Jump to content

Beamengine

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    98
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Beamengine

  1. I have a current complaint to FOS about exactly this behaviour by Amex. They appear to be incapable of responding by post except to request contact by telephone. In this way it is virtually impossible to prove any of the complaints made against them. Their complaints procedures are a joke aimed solely at using one excuse or another so that they claim to not uphold the complaint when in fact they have not even started to address it. FOS dismissed the complaint on the basis that they could not interfere with the Amex internal procedures which in your case mean invoking the DDA on spurious grounds. Have a look at the OFT Guidance to Creditors oft664rev which sets out that creditors must comply with requests to communicate in writing only and thay they must pass this information on to the DCAs. Amex have used passing to DCAs their excuse to fail to recognise a Common Financial Statement even though this is contrary to the Lending Code. They also use RMA, which is NCO Europe trading as RMA who similarly refuse to communicate except by phone. The complaint to FOS about this was redirected by FOS to Complete Credit Management who have also traded as RMA in the past. However, CCM Ltd went into liquidation at the beginning of the year and I am awaiting the FOS response on this.
  2. There is the Court of Appeal decision Roberts v RBS http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2013/882.html which supported a debtor's right not to communicate with the creditor and that harassment requiring contact was not legitimate. The creditors course of action was through the courts. As RLP don't have a cause of action they are prevented from taking civil action (that would have to be Primark) and I believe that criminal action would require CPS approval although that requirement may have been relaxed as the successive governemnts seem intent on handing over all control to big business. In any case RLP should not refer to anyone as a defendant unless criminal charges have been brought. In a civil action the correct term would be respondent.
  3. I think that there is some confusion over the use of the word debt. It is true that if you have debts then when you die they will die with you but this is not your debt it is your ex's. He is in arrears in his obligation to maintain your children has result in his debt to you and this would normally go to your estate. Try to get the CSA's decision confirmed in writing and then take the matter up with your MP as it was the CSA'a failure to enforce collection in a timely manner that has resulted in this situation. I hope this helps and that you live long enough to see the arrears cleared.
  4. A very good result and I hope that it was not too stressful. May I give an overview of the saga based on the probability that everyone at least started with honest intentions. The initial police investigation must have included an element of suspicion that TFD was involved because of the keys and driving licence. The successful prosection in which TFD was the principal withness would not have removed this suspicion entirely and they would have regarded MM as the sole victims of the fraud. No doubt they would have informed MM that this was now a civil matter for the recovery of the £7000 and they may have indicated that they were not entirely satisfied that TFD was not involved but there was no chance of taking action because of reasonable doubt. The police were then unable to treat MM's theft of the vehicle as such as they would claim that the police had indicated TFD's alleged role. MM seized the vehicle on this basis and allowed TFD to initiate the civil claim. Perhaps there should be a complaint to the IPCC that the original police investigation was flawed in that they failed to treat TFD as a victim. This led to their failure to warn MM against the seizure of the vehicle and subsequently fail to take action to recover the vehicle following his complaint. The evidence for this is that the Chief Constable has stated that MM did not act dishonestly i.e. that they had been advised of the suspicions and that another police force's investigation resulted in a different conclusion i.e. that MM had not title to the vehicle.
  5. BCOBS only applies to banking operations rather than credit which is covered by COBS. However, I am still trying to determine the basis for a legal claim which may well be CCA 1974 s140b which requires fair treatment,
  6. Is thee such a thing as a class action for unfair treatment?
  7. I have had the same problem http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?337205-MBNA-Virgin-credit-card-debt The main difference is that they only offered the partial settlement on the basis that MBNA would not pursue the debt. This was rejected on the basis that they are about to pull out of Europe and will sell it on. It now appears that this was deliberate as your offer should have covered the other porential creditors.
  8. It is not clear what "court" form you signed, was it an agreement to repay and was there a County Court Claim? You could apply to have the CCJ set aside if you were not aware of the claim which would give you the opportunity to dispute the debt. If you accept the debt you could apply for a variation but with no income you have nothing to offer. Both of these are covered by N244. You could apply for a Debt Relief Order but I am not sure how your immigration status would be affected. Your ex-friend will spend a lot of money attempting to enforce the judgement and most methods would fail: You are not employed so an attachment of earnings order can't be made. You have no money in a bank account to be claimed. You have no possessions for a bailiff to seize. When are you returning to Australia?
  9. In this case it should be Bank of Scotland as they are the limited company who are replying to my letters and they have Halifax as a registered trade name for credit purposes.
  10. Sorry, Power of Attorney, I must get back into the habit of spelling out the abbreviations. I gave HBOS 21 days and received an immediate response pointing out that I had referred to them as RBOS rather than BOS (it was as the time of the bonus row so I can only plead fallibility). I had expected a further response but on checking their response that was another mistake on my part. To further add to my confusion the letter stated that they were part of the Lloyds Banking Group plc (correct) and Halifax Bank of Scotland plc (not according to Companies House who list them as HBOS plc). Raymond Way gave the creditor as "HBOS" whereas is should have been Halifax or BOS as the Consumer Credit Licence for BOS includes Halifax and HBOS Credit Card as trading names but not HBOS which is used by another HBOS company dealing with insurance (I think).
  11. No, I asked for confirmation in writing despite the oral assurances. When the letter arrived I tried to convince them that their interpretation of F&F was incorrect and did not pay.
  12. Thank you 42man but I have already read that and understand the relevance of CCA 1974 section 140a. Unfortunately I have discovered that I can't use a POA to allow me an audience at court. This means that the claim will have to be made by the debtor at at time when the whole purpose of me acting as representative is to avoid undue stress. I have also realised that a claim is unlikely to succeed unless the contract is unenforceable and this could result in a counterclaim resulting in a CCJ which is the exact opposite of my intentions!
  13. They tried to do this to me and I very nearly fell for it. See my thread asking what action I should take. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?337205-MBNA-Virgin-credit-card-debt(1-Viewing)-nbsp
  14. Beamengine

    mbma

    MBNA are a telephone bank and are not geared up to dealing with letters as I have discovered which is why you probably did need to phone them to get the response. It is not clear why you made the SAR as this may be the answer to your question. You need to check whether the original agreement has been supplied as its absence would make the contract unenforceable until they have provided one (even a reconstructed one seems to be sufficient these days). You should also check your statements to see if any charges have been applied which could be challenged. I found that they added interest to an account under a repayment plan even though they had previously said that the rate would be 0%. A complaint removed the interest and any penalty charges during the repayment period.
  15. I have been acting as a representative of one of my family members for a year dealing with eight accounts. Some of the creditors have made life very difficult by failing to recognise the authorisation and charging interest so that the debt increases rather than decreases. Halifax and Sainsburys (a joint venture with Halifax) are the top two on the list for poor customer handling and Halifax have made a total muddle of their handling of this account. Firstly they totally ignored a third part full and final offer followed by no response to my offer of a repayment plan. My local CAB then sent them a repayment plan which they did not acknowledge. Instead, two months later they sent a letter stating that the plan had been terminated. A request for clarification from the bureau was ignored. When Sainsburys asked for an updated financial statement (which reduced the payments!) a copy was sent to Halifax from the bureau. At the end of November the debtor received a call from Halifax. It claimed that he was late with his payment so they were contacted and we were told that the letter accepting the repayment plan had been returned by the bureau as an unknown client. In December Robinson Way phoned without notice and were told to get lost. They subsequently sent a NOA letter claiming that the debt was to HBOS. A complaint to Halifax elicited the somewhat surprising response that it was their standard practice to terminate the contract and pass the debt onto a DCA who subsequently claimed not to have been informed of the repayment agreement extending to June 2012 or to have been informed that there was a representative. Worse still, the response letter to my complaint was address to the correct address but with the wrong forename, not surprising that the bureau returned it as an unknown client! The LBA raised all of these issues as unfair treatment and Halifax have responded asking for time to make a considered response. What should my next steps be?
  16. I have been acting as a representative of one of my family members for a year dealing with eight accounts. Some of the creditors have made life very difficult by failing to recognise the authorisation and charging interest so that the debt increases rather than decreases. MBNA at on of the top three on the list for poor customer handling and I have made two complaints which have taken forever to get a response but eventually they waived the interest and removed penalty charges following the termination of the repayment plan. As a third party I offered a lump sum in full and final settlement of their debt in a letter setting out my terms which included marking the CRF as satisfied in full. Their response was to phone my relative asking for me claiming that they did not have my number - they did it is an 0845 number printed at the top of my letter. I did phone them back was was subjected to a high pressure technique to pay immediately after I had passed their "security" check. I was told that the amount on the account would be reduced to zero, the account would be closed and MBNA would take no further action although the CRF entry would last for six years. I then asked for the acceptance to be put in writing. When this arrived it was only for a partial settlement and the remainder would still be on the account but MBNA would not pursue the debt. I sought advice from a solicitor who confirmed my suspicions that this was a long way from my offer so I phoned again to challenge their letter. I was informed that I did not understand the meaning of full and final which could only be applied if the total amount was paid and that this was the only letter they were authorised to send out by their legal department. I obtained the advice from Citizens Advice that clearly contradicted their view and wrote to them to ask for clarification by their legal department. Again they phoned the wrong number and I was persuaded to ring them again because of their concerns. Eventually when I was put through to the third person calling herself Louise I reached the original operator. She was not interested in the content of my letter as MBNA are a telephone bank and don't deal with written communication. For that I had to make a complaint but that would only get back to her and we would go round in circles. At this point I gave up and drafted a letter before action but only after I discovered that Bank of America announced last August that they were pulling out of the European credit card market and that staff had already been made redundant as a result. I also discovered an OFT requirement dated December 2010 that they must not contact the debtor when a representative is in place and that they shold also use written communications when requested. I feel that MBNA's process to try to extract money under false pretences is illegal under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008. Is this the only basis for a claim or can I use COBS and, if so, what is the statutory basis?
  17. Thank you yes, I have looked at both BCOBS and COBS and my understanding is that only BCOBS can be used as a basic for a legal claim but that only applies to banking and not credit. The FSA regulates the banking industry and OFT the credit side. COBS applies to both but does not give a basic right to a claim. More on the legal thread when I put it up.
  18. Having just read the whole of this thread I can understand why Smoothound is confused. I would strongly suggest that future comments are not made in public as it is obvious that Brachers have been watching the thread and acted upon it. It would not be difficult to identify the case given the location, date and time of the hearing. An alternative would be to post misleading information on this thread while giving advice in private. At the conclusion of the case the real evident could be made public for everyone's benefit.
  19. Good morning ims21, I should be the one to apologise as I hadn't realised that it was posted in MBNA's Successes! I think it should be in MBNA Europe as there are similar threads whose concerns I share. When I have worked out how to post in the proper forum I will put the legal parts on that forum. My concern is that CAG have stated that there is a statutory right for consumers to be treated fairly but that the FSA regulations do not confer the right for court action.
  20. It sounds as though Experte Credite have bought your debt but you have not received a notice of assignment from MBNA. They are now using their bullying tactics in order to try to extract payment from you. In view of your low income I suggest that you seek direct help from one of the charities such as CCCS or Citizens Advice Bureau. They should be able to help you but, unless you can make a minimum payment, they will be able to get a CCJ for the full amount if they can demonstrate they have title to the debt. You should be wary of posting too much information on the forum as you have already provided enough information to allow you to be identified.
  21. As RW have ignored a lot of the previous correspondence and requests it may not be a waste of £10. Don't forget that they have had the account for a year and the DPA requires disclosure of all relevant data. This can be used against them if they have either failed to disclose or don't have enough information to proceed to the next step. They don't appear to be very good at getting the facts right.
  22. Beamengine

    mbma

    My experience of MBNA even when making a Formal Complaint is that they still take months to respond. At best I get a letter after a couple of weeks saying that they will respond within a further two weeks. That response is to say that it will take even longer - so much for the 8 week period as they know the the FOS process will take much much longer. MBNA are in the process of being sold off and their staff are threatened with redundancy so do they care?
  23. This is the standard type of letter if they feel that you have not responded to their previous communications. Have they sent you a letter and/or a default notice? The notice should have advised you to seek help which is what you are doing now. How long have they been in contact and when was your last payment? When did you lose your job and are they aware of your circumstances? I feel that the letter they have sent you goes beyond acceptable practice but this might be expected from the following link http://www.brachers.co.uk/intelligence/item/oft-fair-enough-or-ott
  24. This was posted on the MBNA heading as it is about their practices. There are legal questions that will be posted in the Legal issues but this was intended to caution others about MBNA's mode of working.
  25. Looking at another thread where Halifaz ignored the SAR request you should consider taking it to your local branch in an unsealed envelope with the £10 and asking for written confirmation of its receipt.
×
×
  • Create New...