Seems they don't keep copies of the relevant terms and conditions as a matter of course then.

Fancy joining me in a complaint to the OFT about their behaviour?! Roll up, roll up, let's join the Sainsburys CCA circus!

I hope the FOS reconsider whether or not their failure to invetigate my issue as Sainsburys, like all banks, have their customers over a barrel in all of this. They persist and chase the debt, setting DCAs onto the 'debtor' and potentially ruining a person't credit record in the meantime thereby depriving them of favourable finance when it comes to mortgages and the like in an effort to just get a customer to pay up. The customer in the meantime having to develop a cast iron stomach every time the phone rings or a letter comes through the door as they know it's another 'chaser' from the Bank acting contrary to the law and guidance notes in respect of these activities.

Even if the OFT don't investigate this issues further - after all, it is just one complaint at the moment - I'm hoping that they send some sort of correspondence to me which states the legal position in respect of these matters that I can throw in the face of Sainsburys and hopefully help ward them off.

I would say that at the moment, I'm still paying payments towards the balance of my card and have offered to settle the account (standing at £1500) with a F & F payment of £400 - generous in my opinion - which was rejected in their last correspondence to me. I'm coming up to renewal time of my mortgage deal hence I must have a good credit history in the run up to this, not to mention my own responsibilities as a professional to have a 'good' credit history.

The ball is very much in their court.

Right, one year later and this hasn't really moved on from a Sainsburys point of view. They've refused to accept they're doing anything wrong so I've complained to the FOS. The FOS say it's nothing they can do anything as they are not there to 'police banks' and returned all my papers. I've sent them back to them asking them to mediate in a dispute not police anything.

Anyhoo, in the meantime I've written to the OFT to ask them to consider Sainsburys credit licence given their continued pursuit of a debt while failing to provide a valid CCA. Sent a copy to Sainsburys Chief Exec so he is aware what I'm doing.

HAK! Good to hear from you again! By coincidence I was coming on here to update my own Sainsburys thread - namely, FOS returned my complaint saying it is 'not their role to Police banks' so I've sent it back asking them to help consider and resolve a dispute not police anything.

Also, decided that I'm p*ssed off with Sainsburys not being able to present the appropriate documentation to me so I've complained to the OFT and asked them to consider their credit licence given their failure to observe the law and continued failure to observe the OFT's own Guidance Note on Debt Collection.

Feel like joining me in my complain, HAK?!

AA, just caught up with your post (been a bit preoccupied with mine!) and find the response you have had from the OFT to be really interesting. Perhaps a suitable time for me to start to complain in their direction too about the Halifax. Their comments about Limitations and CCAs though are really useful to me and many others - big thanks to you for typing it all in!

(I have visions of you sitting bashing the keyboard in anger as you retell some of the nonsense that you have been fed by your bank - I certainly do that!)

I'm quite careful about giving details over in the street and things like that, but the uncertainty over the very detail over how this card was applied for given the information they've supplied is one of the reason I want answers from them. It's at the stage now where I feel like Quincy ME examining every detail of what they have supplied me with, unlike him, I don't seem to have been able to find an answer!

I have returned the Allocation Questionnaire and in it have said that I would consider using the small claims mediation service in an effort to resolve this. All along I've wanted answers from HBOS but not got any, and the defence that they have served seems very murky in it's detail (right down to denying that Halifax Ireland is even part of their group of companies, something which is blatantly untrue).

I had thought about whether it had been filled in during a branch visit or something which I have asked them about and there was just that it was completed by 'mailer' with no further details about that.

I contacted the FOS to complain about Sainsburys failing to send a copy of the original terms and conditions of my credit card. Sainburys say that have complied, I don't think they have so there's a dispute there.

The FOS have responded and say that they are 'not there to police banks or ask them to improve their procedures'. I hadn't asked them to police anything but requested them to act as mediators in a dispute.

Any suggestions where to go next?

I have to complete my allocation questionnaire by Monday (been busy, serious stuff going on elsewhere). Is the court mediation service worthwhile or should I persist with my full court application?

I made a 'without prejudice save as to costs' offer to settle with them at £1200 which they rejected - something which I thought was a fair offer at about a half of the total amount as it now stands. Anyway, they didn't respond within the timescale I'd given them to consider it (by 2nd July) so now got to take it onto the next stage.

Frustratingly I'm hearing lots about the Halifax settling with other people........................but not me! I won't take it personally

Does anyone have any experience of the mediation service?

I think section 17 perfectly fine! (Mind you, I've seen some of the things I wrote in my case against the Halifax!).

What about saying something about them being unqualified to suggest the extent of your loss?

I'm at the court stage with them at the moment and the correspondence I have received from them purporting to be the CCA has even less info in it than yours! They have even described it as an application form in their correspondence with me thus far.

I have less and less respect for this shower after each passing day.

Isn't it awful how these costs just keep accruing as we try to do little more than just make a bank accountable for their actions?

I've got to pay £35 with my AQ and then the hearing costs thereafter. Like you, it seems like the stocking and suspenders will be on this weekend to pay for it all At least that will help pay for the stamps.

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand a simple google search for Halifax Ireland Insurance states that they 'are a subsidiary of the HBoS group'.

I did not come down the Clyde on a bananaboat.

From reading the article on the Which website, the rules for pre-95 sales give a degree of comfort over this too. I've asked the Association of British Insurers for a copy of their good practice guidelines from 2001 as the Halifax deny that they've done anything contrary to good practice at the time, although almost everything I've read does suggest that a customer should be provided with sufficient information to make an informed decision over the purchase of insurance.

Interestingly, the Halifax also claim that there's no fudiciary relationship in respect of PPI between myself and them and that the relationship is with Halifax Ireland Insurance, therefore, the Halifax themselves have not mis-sold anything. They also state that Halifax Ireland is not part of their group of companies. I'll do a wee bit more digging on this - my former employer is on first name terms with the former Governor of the Bank of Scotland, so I'll ask him to do a bit of digging too!

Would be interested in anyone's thoughts before I return the Allocation Questionnaire.

I know the feeling! I got a few of these delivered when I was out of work and managed to beg and borrow cash from other people to make good the arrears within the timescale on the Notice.

It would be worth sending them a recorded delivery letter confirming that payment has been made (confirm the date and method payment) and state that you deem that the requirements outlined in the Notice have been met and that no information will be passed to CRAs as a result.

From memory, I did something similar and gave me something to brandish at them in the event that they made an error and did send something to CRAs about a default. (I'm overly cautious with any bank and take a belt and braces approach with everything they do now)

Received a copy their defence today and I'm sitting plodding through it. Will post further details once I have had a chance to consider it myself, however, so far it looks like they're going on the 6 year time bar and also saying that the fact that the CCA was date stamped was enough for them (no mention of the missing prescribed terms)

SHould have added that they are saying that there was no responsibility on them to tell me that I could have sought alternative insurance elsewhere.

Charming.

Two months arrears is normally the point at which you will be sent a letter like this. Halifax and RBoS dis similar to me a few years back but I managed to avoid further action by paying the same due within the mentioned timescale.

Can you make payment of the amount shown before the date in question?

If you can, you'll note that the letter states that they will take no further action before then. I've had letters like this before and they have terrified me, but luckily as I was able to make a payment of the sum due within the relevant timescale it has prevented any default being registered with credit reference agencies. The only info that went to CRAs was the 2 late months arrears.

Interesting that they are seeking to preserve the matter of costs at this stage - perhaps they are not that confident after all??

Here's a copy of a summary of the details contained within ICOBS. Although a fairly recent document, it does show how the FSA would assess the principles of Insurance selling:

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Doing/small_firms/insurance/pdf/ICOB_ataglance.pdf

Very interesting as I'm a few steps in the process behind you I don't know whether to be surprised or not that they haven't responded!

Unfortunately no - it looks like it's going to be up to the individual to fight against the banks on their own on the inidividual points of each case. That places a hell of an onus on the consumer to try and become a legal expert, and take a confident approach when taking on the banks. Not easy when each case is so different.

Well done!!!! I'm delighted to hear of another positive outcome when it comes to PPI mis-selling!!!! (And a bit jealous too! )

The Guidelines in place in the FSA Handbook (ICOBS 2.4) on Record-Keeping state that firms "....have to deal with requests for info from the FSA as well as queries and complaints from customers". If they had no record of the original telephone conversation over the PPI sale, then it would have been worthwhile reminding them of the guidance note put in place by the FSA where it specifically states that firms need to maintain adequate records in the event that the FSA or customers makes requests.

Imagine if the Nationwide had been asked to provide info to the FSA and they didn't have any???? That would have been a healthy stick to beat them with.

Absolutely! My claim against the Hellifax relates to PPI applied to for a credit card, and I've found them to be quite stubborn over all of this. My own case is now at the Court stage with both parties having filed papers (the halifax defence should be copied onto me by the end of this comin week) and from there it looks like we'll be battering it out in court.

Wonder if it will be Howard or the girl who sings on the flying swan who appears in front of the judge?

Definitely! Your insurance appears to have been taken out at roughly the same time as mine and the brick wall responses they have given you are similar to the responses I have had. I'm now at the Court stage and understand that the Halifax have filed their defence. Hopefully I'll receive a copy of this over the next few days.

As I've always said, I just want my money back as the policy that I had didn't provide cover for me at any point, not least when Halifax Ireland rejected it during an awful period of unemployment where I thought I was going to end up losing my home and my sanity. My heart still skips a beat whenever the phone goes at home as it just reminds me of what it was like to get 10 calls a day that summer from their Collections team chasing up debts while I falsely held out hope for their insurance to 'protect' me. They really are taking money from the sick and the dying and the desperate with these useless policies. I cancelled shortly thereafter (once I got back to work and feeling able enough to even open any white envelopes from banks), and it saved me £80 a month thereon.

The balance of my card is £750 now while it was once at nearly £13,000 as I used it to pay my mortgage, food, power, etc while I was out of work. Eventually my mortgage company paid out on that policy, but the Halifax was the only one who never. Their own peculiar exclusions meant that of the 4 cards I had, only 1 did not cover me. I'm firmly of the view that any unusual or unique exlusions relating to that policy should have been made known to me. ICOBS contained within the FSA Handbook appears to agree.

I have been looking through the FSA website and the Insurance Conduct of Business Sourcebook (ICOBS)makes for interesting reading.

In it, it outlines it's rules and guidelines for member firms and outlines general rules under (s) 138 under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000. Most of the Rules create binding obligations on firms, while guidance is under (s) 157 of the Act. These are not binding but have an evidential effect.

I have had a look through these but would welcome other people's thoughts as to the most important parts of this. It covers statements of demands and needs, pre and post-contract info for protection policies, communication requirements and a few other items which may be relevant.

BB, I have been scanning through the FSA's Regulations and guidelines on PPI (ICOBS - Insurance Conduct of Business Sourcebook) and it says under 6.4.5 that "A firm must draw a consumer's attention to the importance of reading the PP contract documentation before the end of the cancellation period to check that the policy is suitable for the consumer".

The Regulations are effective general rules under (s) 138 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 and most of the rules within the Sourcebook create binding obligations on firms to behave in a particular manner. Is there any specific insistance in the documentation that relates to your original application which mentions contract documentation or a cancellation period?

Also, under ICOBS 6.4.4 It states that "A firm must privude a consumer with a policy summary within good time before the conclusion of a contract".

Did they ever ask you to complete a needs and benefits questionnnaire? ICOBS 5.2 states that 'firms must specifiy on the basis of information provided by the customer, the needs and benefits of that customer'. The Halifax never asked me to complete one of these (I'm assuming that these are those questionnaires which ask about back pain, cancer, asthma, hospital treatments, etc, as well as some employment questions).

I have also seen an article on Which? which states that it is 'the insurers responsibility to ensure that you are aware of the main conditions of the policy' and that clear expectations must be set as to the scope and limitations of the cover.

There was no reference attached to this quote, and I'm trying to ascertain whether it is explicit in law that this is the case. I believe that the Sale of Goods Act may cover this as it consider the 'fit for purpose' requirements but I suspect that this would be useful in both of our cases.

The other BB.