That's what I meant. Sorry. They can't just dismiss the OP whilst off long term sick anyway, so there should be a good chance of getting a settlement.

I would open up a parachute account because sooner or later they will close your account and enforce the debt. Send them a letter, stating the debt is in dispute. That way they can't take you to court. Also, send them a SAR to find out when they have charged you and then put in a claim for the amount. They will put your "complaint" on hold because of the OFT case, but at least you know it's in the system. Unfortunately at this time, I believe you'd have to be extremely shrewd to weasle your money out of the banks because of the OFT case. But as long as you make them aware the account is in dispute, they can't claim on it, or effect your credit report, etc etc. Hope that helps, if there's anything I've missed I'm sure others will chip in. Also, there's loads of template letters on here, which will help.

I know absolutely nothing about the third world debt problems, but it's a harsh reality of business unfortunately. We're at a bit of a deadlock here, because my argument is that these agreements are enforceable because you (I am not directly aiming this at you, or judging you) have enjoyed the use of a financial package for a lengthy time period, making payments to the company in the process. Bank charges are unlawful because the banks make a profit on top of a penalty, and are now challengeable under the unfair contract terms Act. Where as, increasing your interest by 5% is most likely covered in the contract that you agreed to....or didn't?...whatever the outcome of this argument is.... It is my understanding that an agreement would be executable minus a signature where benefit of a product / service has been received, over a period of time. If you felt that they were acting unlawfully by increasing your interest rate, you could challenge it using the same act of parliament as bank charges...I presume...

If you've been there for 9 years, can you not negotiate a redundancy settlement? 'unsustainable' is code for, they can't pay your wages, or whatever pay you are on indeffinately. If the job's stressful and causing your depression, find another. "he surmised that the chances of recurrence were quite high"....probably quite spot on. I don't understand why they should automatically look for another position for you. I know that under redundancy conditions, they are required to look at alternatives. Anyway, if they deem that you are a liability and you ask for them to look for another position for you, all they'll say is that they've explored the possibilities and unfortunately there aren't any available positions. That is if they are indeed desperate to get rid of you. You could argue your case and take them to court lasting months / years, which will probably add to your depression......

also, I don't understand this statement. Don't confuse CCAs with bank charges. By extortionately charging consumers, they are acting unetthically, agreed. Are you saying if they do it, it's ok for us to do the same??? By not filing the correct paperwork or crossing the right T's they are guilty only of an administrative error.

Woooah, calm down! I wasn't trying to suggest you specifically were comitting fraud. You never mentioned anything regarding negotiating with your bank on a settlement. (That's what I would do, and have done) Your original post was in reference to a non executed agreement, which would render the debt unenforceable?? unless I'm mistaken? I'd be surprised if the bank in question didn't use in their defence....your honour, this man has paid xxx amount over a period of xxxx and clearly knew of the existance of this debt. Whether the banks act morally is a separate issue to this thread, one which I do actually agree with you about. similarily, I can't speak for the DCA in that instance. What was the sum involved? Did they own the debt? How old was it? Was it in their best interest to enforce the debt, CCA or no? There's many different reasons why they may have not persued your debt.

That just made my day. I did wonder, when I saw a response after a year. We ended up asking for a longer time to repay the money in at a more affordable rate. However, we moved out recently, so still owe the council a sum of money. They will have to get in the que. I was made redundant 6 months ago, and I've only just found work. Thanks again for the response!

Could be an idea?! If you've used the credit, then it is repayable regardless of a signature on a bit of paper. If the courts are now accepting claims against financial organisations based on a lack of a signature, then I'm not surprised at the lack of communication and relations that exist between consumers and financial organisations. Anyway, surely that's almost fraud? I could get credit tomorrow, wait a few years and hit them with a CCA???? I've read a few posts in reference to the CCA and lack of signature, so I'll back down if this type of persuit is deemed legal / morally / ethically correct etc etc, and actually works.

That has to be the longest response time in history....but thanks anyway.

In my opinnion the fact you've been using the card indicates you accepted the financial package including T & C's, so no signature would be a technicality that may not be bought by a judge. I'm sure someone with better legal knowledge than me could answer better. Logically thinking, the only way a person could use the, 'unsigned agreement' get out clause would be if you were claiming you never applied for the card. Which, as I say, after 11 years would be hard to believe. Also, if you've been using the card, why are you claiming the agreement was not executed?

I just read the definition of an internet troll. Completely new terminology to me. I fail to see how the guy can be described as a troll?? His posts are informative and he appears to be collating relevant information on a specific topic for other users. Surely this thread is more of a waste of forum space than his? also, I don't like the fact you can block other users. If a troll, as you guys put it does appear, they should be banned, yet the ability to ignore users I'm sure, is being used to block threads contributed to by people who have a different opinnion or view on a subject. What if they need help? surely everyone deserves assistance? I've posted a few times and not had any responses to my SOS'. Does that mean somewhere along the line someone disagreed with me, couldn't be bothered to contribute to the thread and blocked me? How do I know if I myself has been blocked?!

Surely the lack of signature would be a technicality? If you've had the card since 1997, have you been using it?

I have a question. I have no idea how these things work because I've never paid a fee for an account. Is the monthly fee not fixed? ...regardless of whether the account is in credit or not? If that would be the case, it sounds like they haven't closed the account when request, and continued to charge for the mere fact an account is open in the OP's name??

Not an expert, but you should have reported to them the fact 8 grand had materialised in your account.... a few hundred quid MAY have been different, but 8 grand???? You have received money that clearly isn't yours, and have moved said money to another account, so yes, that is (or appears to be) fraud.... They closed your account because you are committing fraud against them. I don't like your position very much...

Hi, I think you should read this.... http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/benefits-tax-credits-minimum/125278-social-security-administration-act.html Unfortunately, in any financial jargon where the term, 'charges' are stated.... it appears bank charges are never ever what are intimated. I was caught out by the fact many CAG members still believe that the social security act can be used as a WMD against the banks when claiming, during the OFT case, based on 'financial hardship' arguments.... Doesn't work, they're still under no obligation to repay the money....yet...What I intend to do is wait until I see the banks next response to a letter I sent outlining the fact I am on JSA, benefits are set by the government as the minimum amount of money an individual needs to live on, and outlining my case. I also added a comment by the FSA that stated all complaints that involve financial hardship should still be looked at. If they still refuse, I shall further my complaint to the FSA and the FSO. I shall then continue with the claim, which will most likely involve a removal of a stay as mentioned in the above posts. We'll see what happens with that... I strongly don't believe that I have paid NI and tax for 10 years (may seem like a short time to some...), only for Natwest to literally remove my ability to feed myself purely to satisfy their shareholders.

yeah....I was on seroxat. Waste of time. I think there's been a lot of press about that placebo. I know people that have been on it, or something similar for years and they're no different. You can't replace feelings or train your brain to think another way with a "happy pill"... And, also, they're probably more addictive than any other illegal drug....Do you get the shakes? and fall asleep at 4PM?!? Sorry about the resignation thing. I honestly think you'd have a better time with a therapist getting to the route of your anxieties and learning to deal with them and counteract them. But hey, I'm no doctor, so I hope you get the best professional advice you can and things work out!

Smile did that to me too! unfortunately, due to their charges I was £600 - £700 overdrawn.... Without knowing for sure, I'd say it's a case of the marketing department pretty much working solo. Part of the lure towards signing up to a Smile account is a £500 'FREE' overdraft.....they fail to mention the time limit and the fact their system probably only allows an overdraft to be entered with a time limit....hence, you end up getting a customer service advisor pick up on an expiry, which then follows a secure message, followed a few months later by a nasty debt collection letter....they weren't very co-operative with me.

When I banked with Smile, I tried to pay a cheque into my account using their self addressed envelope system, which I thought was faultless....wrong...they "never received any cheque, sir"....don't trust them....

hahaha....that reminds me of the company I used to work for. They introduced 'Back to work' interviews....filled with questions like why you were ill?...what can the company do to improve conditions? etc etc luckily, I was quite friendly with the HR girl so I gave only sarcastic remarks and at one point I specifically asked for a bowl of fruit each day so as to hopefully build up my immune system.... With regards to agencies, it's only ever about quantity. They're only interested in getting people on their books. Despite living in Portsmouth I still get offers of work in Huxley, Andover, and various other places I think may or may not exist....I just learn to live with it, I have communicated my salary expectations and job requirements numerous times, but they always ask again. I just try to filter out the joke agencies and concentrate on the ones that don't bull**** their way through a conversation.

I think the difference with bank charges is that there isn't any compliance on either side. Theft would be, breaking into the bank and robbing it. To compare bank charges to theft is a bigotted attitude. I agree with most, free banking already exists in some form or another. I'm all for an account fee if the charges are, clear, transparent, fair, did I mention fair?! clear?! lawful?? how about, if the charges don't bring further charges...resulting in a mass build up of debt, which won't go away...in fact each month it increases, ruins your credit record and hinders any chance of leading a normal life for the next 10 years?....all for going £1 overdrawn because the banks can't or won't improve their system so as to not allow their own system to take money that doesn't exist.....resulting in charge upon charge, as mentioned above. I don't see how the banks can win in court in the long term because surely they have an admission of guilt by refunding several hundred million of pounds to consumers?? I'm sure their excuse would be, they were offering a gesture of good will....? However, believe me Natwest are much better than Smile....They charge per day, despite knowing most people get paid at the end of the month...so they deliberately remove funds on the 21st, knowing full well, further charges will rack up. So as mentioned above, going £1 overdrawn in January 06 cost me £1200 in 18 months and a black mark against my credit rating....I did operate responsibly, which is why Smile couldn't wait to have my business....2 years later, I have a Natwest basic account and I still have a debt with Smile, made up of their charges, which is yet another battle. I can't speak for any other CAG member, but all I want is to be treated with respect and to be able to know exactly what I am signing up to when I sign up to it. I want proper communication and dialogue between the consumer and the banks. Sorry for the rant guys...

Unfortunately, by the term 'charges'....overdraft charges / bounced DD, or SO are not included under that terminology....Don't ask me how, but I tried that one with Natwest and I hit a dead end.

Natwest are no different than any other finanial organisation. When you have money, they're all over you. When you don't, you are treated like ****. There's no middle ground....or personal connection behind dealing with a bank. I was made redundant about 6/7 months ago, received a few grand in compensation. Every time I would speak to them on the phone or go into the local branch I would be offered anything and everything. And now......I'm still searching for a job, had to move back home because I couldn't afford the rent... I had a bizarre conversation with Natwest before I moved back home....They charged me £38 because there was not enough money in my account to cover a payment of £275 for my rent....In fact, my account was at zero...So I queried how they can have a system that doesn't recognise when my account has no money in it?? and Why have I been charged when you are aware there is no money in my acount? Her answer was that, I'd instructed them to take the money....so I again made the point, that there was no money in my account??? her answer was the same....I instructed Natwest to transfer the money...blah blah blah..... I swear things would be much easier if we could all go back to keeping our money under the bed....

Hi, Got a question for you all... I was employed by one company who overpaid me by £136 in my final paycheck, before I went to work for another company. This all took place last November and a month or so after I left I did receive a letter from my previous employer asking for the money back as they claimed it was a clerical error. Anyway, some months have gone by now with no communication until I received a letter this morning from a local solicitors office acting on my ex-employers' behalf. The letter states that unless they receive full payment of £136 within 7 days they'll 'issue court proceedings without further notice'. They also say any court claim will include interest (which I guess will date back to last year!) and court fees. Can anyone give any advice? Many thanks.

cool. that's what I'm doing now. I'm modifying an LBA to express the extreme hardship I'm suffering and "requesting" that they deal with my claim outside of the current bank charges test case....we'll see what they say. also, there is a sticky thread in the general debt forum... http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt-issues/36790-bank-taking-your-benefits.html Slightly misleading until you read the very last post. For anyone like me who reads from the beginning, it would appear that it is completely illegal for any bank to take a sum of money directly from a state beneft....

cheers, I've opened a parachute account through the Halifax. Surely the letter to get charges back whilst on benefit should be removed from this site then?? Should I continue with the LBA etc etc? or wait until the test cast is complete? Natwest might have a change of heart and give my money back to me!