Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

65 Excellent

About ieuanMr

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. I think you have done a marvellous job in winning with the FOS. Unfortunately they do not pay much by way of damages. You have won but you do not have to accept the award. You may refuse their descision and then go to the small claims court for harrrasment. As long as your claim is under £5000.00 the bank cannot claim costs. I recently began being harrassed by NatWest and clompalined to the FOS, and as I was already in contact with the FOS about PPI I was able to pohone through and the harrassment stopped. If you look at Irresponsible Lending OFT1107 March 2010 Section 7.10 and 7.11
  2. Thanks Ian We have had an admission from the bank informing us that the debt is unenforcable as they canot locate the contract. I have been thinking seriously this past week and come to the opinion that I will put the whole case to the Salford court as Follows: 1. Claim for an unfair relationship due to: a. failure to act for a SAR request under the Data Protection act 1974 b. Irresponsible lending. It should be obvious that the bank have been unfair as they sold so many products and 5 cases of PPI 2 of which the FOS found in our favour and also they
  3. So today I went to the county court and was told my claims went through Salford. I lloked upo the information on the web and now have to decide how to make the claim. Oiur initial claim will be for: Failure to respond to our Data Protection Act Request (SAR) of the 30th September 2009 and to ask the court to enforce our request that is, to supply a signed copy of the £17 000.00 loan including the insurance and the PPI. In the absence of that contract to make a judgement on the loan, whether it must be paid or is deemed invalid and therefore cancelled. In the absence of the document
  4. Hello all, Nice to be back, I have been off ever since the new format changed. I have tried for a year to get on but have only just managed it after a new password was sent to me. If anyone remembers my claim (for my son) was against NatWest for selling too many products and lending too much also PPI and so on. Well we went down the FOS route and they were very much useless as advised from cagers. We won easily agaisnt 2 other banks with 3 claims on PPI, just taking a few months and one case against a moter retail outlet that tried to rip us off, but NatWest has proved an
  5. Thanks to all for replies and support, it has really been helpful these past few days. Made us think. We realise now after reading the terms and condition as suggested by IainHL that it is futile paying off the overdraft as the bank will simply start again with a clean slate, the bank have already told us that they cannot close and account whilst we have outstanding loans. My latest e-mail communication to the Adjudicator last night. Mr xxxxxxxx I beg indulgence in the presenting of information to enhance my appeal with the Ombudsman, I am 67 years of age and it is
  6. Thanks guys, I took Elsa's advice and lloked up OFT on Debt Collection here is what I found: OFT664 July 2003 updated 2006 Debt Collection Advice 2.5 Putting pressure on debtors or third parties is considered to be oppressive. b. pressurising debtors to sell property, to raise funds by further borrowing or to extend their borrowing Deceptive and/or unfair methods 2.7 Dealings with debtors are not to be deceitful and/or unfair. d. contacting debtors directly and bypassing their appointed representatives g. failing to refer on to the creditor reasonable off
  7. I have read the threads o the former thread, thanks to all who contributed. We have written formely several times to close the account and they refuse. The bank also want us to make a statement of our intentions, if we say we intend to stop all further premuiums thay will refuse to close the account even f we do pay off the overdrfat. paying off the over draft will be counter productive as they will then have a new limit to work on. The bank are withdrawing funds to pay off the £17 000 loan by way of 'offsetting', this is common law and they can do it. My argument is they are enforcing an unen
  8. Thanks guys, good imput I will answer you all in the new thread. Ieuan For all extents and purposes this thread should be viewed a closed.
  9. The banks hold all the access...only this forum and forums like it (if it is not the only one) have cost the banks millions of pounds, mabe a billion pounds, which we the consumer and taxpayer are paying for. I looked at the 1976 aka 2006) Consumer Credit Act, they've changed the rules and awarded the bias to the banks. I can still go to court and claim damages for the bank failing to comply with the Data Protection Act 1998. But it's not getting to the core of the problem. The problem is this: 1. the bank have admitted they have lost the agreement and that the agreement is unenfor
  10. Thamks Pumpytums, I shall do as you suggest. I am taking Midenmess' advice and transfering the thread to a new thread.
  11. Wel, forgetting all the negative things we can do like rant, hire a bus and ram the local branch, set fire to their tyres, picket the local branch, send not very nice letters, scrawl on the walls, do a farmer Giles with the muck spreader etc. etc. We could alternatively walk away and forget about it all and ten years form now let the bank destroy us when all the legislation has been tinkered away to steal our rights we shall ponder the middle course. The banks hold all the access...only this forum and forums like it (if it is not the only one) have cost the banks millions of pounds, mabe
  12. It seems I have led my self up the garden path, the FOS seems useless what to do next? I've been looking at other threads and there are two that seem to bear fruit, one is Pumpytums, she won when the agreement could not be found and Gemby (http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/natwest-bank/263433-natwest-should-i-settle.html) On both occasions the bank had lost the original agreement and the bank either settled or the judge threw their claim out (as in Pumpytums case). Considering that the bank have lost the agreement on the £17 000 loan and are charging the premiums to my son's
  13. Further to our complaints against NetWest and you for the handling of this case I wish to make sure you have examined my son's case according to OFT1107 dated March this year. Scope for Guidance section 1.22 speaks of context, This why I have put everything relevant to my son in with my complaint I believe it shows a systematic and prolonged preying on vulnerable consumers by the bank. In my opinion the bank has to be fair in its dealing, and the bank has to demonstrate it has been fair, I believe I have shown this and that it is self evident from the cash flows and statement and by my
  14. Adjudicator Writes BackI confirm that in making my opinion I read the entire file, including your 12 page letter dated 22 June 2010 and all other correspondence between yourself, xxxxxxx and the bank from 11 September 2009 (being the earliest correspondence in the file) onwards. I have acknowledged receipt of each letter you have sent in since I have taken over this case (the letters in question dated 19 and 22 June 2010). I also have copy correspondence of all letters you have sent to us from 21 January 2010 in relation to this matter. The fact that I have been called to the Bar is of irrelev
  • Create New...