Jump to content

mzfrfd

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    31
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

51 Excellent

About mzfrfd

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. Just read your Statute Barred 'pop up' message. Im afraid it is incorrect and will stop people from claiming what is rightfully theirs. i have received a favourable decision today from the Ombudsman on a PPI claim which was launched 11 years after the last premium was paid. Further to this please see below. Limitation Act 1980 c. 58Part II Fraud, concealment and mistake Postponement of limitation period in case of fraud, concealment or mistake. (1) Subject to [F1subsection (3)][F1subsections (3) and (4A)] below, where in the case of any action for which a period of limitation is prescribed by this Act, either— (a)the action is based upon the fraud of the defendant; or (b)any fact relevant to the plaintiff’s right of action has been deliberately concealed from him by the defendant; or ©the action is for relief from the consequences of a mistake; I dont think Im done yet so if anybody can answer my original question please let me have a response so i can get to tackling the Bank
  2. Why is it Statute barred? And the reason for asking is if there was any 'mistake' made I'd like to go after the bank for restitution.
  3. Hi Im not sure if this is correct place to post this so I'll be brief and wont object if someone moves my post to the correct place! I have done a DSAR and noticed on my Bank Statement in 2007 that a cheque I wrote was presented on Tuesday 02/01/2007 and it bounced. It was further presented on the Friday 05/01/2007 and bounced again.* 02/01/2007** *Tuesday 05/01/2007** *Friday If cheque clearing took 4-5 days at that time, how could it be possible that a cheque could be represented 3 days after bouncing in the first place. I am mystified! Please can anybody shed any light on this. thank you
  4. Just to put this one to bed. I did not get any charges back but did get £2821.65 which was Service Fees + interest. Thanks to everybody who assisted me. MZFRFD
  5. I do have a full set. From 2001 - 2008 for which I have used Fosrunning spreadsheet. Nonetheless for that period alone my compound interest differs from the banks. I have £430 and they have £285. So something is very amiss. The missing data is from 1998 - 2000 for which the bank is making assumptions.
  6. Hi Ims21 did a fantastic job with FosRunningPPI v102.xls based on PS10/12. Does Ims21 or anybody else have any plans to do an update based on PS17/03? I ask as I am in protracted discussions with FOS over a claim and its worth, and they are discounting my calculations using FosRunningPPI. Their statement to me is below: "....It is not our job to audit the Banks calculation, there are periods of missing data and assumptions have been made, we feel this is fair when the business and the consumer don’t have full records. We check to see if the offer is fair and this offer is within our within our tolerances. I have asked you to supply credit card statement show the discrepancies in interest rates used, I've yet to see them. Your calculations differ from RBS' and your calculations are not in line with our guidelines..." Are they lying to me? The CAG warned that the FOS is totally committed to limiting any redress the Bank needs to pay, and I am very much seeing this first hand! I ask the above question as i really need to hit them with some nailed on maths which is beyond my skillset.. Thanks in advance
  7. Thanks for the response dx100uk. It looks as though I'll be charting new territories which is not good! Ill be giving it a go nonetheless. Thanks again for the feedback.
  8. Hi I put a claim to the Ombudsman for the return of fees for my Advantage Gold account after months of wrangling with the bank over its perceived mis-sale which the bank denied. However I received a letter from the Ombudsman who has advised that whilst they haven't looked at my case or paperwork yet the bank wants to make me an offer which constitutes of the return of my fees plus interest, less any benefit I received for the preferential loan and overdraft rates I received. Thats fine as it stands. However I want a lot more than that if redress is supposed to put me back in a position I would have been had I not paid those Service fees. If I do a running total on the account from the account start, the bank hypothetically owed me £85 in Service fees before they applied a lending charge of £25 to the account. If you remove that charge and add subsequent Service Fees, the next charge of £35 was again more than covered by what the bank is now prepared to return to me in Service Fees. When you continue in this vein all of my bank charges are wiped out and i believe should be returned to me with interest. In short we are talking about a reconstruction of the account. I hope this makes sense. Now I believe Lou Lou probably benefited from having a running total of Services charges which facilitated the return of her bank charges which her bank returned. However, this occurred without the intervention of the Ombudsman and my bank having previously kicked up a fuss will not want to pay me 20 x what they are offering. (Which would be the outcome) I believe the Ombudsman would be reluctant to do the same given that they have recommended that I take the offer as they believe it to be fair My questions are below: Has anybody benefited from this approach from an adjudication via the Ombudsman before when they got or sought redress? If this level of redress has been declined by the bank and or the Ombudsman, has it been tested in court and if so what were the outcomes? Other than Lou Lou on another site do we know of any other cases out there where the accounts were reconstructed and lending charges returned? The Ombudsman as not actually come up with an adjudication as yet and has asked that I wait for the bank to get back in contact with me. I am asking the above questions in anticipation of receiving contact from the bank and I just need to determine my next steps. Do we have any Advantage Gold/Ombudsman/redress specialists on this forum who can answer my questions? If so, please do! Thank you
  9. I've just checked the spreadsheet I posted up and realised I'd deleted some code from the first 2 rows. I've corrected this now. Sorry! FosRunningPPI v102 CookieRocks Blank v.01.xls
  10. Your welcome CookieRocks I prefer that people get paid exactly what they are owed when they have all of their statements and interest rates, so I personally would not want to forward an estimated interest rate. With the exact interest rates inserted into the spreadsheet, your totals and claim is indisputable. Numbers are absolute and not subjective, and the FOSRunning spreadsheets' calculations reflect the approach used by the Ombudsman, and produce the numbers that the Ombudsman's calculations would produce. That is beyond doubt. The decision of a mis-sale has already been made in your favour so I would suggest the pressure is off. All you have to do now is stick to your guns and get what is indisputably yours. I tried to PM you but I have only made 23 posts and need to have made 30 to have the privilege of PM'ing people! Don't forget to add any over limit fees that you may have incurred. If you need any help around the spreadsheet or around anything I have written in the word doc, please give me a shout. MZFRFD
  11. Hi Cookierocks Have a look at the attachments and let me know how you get on. FosRunningPPI v102 CookieRocks Blank.xls Cookierocks.doc
  12. Summary Advantage Gold Account held between 1998 – 2008 2 x PPI reclaims successful 1 x NatWest Credit card PPI complaint successful 1 x Packaged Account fees complaint ongoing Bank charges History Circa £7000 taken in Bank charges between 2004-2008 which caused extreme hardship and stress related illness at that time. Whilst there is no hardship now, there was severe hardship at the time so my belief is that any claim now would be based on current circumstances and fail. Any thoughts on this? A complaint made to bank in 2007 to recover charges was put on hold by the bank until the outcome of the Supreme Court test case, which due to the outcome seem to conclude concluded that the original charges reclaim complaint could not succeed. However, I am wondering whether,with an account reconstruction to validate, a claim can be made with the suggestion that if those mis-sold PPI premiums were not taken from the Advantage gold account in the first instance, monies would have been available in the account and the charges would not have been incurred, so therefore need to be returned. A back door approach for sure, hence my Interest in Lord Tiger’s thread. How say thee dx100uk? Is there any viable route to reclaiming these charges? Has it been done before under any similar circumstances as outlined above? thanks By the way. Why do you think Lord Tiger’s approach was whimsical? Where do you feel it fails? thanks
  13. Hi honybee13 Do you know of anybody on CAG who has attempted to get their bank charges back via the method that Lord Tiger suggested? Its seems like a rational approach...
  14. Hi Lord_tiger_putin I've just come across your post and wondered how this ended. Did you have any joy?
×
×
  • Create New...