Thanks Keith.

Great - thanks 10pack

Thanks 10pack - if you forward me your details I'll add to the letter as you would be a good example for BPF loans being mis-sold. There are quite of few people I know who were signed up and approved by Barclays despite being unemployed/no previous IT experience/guarantors elderly parents etc.... I'm determined to do all I can to see this bank burn for what its done now and if a minister and head of OFT and FSA takes a hard look maybe that will help our case if they get on BPF's back with some sharp questions - that's what I'm hoping anyway.

Thanks for the offer, 10pack, that's much appreciated - should be OK though. I've had a draft sitting by ready for when Ingrid gave me the go ahead to go to this stage and ramp up the pressure on Barclays so I just need to adapt it including some of Hausfeld latest letter now. Ingrid did say it had to come from the group, rather than just me, and suggested I ask two or three of you to give permission just to add your names at the bottom as representatives of the group action, so I'll do that.edited. It won't need a signature. Ingrid will give it a look over but as Hausfeld are not the clients/consumers (we are) they can't write to these bodies for us initially. I've got recommended names to write to at OFT etc and suggestion for angles to take with the minister (particular emphasis on lack of regulation on loans for private training companies and legal protection for consumers with banks lending on this at exorbitant business rates). Please do let me know though if you're ok to be named as part of the group in the letter. Thanks v much.

Hausfelds have received a holding reply to their last letter from Lovells now, and expect a full reply after Xmas about all the points they've challenged on. I've also had the go ahead to write officially as group rep to the OFT, FSA, and Education Minister now from Hausfeld so that's my Xmas break sorted out!

That's interesting - please do let me have a copy, Lowdown. I'm sure Hausfeld would like to see it! Thanks.

FUZZBUTT ANNOUNCEMENT: Someone has sent Hausfeld a FOS letter with no senders name. The ref number is 9949031/DB/CCCH. Please contact Hausfeld with your full details.

They have no legal grounds to send debt collectors to your house. If they threaten this then inform your local Trading Standards, police (if anyone actually does turn up on your doorstep) and demand the collection agency produce a DOA (Deed of Assignment, mentioned in posts above). Without a copy of your agreement with Barclays and signed authorisation they should not even be contacting you. It's a con, just to see if you'll pay up! They would have to be bailiffs appointed by a court to take anything from your home in way of goods etc and to get that BPF would have to take you to court first - so far they have not done this as they are treading on thin ice (and know it!)and subject to a legal action over our agreements. Skyblue Dave - I've asked Hausfeld if there's a time limit on the Barclays response, as you wondered. Will let you know as I'm not aware what was in the full, original letter so can't say myself.

As I gather that is pretty much the case. I understand from Ingrid that Barclays don't like individual actions against them in her experience of previous dealings with banks. She is still hoping that threat will make them resolve this out of court now, I think, which will be quicker for us. Failing that, a number of individuals including myself as lead plaintiff (who were quoted, I believe in the original full letter to Barclays) will appear as individuals in court. I'm not entirely sure how it works but it may be everyone has to put in their case under Hausfeld's umbrella then, or just be named on a document that's read out in court without them personally having to be there (the form you printed off the website and signed for them). I guess we'll know more when Barclays reply to Hausfeld, hopefully soon.

FUZZBUTT ANNOUNCEMENT: Hausfeld's edited version of their latest letter to Barclays is on the 'Case Updates' page of the student website. You'll need to sign in to download it (Word doc). This is Barclays last chance basically to 'come to the table' to resolve this. Hopefully their lawyer will respond quickly to Hausfeld and we will then know whether this will have to go to court action if they refuse to negotiate (next step).

You're welcome. It certainly has taken up a lot of my free time, but hopefully we'll get a positive response from Barclays now. I'm hopeful that the legal issues Hausfeld raise will win the day, even if FOS refuses to do right by us. I did point out in my appeal to FOS for an ombudsman to re-visit my case that they seem to have just taken Barclays 'evidence' without question.

FUZZBUTT ANNOUNCEMENT: I have spoken to Ingrid today and will post the authorised version of Hausfeld's latest letter to Barclays on the student website when I receive it in the next few days. It's a large document, outlining all the issues and legal challenges. Let's say this is Barclays 'last chance to dance'! Thanks to everyone who responded to the call and sent copies of their MP letters, FOS replies and personal accounts of their Advent sales visits and so on to me to pass on, or to Hausfeld directly. THANK YOU! Ingrid was very impressed with the quality of information you all sent. She has gone through it all with a toothpick and the evidence has firmed up the case against Barclays. Hausfeld can't reply personally at this time, and nor can I, (due to the volume of mail) so just to let you know....

I've caught up with all the inquries that came in over the weekend, Hippy Pie, so you should have the link/info now (check junk mail!)

Might be worth taking it to your local CAB for their legal advisor to look over maybe, 10pack. Odd, as you say, when so far when asked for a Deed letter people are reporting that the debt collector falls silent or says they are passsing the debt 'back to Barclays'!

Yes, they had a lot of documentation from me a long time ago. The 'One Show' also interviwed me and Ingrid, and Duane (another student) and made a rather disappointing 3 min feature which didn't really highlight much so far as the protest and unfairness of Barclays behaviour went (that's also on YouTube).

Good point, Lowdown. Barclays are skating on thin ice as it is. That's probably why no one has been taken to court for non payment yet, even though we're into the eleveth month after Advent's collapse now.

As 10pack and Roadie said, Arlee, you'll get constant harrassment from debt collectors if you don't pay and probably a bad credit rating BUT be mindful that... the harrassment is unlawful and against the Office of Fair Trade Guidelines of good practice. demanding a Deed of Assignment letter (which the debt collection agency is required by law to produce as proof the debt has been passed to them by Barclays) has not been offered in any case I'm aware of! BPF should not be chasing a debt if the account is in dispute and part of a legal investigation and challenge. If you do go ahead and continue paying then you won't have that hassle, but your choice of course. You'll then have to take legal action to get your money back from Barclays. Technically you are breaching the contract with BPF if you refuse to pay but so far no one doing that has been taken to court, despite Barclays huffing and puffing and threatening some people with court action (see the Facebook group 'Advent scammed Us' for some of the horror stories there). Many of us have joined a group action to do this and get our money back and challenge Computeach as an enforced provider we didn't choose and don't want.

One of the issues that a majority of people seem to be raising is mis-selling, which is stronger now than the like-for-like argument now Computeach has re-designed it's courses to match Advent's. Hausfeld have raised this with BPF. Mis-selling seems to have been a key thing with a large number of people, with loans to inappropriate people (part-time/unemployed) as well as bad advice to guarantors from Advent salespeople, plus the promises of guaranteed job placements.

Our lawyer has heard of NO ONE who has had a refund from BPF (or else she would have signed the case off by now and we'd all be richer again!) and nor have I in the hundreds of emails I've had to Fuzzbutt, except one.The only person who HAS had a successful refund that I'm aware of was a lady that took out a BPF loan just before Advent folded, and was luckily still within the 30 day cancellation zone - but even she had to get that via complaints to Trading Standards and FOS. She contacted me to tell me and gave permission for details to be passed to our lawyer in case it could help others. Maybe Feedme would like to post his/her correspondence from BPF, explaining what circumstances his refund was returned in, if that was the case? Or perhaps Feedme is just a wind-up merchant troll. In which case ignore is the best tactic until they get bored and go away again.

You've hit the nail on the head there, 10pack...it all stinks. My anger and disgust is directed at Barclays rather than Advent, as it initially was after the collapse. Lets not forget it was Barclays pulling out at short notice that caused the collapse in the first place. This is my last letter to FOS, after challenging their first decision and asking for a second opinion from the Ombudsman him/herself... Dear Ms Webster Thank you for your letter dated 12 November and for forwarding the documentation provided to the Financial Ombudsman Service by Barclays Partner Finance, justifying its appointment of Computeach (CT) as a replacement to Advent Computer Training. Before FOS gives a final decision, I would just like to make a further couple of points to my complaint however, which I think are key to the unfairness of this situation. According to the Computeach website, FAQ for Advent students www.computeach.co.uk/advent-faqs, Question 12 runs – ‘My contract had already expired. How can I continue my training?’ Answer – ‘You can still continue your training with Computeach but this will require further financial outlay.’ Question 16 asks – ‘My contract with Advent was just about to end. Can I carry on studying if I want to?’ Answer - ‘You can still continue your training with Computeach but this will require further financial outlay. Barclays also states in the document that it considers it quite reasonable that Advent students should pay the Advent fee for an identical course with Computeach that is some £1,760 cheaper. How is that fair? Barclays can’t have it both ways. If they are assuring me they are providing an identical like-for-like course then it should be for a like for like price, surely? Why are they refusing to refund the difference? Barclays claim that Computeach contacted all the Advent students several times by email, letter and phone on April 1st (letter), April 28th (reminder email), May 24th and July 2nd (phonecalls). Well, I can categorically state that after I received the initial email explaining CT had taken over from Advent and the reminder to sign up with them, I had NO FURTHER CORRESPONDENCE from Computeach in any way, nor any attempt to contact me with the details of the bespoke replacement course in writing, as I’d requested. In fact, when I telephoned them for that information after I’d received the reminder, the rep could not answer my questions and promised to get someone to call me back. NO ONE DID -for THREE MONTHS! When a CT rep did call in the first week of November, he was surprised to hear that I was an ex-Advent student and not a 'new inquiry' as the system had me down as! I had to explain the whole situation to him. This is atrocious customer service and Barclays and FOS wonders why so many Advent students do not want to take up with this company? This is an example of the type of ‘student service’ CT is known for! And the comments on the forums clearly show I’m not alone in this appalling lack of communication and confusion on behalf of CT. My argument to FOS is that this is unfair as my Advent agreement end date is Dec 2010 so that now leaves me just a few weeks to complete a 2 year course, or else I have to pay Computeach MORE money on top, just to finish my studies! This is due to virtually a year of my time having been wasted first by Barclays Partner Finance taking 3 months to appoint CT, and then FOS in your delay in giving a final answer on this. Fair? No! Even if I had wanted to take up the CT training it is too late now to complete within my deadline. I've argued the point that the Advent sales reps gave me a verbal assurance that the course was open-ended (a sales rep even made a statement to that effect to our lawyer, that they were encouraged to make this clear in the sign up meeting to prospective students) but you tell me this is not considered evidence as I don’t have any written proof of it. Does the word of how many complainants now, all telling you the same thing, count for nothing? Why cannot this be taken as evidence? Are we all lying? The documentation from Barclays will be passed to our lawyer as part of our group action challenge to this appalling mess created by Barclays, who were instrumental in sending Advent down the pan in the first place by withdrawing their partner funding at short notice, as they also did to many other private training partners such as Access2Trade also. My argument still stands – that I did NOT choose Computeach and do not see why this training provider should be forced upon me. I insist on a refund for a product I did not receive. Nor do I have any faith in the Ombudsman Service anymore in defending the little people against giants of industry who treat them as non-entities for exploitation.

Unfortunately no-one seems to have this in writing, so FOS dismiss our argument out of hand.

I have managed to wrangle the document from FOS that Barclays base their argument of not refunding us on. It is basically all the 'like for like' bull and an outline of the new 'bespoke' courses. Unfortunately, they do seem to have covered all the modules Advent had offered now, so far as I can see. Updated details for Advent students are here on CT website..... http://www.computeach.co.uk/advent-faqs Question 12 runs. My contract had already expired. How can I continue my training? A. You can still continue your training with Computeach but this will require further financial outlay. If you would like to talk to one of our Course Advisors about signing up to complete your course please call 0845 60 99 020. My argument to FOS is that my contract end date is Dec 2010 so that now leaves me a few weeks to complete a 2 year course after a year of my time has been wasted by first Barclays and then FOS in their delay in giving a final answer on this. Fair? No! I've argued the point that the sales reps gave us a verbal assurance that the course was open-ended (a sales rep even made a statement to that effect to our lawyer) but FOS say this is not evidence as we have no written proof (does the word of how many complainants now count for nothing? Are FOS calling us liars?) Barlays claim that CT contacted everyone several times by email and phone in April, May and July. I received one initial email but no calls - until last week when a CT rep called and was surprised to hear that I was an ex-Advent student and not a 'new inquiry' as the system had me down as! I had called months ago for more detail about the 'bespoke course' - no one at CT had bothered to call me back! All this will be passed to our lawyer. She's on leave for a couple of weeks now. I'm sending one last letter to FOS, just so it's on record that I'm not happy with Barclays account to them, then giving up with them. Another issue has come to light that I can't speak of yet, but may have a bearing in our favour. I'll know more when I speak to Hausfeld about the latest. Not good news I'm afraid regarding FOS - but keep up the fight.

Our lawyer has asked me to make people aware that, if they are still getting harassment from any debt collection agency to please contact their local Citizens Advice Bureau, NOT Hausfeld. The legal team are unable to represent individuals in this case and are just e-directing people to CAB, who can offer free legal, immediate help. Thanks.

I've just been reading through the last 2 pages and have flagged up to our lawyer this latest assault by BPF, using multiple debt collection agencies without Deed of Assignment letter. I don't know if it's illegal or not, but it certainly illustrates what an faceless, ruthless and incompetent bunch of idiots Barclays Partner Finance directors are!

FUZZBUTT UPDATE: Sorry there's not been any news from me - I know a lot of people are anxious to know what's happening. Hausfeld are still working with Barclays and there has been some positive steps but nothing concrete I can report at the moment. I hope to have more very soon. I've personally asked FOS to release me the documents BPF sent them to justify their position, so that I may challenge what was said. Unfortunately, FOS aren't obliged to do this under the Freedom of Information Act but the adjudicator did promise to ask Barclays if this was possible (they need their permission!). More wasted time. Our lawyer is aware of all these manouvers. Perhaps everyone who has had a refusal by FOS should complain and demand to see the evidence BPF supplied that led to their decision. Please copy to Hausfeld if you get anything. Thanks.