a more restricted range of topics and issues to concentrate on. It would be better if information arising from this work is enabled to be shared with the members of other sites and forums, and would allow it to benefit a lot more users. I can think of specific instances but I won't share them in deference to YBs point about mudslinging and I have no intention of going down that route when we do appear to be making at least a little progress.

I agree with you, and i do feel that good and ready is finally getting closer. It is sad that it has taken the possible demise of one very good smaller site to bring this subject up and enable it to be discussed properly, hopefully we can all learn from it.

Most of the other sites are working together quite happily, it is indeed only CAG that refuses to work with a couple of the smaller sites.There may be issues behind this we ae unaware of. The issue, IMO, is not the smaller sites missing out on CAG, although it holds a wealth of information that has been built up and developed over the past couple of years by thousands of members many past many present, in my opinion it is CAG denying its members something by refusing to work with the smaller sites. I think communication is more the key than think tanks tbh. I think it is the members that make the sites and its the members should be sharing info and being able to share info. While it might be useful for admins to have some kind of open discussion vehicle I doubt it would be used very much. I dont think any of the other sites have issues with users from any other sites using their sites, posting, joining in - so long as there is no malice. I know most of them treat all their members in the same manner moderation wise be they admin from another site, a member of multiple sites, or a newbie to sites altogether. Links to where the best information is should be allowed and if its felt people may be better advised by another person or site that is able to specialise in a particular area, then they are told that....the idea of all our sites is to help people and empower them to help themselves. The sites communicating properly and openly is a big part of that in my opinion. Theres no competition, theres an awful lot of people need help, and there will be a awful lot more in coming months especially on the debt front. They need to access the best help and support as quickly and easily as possible. The sites are individual and each has its own characteristics and that shouldnt change at all. Simply recognise that there are a lot of very good people out there who can be utilised for the better of all the members on all the sites.

I don;t think unification is particulary necessary, maybe an area for admins / teams of site to discuss ideas and strategy, and share important case developments etc which need to be wider than the individual sites may be beneficial.

Well as the other sites do already - post on one anothers sites with new info and ideas and help each other out, recommend users to each others sites for specific specialities etc. It doesnt need a great deal of organisation just an agreement between the sites to work together but retain their individual identities entirely.

Indeed most of the smaller sites, along with PC and MSE have pretty good working relationships and share information regularly. CAG would be a good addition and enable information to be shared a lot more widely.

Okay honey I really think we need to go through this carefully from the beginning and look at the other debts and exactly what you have going on. We need to work out an amount to offer NATWEST that you can keep up with. Also need details on the other secured loan you have. And whats available on your mortgage etc. Two mins.

Not really - well you could but wouldnt you rather be in control of the situation from the start rather than waiting to see what happens ? I'll help u with a letter if you have a go first. The CO won't affect your current mortgage payment no, but as with any CCJ/second charge moving to fixed rates etc in the future may be difficult. Do you have other debts need sorting out too or is this the only thing ? What was the redetermination amount you offered ?

Charging order is nothing to be scared off - they just use it as securing the debt incase you stop paying again in future. I don't know your personal situation either, but courts don't like ordering sale orders for secondary debts....so keeping in touch with Natwest is your best bet. IMO.

Hi Honey Well done for going through the redetermination and attending the hearing and sorry it didn't work out the way you wanted. How much is the forthwith judgement for? When you received the first judgement with the installment order of £550 did you make any payments or go straight for redetermination ? I don't think you need to do a N245 at all - indeed you have already done that,so what you need to do is negotiate with NatWest. Accept the charging order and offer them monthly installments at the amount you were trying for redetermination on. Write to Natwest stating your situation, tell them about the hearing and include your budget sheets. They will have to apply for a final charging order - I don't know if they have an interim one while the case was in the courts ? So when they do that you can go along to the final charging order hearing and put forward your case why installments are more suitable you don't want to lose your home, negative equity with the CO etc. so what I would do it write to Natwest saying Invite you to apply for charging order as security and will pay you £200 (or whatever) a month, heres my IE and circumstances I will increase this if things improve and go from there. Does that help? The Charging order will just sit there for years, yes judgement will most likely be added as it will be allowed for in the original judgement from the loan contract. We can have a look at that later on but write to Natwest first.