Hi Abroadgirl. Did you ever ask them for a copy of the credit agreement? Can you post a link to your thread and will see if I can help you with a letter...I should have one suitable knocking about I had Buchanan Clark & Wells and got rid of them easliy enough. Don't be scared of them...they just like to sound big lol, they ain't!

Morning Diddydicky.....your letter away to the bank recorded. Lets just wait and see

Only mentioned money laundering as a possible excuse, but it cannot be that. Situation is, she had a loan...paid for few years and settled the balance with her existing loan. She discovered on CCA'ing the she had PPI on the original loan, she could not have claimed on and did not ask for (internet application). They agreed and offered refund almost right away. She still has an existing loan with the bank and her a/c and overdraft all running as normal....their offer said they would simply credit the refund to her current a/c if she signed and returned...which she did....now this rigmarol. The letter reads like TV instructions....step by step, including handing back the letter to return it to them. As you say rickyd, in these circumstances...odd. Its only a wee drop of money as well lol! Very interested to see if anyone else been told to do this process before payout.

So, in very basic terms, for every book debt in recoveries (CMS) they can liteally triple the asset value in this way. Like you said, each a/c may only be small figures but what volume in total is transferred to CMS each yea? Double/triple that figure and thats quite scary. And if they then 'write off' chunks of the original debt....does their 'asset' balance drop by the inflated amount also? Or am I just 20 pages behind lol

Yes I did As far as the agreement being terminated unlawfully etc and how to approach...there has been a LOT of high level discussion on the legalities etc and what to do lately and I was given sound advice - and stopped from making a huge error! Check my thread, page 2 and you will see the difference from the letter I intended to send the cracker a cagger gave me (post 36) http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/207374-rbs-defaulting-me-no-2.html Hope it helps and best of luck to you

Also look into the permission status of the Broker. Were they independant and fully authorised or were they linked to the Lender in anyway ie and appointed representative maybe? If they were linked in this was the Lender is fully responsible for their behaviour, actions, auditing them and regulating them so would not be able to claim its nothing to do with them. Just in case!

Don't be so sure.... You'd be surprised what some have discovered when looking right into the details and financials sometimes. Don't just look at the face of the agreement and think thats it. And you should care if it means that the broker acts out of their own self interest rather than his duty to you...which can end up costing you lots more. Thats why these rules are there as greed always crops up!

How do you find and understand all this stuff Postggj! Be dancing that jig round the kitchen soon methinks Hows the blood pressure Margaret Young?

Sorry Caro, did not make that post clear. The questionnaire was for the PPI claim. Over 20 questions! Sent this letter, will update with their response: I am in receipt of your letter dated 9th July 2009 and am extremely unhappy at the apparent delays in investigating my complaint. I do appreciate you have 8 weeks to resolve my complaint but I have been given no explanation as to why this has been delayed again, yet I am now being asked to complete a questionnaire, in what I can only assume is an attempt to gain information about the sale of the insurances disputed which should already be in your records. I am confused by this request, weeks after receiving my initial complaint, which already stated my reasons and I also clearly explained my reasons to the branch manager when attempting to lodge this complaint on 19th June 2009. I am also very concerned that almost the entire questionnaire is asking for details you should already hold in your system from our loan application, and am at a loss as to why you require me to try and find time to dig out old financial details etc and provide these again. The only questions I need to answer (again) are questions 18 to 20 – which I assume I have to provide more detail on (again). After 3 weeks it is clear that the basic paperwork involved in the sale has not even been reviewed yet. Again, I expect a review to ensure the sale of the above mentioned policy was fair, reasonable and in my best interest and the relevant facts to be taken into consideration: 1 - Our employment status at the time, which was clearly explained to your advisor at length whilst applying, would have actually rendered the policy useless. I was self-employed and (I now note) not even covered as the 2nd person on the agreement. Mr Friend worked for our local authority, XX Council, which provided more than adequate accident/sickness and death benefit as a standard work benefit, and operated a no redundancies policy. I can find little or no circumstance in which Mr Friend would have been able to make a claim. Any extremely limited circumstances in which he MAY have been able to claim were then certainly not worth the cost of this expensive insurance. 2 – We explained at length our employment circumstances to your advisor and, despite a very strong (and in my opinion very misleading) sales pitch, we completely refused the insurance. Your advisor made no attempt to explain relevant exclusions, ask health related questions, complete demands & needs etc, or provide any ppi details, leaflets or booklets as we had already refused the offer. The agreement was literally slid across the table and we were asked to simply sign the bottom. 4 – Considering the sales pitch used by your advisor and his actions in then adding an expensive policy to our loan anyway despite being aware of our circumstances and refusal, I can only assume your advisor had a financial interest in selling this policy. Please confirm if your advisor received any commission or incentive, whether bonus or target related or not, for the sale of this insurance. In your response to my Subject Access Request, you state you have provided all information relating to this loan account. I note you have supplied absolutely no documentation relating to the PPI, despite my specific request for this. No demands & needs statement, no pertinent personal, employment or health checks relating to the suitability of the policy, no details of the insurer or underwriter, no copy of the application. The PPI element details were specifically requested and was also part of this loan therefore you have not supplied all the relevant information and I require copies of these documents. Even though you have provided a statement showing only half the transactions on a 60 month loan, I note the for the first 34 months the full monthly instalment of £234.62 was deducted from the servicing bank account, yet only varying amounts of between £175-£185 were applied to the loan account? I will require a full explanation of this along with the other irregularities on my account but in this instance, please clarify if this monthly shortfall was in anyway related to my Insurance payments. I am concerned that I actually paid the PPI element of the loan in 34 months yet was charged interest over 60 months. Further to this, I have still received no acknowledgement or response to the serious issues raised in my letter of 3rd July 2009 and require clarification on these matters also - explanation as to how the signatures from a ‘scanned’ copy of the agreement can be different, the need for a ‘cooling off’ period and if this loan was processed as ‘secured’. Please also clarify urgently if there has been any security place on my property. I have not returned your questionnaire for the reasons listed above – every question is requesting details you should already hold in your system - but have answered the relevant questions in this letter. Should you have any further genuine queries please ensure these are put in writing to which you will receive a prompt response. Should you require extra time to review the sale of my PPI policy or you feel I am not entitled to this review, please confirm this along with your reasons. As stated in my letter dated 19 June 2009, unless my complaint has been investigated and there has been some attempt at resolution within the 8 week timescale, I will pass this to the FOS for investigation and I will be advising them of your failure to follow your own complaints procedure. In Summary Actually now investigate my complaint and confirm your findings urgently. Provide the information missing from my Subject Access request Confirm if your advisor received any incentive for the sale of this insurance. Clarify if the shortfall in payments to the loan account relate in any way to the PPI. Acknowledge and clarify the irregularities in the loan paperwork – differences, signatures, security, cooling off period etc.

Hi Alanalana Am fighting a Clydesdale missold PPI for a mate and they have just tried the questionnaire (fishing expedition) carry on too. I couldn't believe it....I have supplied less details when applying for huge loans or an MOD security pass! They sent a questionnaire that asked basically everything except the colour of my grannies underwear: Full financial details from the date of application, salary, outgoings, dependants, full employment circumstances, loan details, loan application details, PPI application details, recollection of events, the works! Honestly...about 20 questions! Basically asking for everything that should be in their system anyhoo, its a blatant fish for info...how dare they?! Sent a letter clearly stating it would not be filled in as it was an attempt to gain information about the sale of the insurances disputed which should already be in their records, repeated the basic reasons the policies were useless and ended with: Should you have any further genuine queries please ensure these are put in writing to which you will receive a prompt response. They really want to play with you though don't they! Have they been warned about you?

She is just going to phone the FOS in the morning. It is just a ridiculous and highly suspicious demand to make. We CANNOT refund your PPI claim into your a/c until you bring in photo ID bearing your normal signature and you certify it is a true copy? It ain't the money laundering regs...she has banked there for years, loans, overdrafts etc...they didn't need this carry on to pay thousands into the a/c on her signed acceptance of a loan or to open the a/c's, anything! They are at it

Hi all, thanks for the replies. I think she will be doing it anyhoo, but it just seems strange, over the top and for no valid reason we can think of...its not like they state why. Having double checked the original settlement offer (letter from bank, court was not required) they said sign this declaration and acceptance and we will put the money in your current a/c. So no extra security required, not sending out a cheque etc......still confused. Think we'll just be buying one of the CAG's great new signature strip anti tampering thingys anyhoo

lol, is that Phil McCrack's brothers? Not really off topic, this thread is all about being bent over and...... While I am on, got one that needs advice. My sister CCA'd RBS ages ago, no response. She has just won her PPI fight against them for a previous loan and accepted their offer by signing the acceptance and returning it as asked. Weeks have went by and no cheque then she receives a letter today stating " To secure payment of the money it is necessary to confirm your signature as without this I am unable to process your case. It then asks her to visit her local branch with the letter, the pre-paid envelope and ask them to photocopy a form of photo ID certifying it is a true copy. (all of those bear signatures do they not) She is then to hand the pre-paid envelope to the staff as this will enable them to foward to them the certified documentation together with the letter, so they can proceed to process the declaration and acceptance. My question is...EH? Why on earth after receiving her SIGNED acceptance does she have to go through this very specifically stated step by step rigmarol inc. phot ID and confirming signatures just to get the refund they have offered? I will say again that they haven't complied wiht the CCA request.....Hmmmm I wonder

Capquest have this a/c! Have RBS actually sold one of these dodgy a/c's to a DCA Thats what has really grabbed me about yours is that if this is one of those INTERNAL router a/c's then how are you being chased by an EXTERNAL dca like Capquest?!!!

V interesting. As my loan has (apparently) defualted they are sending all my a/c's to recoveries and I cannot use them anymore..ie closed. But they certainly did not give me 30 days prior notice!

LMFAO diddydicky, you're too quick for me, I had to read that a few times before the light went on Interesting mental image all the same! Have tickled yours too, I'm just that kinda gal

ukbix, thanx for the reply. Allok, they wanted to see me to ensure maintenance was being paid for the kids....that was all but it sure worries you! I cannot live like this, feeling like you constantly have to justify yourself, I feel really sorry for those who are unable to work and have to deal with that system. thanks again, panic over!

Fantastic minds think alike Can't wait to see how this plays out lol. Did you read the stuff about securities? Did you browse the sections round it about what happens if their paperwork is not right or they don't comply with your request?

Elsa, thanks for the support, really appreciate it. Have tickled your green spot If I can ever........

You haven't post....you did start digging into this before, we could never get to the bottom of it though! I may be disappear sometimes but am still here

Double whammy then really. As Steven says, they are naughty with the Insurance side of it and the Acceptance Fee they LIST in the charge for credit....but we all know and have proof they then TREAT it like credit and charge interest: Part II Credit Agreements, Hire Agreements and Linked Transactions 8 Consumer credit agreements (1) A personal credit agreement is an agreement between an individual (“the debtor”) and any other person (“the creditor”) by which the creditor provides the debtor with credit of any amount. (2) A consumer credit agreement is a personal credit agreement by which the creditor provides the debtor with credit not exceeding £25,000. (3) A consumer credit agreement is a regulated agreement within the meaning of this Act if it is not an agreement (an “exempt agreement”) specified in or under section 16. 9 Meaning of credit (1) In this Act “credit” includes a cash loan, and any other form of financial accommodation. (2) Where credit is provided otherwise than in sterling, it shall be treated for the purposes of this Act as provided in sterling of an equivalent amount. (3) Without prejudice to the generality of subsection (1), the person by whom goods are bailed or (in Scotland) hired to an individual under a hire-purchase agreement shall be taken to provide him with fixed-sum credit to finance the transaction of an amount equal to the total price of the goods less the aggregate of the deposit (if any) and the total charge for credit. (4) For the purposes of this Act, an item entering into the total charge for credit shall not be treated as credit even though time is allowed for its payment. This issue has been kicking about for ages and has nagged away at all of us (POst, Andie, Millymo, me! etc) The implications are huge! hehe

The more I look into it the more I think they are stuffed on this one CCA clearly states : For the purposes of this Act, an item entering into the total charge for credit shall not be treated as credit even though time is allowed for its payment. So would that be just about every agreement they've ever written then pmsl?

Wow, excellent thread, is goign to be so useful to all those who got slapped with Defaults for 'daring' to actually exercise a few legal rights against these bullies. Defo deserves to be a stickie!!!! I will be tackling a few defaults and need all the help I can get. Thankyou Car2403

Subbing amd best of luck on your next move Paul. That was a disgustubg outcome and totally unjustified. It is particularly galling when a judge actually ignores the legal facts, shoes a bias to one party and bases a judgement on nonsense...just makes a mockery

Subbing, very useful POC details!