Hi - I managed to get money back on the PPI front eventually. No success on the increase of interest prior to removing the credit facility away from me. Just got my head down and paid off the balance of the card. Was a great relief not to have to deal with Egg again!

Not much happened with me - I ended up just paying up the card and forgetting about it! I did argue the case with them but I was getting nowhere with so just paid it up. Felt as if there was a little bit of momentum lost in this, and didn't know where to take it so just left it.

Ok ok ok. Update for everyone, the FOS have upheld my complaint against Sainsburys! They wrote to me about 5 months ago telling me that my case agsinst Sainsburys did not come within the appropriate timescale, but it did, so I challenged them and a few weeks ago got a call from them telling me that they were upholding my case against Sainburys and that they would be contacting me with a settlement offer of full refund of premiums plus contract interest plus 8% interest! I think my case was first reviewed by a new adjudicator as he seemed to be saying that I was outwith the 6 yr timescale even though I specifically made my complaint within the 6 yrs. Thankfully the second person who looked at it agreed (and obviously had to go back to the Bank to correct what the initial decision was). This is the last reclaim case I have - I've yet to lose - but thank to this website and MSE, I've got my life back.

Are you me? Same thing happened to me today and I was wondering exactly the same thing.

I had a nice little letter from them following my request for them to justify the decision to raise interest rates a month before terminating my agreement. Apparently section 17 gives them the right to do that, although I'd suggested that it was an unfair practice in that it would appear they have done that as a matter of course to a large percentage (if not all) of the 100,000 customers whose accounts they have closed. Anyone else complaining to them about this?

Cheers for that - I certainly will! I think the real issue is the extent of the teeth which the FOS have. They initially returned my complaint saying, "Sorry - we can't deal with this" then suddenly it has become something they can deal with!

Thanks very much for that - I'll certainly dig out the quote from the OFT. Any suggestions where I can find it?

That was my line of thought too - if I stopped paying I could face a year or two of constant phone calls and letters and constantly having to tell Sainsburys what they can and can't do under the law! I still have my PPI reclaim being considered by them as they'd split the two issues into 2 totally seperate matters so hopefully the PPI matter can be resolved soon and I can soon kiss goodbye to Sainsburys!

Hi - I've updated my thread with the results of my own CCA issues against Sainsburys. No luck for me I'm afraid. I hope you have more luck than I've had!

Pretty much everything in the FOS's letter - I have 2 weeks to raise any matters with them.

The bulk of the letter I received back from the FOS.

Funny, mine said I earned £9,700 a month! Something a bit strange if this is happening with all these applications, eh?

I'm now seriuosly considering a 'no win, no fee' company to deal with this now, although i think their advice is the same, "Pay them nothing, let them chase, let them default and then let a judge decide". Unfortunately I work for a financial services company managing certain specialist accounts so a default for me would mean goodbye to my job..................income...............home................... Surely there's a fairer way than this to resolve such matters?

Hi - just an update on the FOS response to my CCA case: They say the appropriate forum for me to do that would be the courts. Not suprised at all by this as they routinely turn around with CCA matters and say, "Not our area". They acknowledge that Sainsburys didn't even send me terms and conditions for nearly 10 months. They say that 'enorceable' realtes to 'enforceable in a court of law' and that the 'normal administrative operations of the account such as charging interest, or seeking repayment is not disputed'. They also say that the fact that I have been continuing to make payments to the account suggest that there is no 'dispute' in the OFT sense and that I am not disputing any debt to Sainsburys (Rather than a recognition that I need a good credit record to work and that forcing the situation into a default to get taken to court to resolve the CCA issue would be damn near useless for me if I had to resign from work!) Also that the OFT do not prohibit interest of charges being added to loan accounts when in dispute and not credit card accounts. The Bank are deemed not to require to forward copies of the term of the agreement at the time it was opened but can get away with current terms and conditions. That the correct course of resolving this would be in court if I was a defaulting debtor (so, they're effectively asking me to stop paying and force Sainsburys to take me to court!) I'm not disappointed as I've read from other people that the FOS don't exactly view these matters favourably. Oh well, let's hope they FOS take them to task on the pre-ticked PPI acceptance box on the CCA!

I've had the FOS consider my case against Sainsburys and they have came back with: They say the appropriate forum for me to do that would be the courts. Not suprised at all by this as they routinely turn around with CCA matters and say, "Not our area". They acknowledge that Sainsburys didn't even send me terms and conditions for nearly 10 months but have said nothing about them seeking to enforce the card in the meantime as well as process info to credit reference agencies. They say that 'enorceable' realtes to 'enforceable in a court of law' and that the 'normal administrative operations of the account such as charging interest, or seeking repayment is not disputed'. They also say that the fact that I have been continuing to make payments to the account suggest that there is no 'dispute' in the OFT sense and that I am not disputing any debt to Sainsburys (Rather than a recognition that I need a good credit record to work and that forcing the situation into a default to get taken to court to resolve the CCA issue would be damn near useless for me if I had to resign from work, lose my income, lose my house, etc!) Also that the OFT do not prohibit interest of charges being added to loan accounts when in dispute and not credit card accounts. The Bank are deemed not to require to forward copies of the term of the agreement at the time it was opened but can get away with current terms and conditions. That the correct course of resolving this would be in court if I was a defaulting debtor (so, they're effectively asking me to stop paying and force Sainsburys to take me to court!) Looks like I wasted my time with the FOS on that one!

Hi all - got the first part of my CCA issue with Sainsburys bumped by the FOS today. They say the appropriate forum for me to do that would be the courts. Not suprised at all by this as they routinely turn around with CCA matters and say, "Not our area" and I've seen a few people on here have this response. They acknowledge that Sainsburys didn't even send me terms and conditions for nearly 10 months but have said nothing about them seeking to enforce the card in the meantime as well as process info to credit reference agencies. They say that 'enforceable' relates to 'enforceable in a court of law' and that the 'normal administrative operations of the account such as charging interest, or seeking repayment is not disputed'. They also say that the fact that I have been continuing to make payments to the account suggest that there is no 'dispute' in the OFT sense and that I am not disputing any debt to Sainsburys (Rather than a recognition that I need a good credit record to work and that forcing the situation into a default to get taken to court to resolve the CCA issue would be damn near useless for me if I had to resign from work!) Also that the OFT do not prohibit interest of charges being added to loan accounts when in dispute and not credit card accounts. The Bank are deemed not to require to forward copies of the term of the agreement at the time it was opened but can get away with current terms and conditions. That the correct course of resolving this would be in court if I was a defaulting debtor (so, they're effectively asking me to stop paying and force Sainsburys to take me to court!)

Hi all - got the first part of my CCA issue with Sainsburys bumped by the FOS today. they say the appropriate forum for me to do that would be the courts. Surprise suprise - them and their slippery shoulders! Not suprised at all by this as they routinely turn around with CCA matters and say, "Not our area". They acknowledge that Sainsburys didn't even send me terms and conditions for nearly 10 months but have said nothing about them seeking to enforce the card in the meantime as well as process info to credit reference agencies. They say that 'enorceable' realtes to 'enforceable in a court of law' and that the 'normal administrative operations of the account such as charging interest, or seeking repayment is not disputed'. They also say that the fact that I have been continuing to make payments to the account suggest that there is no 'dispute' in the OFT sense and that I am not disputing any debt to Sainsburys (Rather than a recognition that I need a good credit record to work and that forcing the situation into a default to get taken to court to resolve the CCA issue would be damn near useless for me if I had to resign from work!) Also that the OFT do not prohibit interest of charges being added to loan accounts when in dispute and not credit card accounts. The Bank are deemed not to require to forward copies of the term of the agreement at the time it was opened but can get away with current terms and conditions. That the correct course of resolving this would be in court if I was a defaulting debtor (so, they're effectively asking me to stop paying and force Sainsburys to take me to court!)

Is it worth asking the opinion of the FSA or OFT on this? I know they often say it isn't something they can get involved in, but don't the OFT have to stand up and take notice if enough people complain?

Interesting that they continue to refer to the processing of data to third parties - wonder what right they think they have to do that after an agreement has been terminated?!

Excellent stuff - always good when someone won't be bound by confidentiality! Sounds interesting as I've asked about the issue of terminating the agreement but the ramping up of interest in the weekes preceeding the termination. I've asked them to justify this and asked if they've signed up to the FSA Initiative 'Treating Customers Fairly' and where they feel they've complied with this with the interest rate hike. Similarly they have refused my request to refund PPI cover despite acknowledging that I wasn't covered because of a pre-existing medical condition (They've put that in writing frustratingly) and I've now got a balance of £1300 which has reduced by £1000 since the account was terminated so I'm keen to hear what happens with your case! Is there a timescale you could tell us about involved?

There must be a few twitches in Egg at the moment over this! I'm assuming they would offer the claimant whatever they require with a confidentiality clause as an outcome which favours the customer could be devastating for them. I trust that they their claim is to have all monies refunded after the 31st Jan 08 (which is the date my agreement was terminated) or other effective date of termination? And does this include other compensation too?

As I said earlier, they will not be aware that their cover is useless until they try and claim. If, as forecasts suggest, unemployment reaches 3 million, that's a lot of people to be claiming on various insurance policies. Particularly if 84% of claims are refused (From memory, that figure came from the CC report). As for not protesting before, that's the same in pretty much all PPI cases, not just cases against Egg online. You find out when you claim, or when the media raises the issue (as with other financial products). Certainly in my case against the Halifax (which was resolved via legal action), I only became aware that the policy was useless when I needed it most. If the advice is that this case and Egg's barrister too far beyond me as a consumer, then I'll have to have think about giving in. Thanks for the realism. Looks like they've won Edit - Sorry, looks like I'm posting on someone else's thread about my case. Sorry to the OP.

The majority of people only realised there was an issue when it was raised by the media, hence the comparison I made with PPI cover. And this will only get worse. If the unemployment figures forecast actually do occur, then there will be more people trying to claim on PPI cover, and more people finding out it is worthless is a large number of cases. Those who are covered have less issue - again, similar to endowments.

Just a thought - has anyone contacted the Office of Fair Trading to ask for their understanding of the situation in this instance? Or would the FSA have reason to comment?

Thanks for that. To be honest, a part settlement would more than satisfy me. Obviously the long-term pre-existing condition I had would prevent a claim for that type of illness (and given the length of time I was suffering from it, I'm sure it would be more than likely that this would be the cause of any need to claim under the illness policy), but I would have been covered from a redundancy perspective. The fact that the policy only provided some cover is probably enough for me to concede on that point but via their own admission that the policy would not cover me from an illness persepctive is particularly galling when they then turn around and say, "So tough". So much for the Treating the Customers Fairly initiative!