This is the one I wrote for someone, incidentally, it was a credit card and it was cleared. ALSO; It appears that they may not be able to find your signature so DO NOT SIGN WITH YOUR OUN SIGNATURE-ONLY PUT YOUR FIRST NAME ON IT. address Dear Sir or Madam, TO DEBT COLLECTOR Account number: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ACCOUNT IN DISPUTE I must admit that I am rather bemused as to why this account has been passed to yourselves, as it is in dispute with your client, LENDERand has been since March 1 2010, the date of termination of the service with them after one months notice. Not only is this a breach of OFT collection guidelines, but also in breach of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and Data Protection Act 1998 As LENDER are now in default of the OFT Collection Guidelines, and have also breached s10 Data Protection Act request , I consider this account to be in SERIOUS DISPUTE. A Consumer Credit Act 1974: Section 77/78 request has been issued against LENDER. As you are aware, my Consumer Credit Act request must be complied with within 14 days and if not complied with, LENDER will be in default and enforcement action is NOT permitted, under s127 precludes any Court from enforcing any action as this constitutes a complete defence at law. Whilst the matter is in dispute, it is an offence if YOU or LENDER or any other party put a negative entry on any Credit Reference Agency data bases. Consequentially any legal action you pursue will be averred as both UNLAWFUL and VEXATIOUS. Now I would respectfully suggest that this account is returned to the LENDER for resolution of these defaults and breaches, as LENDER or Yourselvescannot lawfully pursue any enforcement activities. If DEBT COLLECTOR Ltdchooses to ignore my dispute and attempt enforcement, I will initiate legal action and file reports with the appropriate authorities, including, but not limited to, Trading Standards, Office of Fair Trading, Information Commissioners Office, Financial Ombudsman Service and possible court action. After taking advice, I am of the opinion that any continued pursuit is in violation of the Administration of Justice Act 1970 section 40 as well as breaching a number of the OFT Collection Guidelines Also be advised that I will only communicate with you in writing. Furthermore, should it be your intention to arrange a “doorstep call”, please be advised that under OFT rules, you can only visit me at my home if you make an appointment and I have no wish to make an appointment with you. There is only an implied license under English Common Law for people to be able to visit me on my property without express permission; the postman and people asking for directions etc (Armstrong v. Sheppard and Short Ltd [1959] 2 Q.B. per Lord Evershed M.R.). Therefore take note that I revoke license under Common Law for you, or your representatives to visit me at my property and if you do so, then you will be liable to damages for a tort of trespass and action will be taken, including but not limited to, police attendance. I hope that this will not be necessary and an acceptable solution can be accomplished. I would appreciate your due diligence in this matter. I look forward to hearing from you in writing confirming you have returned all paperwork and electronic files. Yours faithfully

You should not deal with any debt collector where an account is in dispute. You have no contract with them. Is your loan from before April 6 2007. If the lender cannot provide a copy of the true agreement, or if they produce it and it is not signed by both parties (section 60/61 CCA 1974 "prescribed terms) the lender cannot pass it to a third party, enter a negative statement on a CRA data base of persue it. Section 127 precludes a court from enforcing the loan where it is not "properly executed". Send back a reply to the debt collector stating you have no contract with them, that their use of your information infringes the Data Protection Act and they should return it to the lender.

As you have a platinum plus account, the monthly charge should include travel insurance in the package, I believe? Therefore, why not claim on the insurance for your accident and consequential costs and throw it back at them. Lloyds are strenuously unco-operative, ignoring letters even when recorded, they don't like to comply with anything so you need to be ruthless from the start. The Ombudsman is a [problem] so thats no use.

You have no contract with the DCA so in matters where the alleged debt is in dispute, their client may be in contravention of the Data Protection Act 1998. Wescot are a third party in this. You may also find the card to which this alleged debt relates to is written on an application form and not a true cerdit agreement under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and it is not enforeable unless it complies with section 6o or 61. If it does not comply under section 127, a court cannot enforce the debt. After 6 years with no contact it is statute barred.

The Parliamentary Ombudsman looks at whether the FOS Ombudsman did the right thing and looks at the case as well. As far as i can remember.

We had a mortgage with The Leeds BS (going back) and were 8 years ahead with it due to not reducing the repayments when the interest rate came down. The Leeds sent a form to "clarify" the amount we were paying and this was confirmed by the manager. We signed the form which gave the term left and the interest rate. But..if the interest rate changed, the details on the form would be then incorrect:- Either the term would change or the repayment. notwithstanding, our mortgage had 3 years left to run and not 11 which we would have had if we fluctuated the repayments with the interest rate. The Ombudsman said the BS did nothing wrong. Our Solicitor, accountant, bank manager and about 5 other accounting professionals said differently. A barrister had said the form was "not legally binding as under contract law it did not duely protect both parties as it was not clear and concise and left too much to assumption" The Ombudsman asked us if we needed to add anything before his decision and we did. The Leeds were given the same chance. The Leeds entered more paperwork which we had not seen, the decision was handed down from the Ombudsman and we complained we had not been given chance to answer to it so we did answer to it. We were told "case closed-decision final" I wrote to my MP who passed this to the Parliamentary Ombudsman. What the Leeds were doing was blocking us from getting a remortgage on the open market. They wanted to lend us the money but at 20% and not the mortgage rate, then 11%. It was defamation.

I had a bad experience with the Ombudsman many moons ago but I wrote to my MP who passed it to the Parliamentary Ombudsman but we did achieve what we wanted to do in the end but without further assistance.

Using and naming people and organisations without proof can be libellous if it is unsubstantiated and it can compromise any case. Facebook is full of people having a pop at each other and some degree of decoram is required.

Did you know it is an offence for them to put a negative entry on a credit file where the loan is in dispute. I have blocked all payments to Lloyds (loan repayments, overdrafts etc) and now they are chasing repayment of the OD and now is the time I shall counter charge them. The whole situation is complicated as in "chain of consequence" so when I tag it together Lloyds will know I mean business. I also have a complaint about the Ombudsman, in that he is negligent in not informing Lloyds of the proviso of the form signed, and he did not pass on all the terms and conditions- this was edited to Lloyds benefit.

By DSAR, I assume you mean subject Access Request. I have written to Lloyds eight times by recorded delivery and had no response, asked for information and been totally ignored. Done a Section 77/78 reguest for the loan and have been ignored apart from the actual agreement which came after 11 months but no figures. I have visited the bank Manager, he has visited Me/Us. I have asked for the files on the Insurance claim decline-refused. I have written to the Senior Manager, the Chief executive, the Regional Manager, used every phone number I have-still no response. The ONLY reply I have had in two years was when I wrote to them in January saying " I will not pay anything into any Lloyds Account-not one penny and will freeze all accounts until they put things right" They replied "we are sorry you are not happy with us and we will respond in 8 weeks after our investigation". How did the investigation go?... No response! I might as well talk to a brick wall.

Turnover should read £85k (thousand) a year on the first line.

I had a business which turned over about £85 per year until I went off sick for 18 weeks. This is where it startd: Sickness claim on PPI declined-miss sold so Ombudsman had premium returned plus interest but they did no pay the interest for 6 months. Manager authorising all cheques issued before I wrote them and all DD's, cash withdrawals but charged 26.4% OD plus £15 fee for unauthorised borrowing when he had authorised it. Arrangement to contact manager every Friday to authorise wages but 5 hours lost on Fridays by having to ring him at bank, on mobile, e-mail him, wait for return call, ring complaints department, (and four others) which cost 5 hours per week @ £20 per hour, plus lost workshop production plus £15 charge x 40 weeks. Bank adding to loan without my knowlegdge but don't know where the money has gone. Can't get CCA 77/78 complied with or any calculations. I have had agreement to write cheques then they have been returned because he admits he had the day off work. (bank charge there) Poeple in the business center did not know what was happening. Had work lined up then he would remove the OD facility without warning then charge £100 to put it back, then lose the work as he would not let me buy the wood, days chasing him at a time. Lost cedibility, overdraft arrangement fees 5 months running, added interest.Agreeing with him I could do the work, then i would order the timber, then when the customer paid the bill I had to haggle with him to pay the supplier. Doing the work in a way not cost effective due to lack of funding. Reached agreement to reduce the overdraft by Lloyds keeping 30% of turnover and giving us 70% to run with until the first payment came in (EG, £3000 paid in but was only allowed to take out £600) If we had been allowed to run properly, we would have been out of overdraft within six months but he escalated the problem and the charges. Statutory interest on all costs incurred calculated on a monthly basis. 8 issues with the bank sent to the Ombudsman and only one solved. The Ombudsman system is stacked against the customer. £65,000. All I did was to go into hospital for a serious operation!

Quote by MamaG1 You appear to have issued the bank with a Section 77/78 of the CCA. They must not only supply a true copy of the agreement but ALL documents linked to it, plus statements, how much has been paid, the balance and how the amounts have been calculated. If not done within 14 days, after 30 days the loan is unenforceable. As the loan is in dispute, and the CCA has not been complied with, the bank cannot pursue you through the courts, a court is precluded from enforcing the loan. It is also an offence for the bank to enter a negative statement on the Credit Reference Agency data base while it is in dispute. If they pass the case onto a 3rd party (debt collector) they commit an offence under the data Protection Act. Futhermore, they are only allowed to ring you TWICE only, under the Harrassment Act 1997 and you don't have to accept home or other visits. Finally, do not make agreement with a 3rd party as you have not contract with them, if you do then you are deemed to have a contract with them. Lloyds did this to me and the agreement I signed in "full and final" settlement was only signed "subject to receiving funds in cash by close of business plus interest on July 23 2009" The final part about signing was sent in writing (e-mail) to the Ombudsman and he failed to pass that bit on. Due to the Ombudsmens negligence I have now got to tell Lloyds the agreement is void as previously stated. They are demanding repayment of a £19k overdraft and I an countercharging them £65k. Finally, it will take time but don't give in.

This calling is excessive. Tell them you don't have to accept phone calls or visits and that you will do everything in writing or in your case then pass them to your solicitor. But do threaten them that if they do persist in this tactic that you will report them to the proper Authority under the "Harrassment Act 1997" which says excessive phone calls leading to distress is a criminal offence and can carry a fine of £5000 and/or imprisonment. In the Act they are not to ring up more than the prescribed amount of times under law (twice). This does have an effect if you be forceful in your tone.

Abbey are to lose their separate identity and being marketed under their parent company banner Santander. Re organisation taking up their time is would suggest.

I have seen figures like this. you have to remember that the flat rate of interest and the APR are two different things. It is a difficult calculation but say 3 years at 11% may equal 33% of the loan over the three years but the APR will say different due to how it is calculated. A PPI with them and has been claimed upon but cant be claimed again is something you are still paying for with no success of a futher claim being paid so this then becomes unfair and good cause to have the loan wiped. Here is a pointer but you will have to research it better.

I am reliably told that it is an offence for a lender to put a negative entry on a credit reference agengy data base where there is a dispute. If the charges are returned, you can't have a negative entry for something where you won the case and so should be removed. All lenders/banks do it though. You can add a message to the appropriate part of the credit file. Ring Experian up or Equifax and they will tell you how to do this.

£1330 x 27.2% each year. (£361.76 per year) Divide this by 12 to get the monthly interest on the PPI. Add this figure each month to the reclaim untill you get the refund. Check on statutory interes which is an extra 8% per annum, this on top of all costs.

I see today Abbey is re-branding to Santender (parent bank)

Are you paying the PPI premium monthly or was the PPI premium added to loan in advance? If it was added to the loan in advance, and you have made 36 payments, then it is the full amount of the PPI plus 36 months interest at the loan rate. If oyu are paying the premium monthly and it has not been added to loan then it is the amount paid. (monthly x 36) Dont forget statutory interest at 8%pa

Apart from breaching the CCA1974, the Harassment Act 1997, and the Data Protection Act 1998, he was going to tell his manager to expect a call from me in the morning!

Re the lending code section. I must say I have heard of it but never seen it. Our own 8 issues with Lloyds is so diverse in damage and hardship I have I haven't found anyone who understands the inter-connected issues. The Ombudsman has determined one issue to the detriment of the others and the whole thing is a total mess. I really do not know what to do next. It seems only bankers and ex bankers think Lloyds have done nothing wrong but normal decent people and organisations think it is a nasty situation.

Whilst I read things, I also cross check things. I see a position which is untenable with the banks and the OFT, the FSA and generally the FOS all in league with each other and the public has been badly let down while the banks sit on everything. I see hardship among people and business and losses due to banks and no automatic protection. Never take anything on first value.

I see that Martyn Lewis on www.moneysavingexpert.co.uk has employed a barrister to study the case. First indications are that the CCA 1974 has a part in it where the banks have to prove fairness on charges but he is saying hold off until this study has been done but information is going to be made available very shortly. They are going to work out template letters as well.

See you tomorrow for shopping!