Hi there I am yet another person with problems with The Community Network TV. I had an appointment with a Sales Rep of the company who sold me a package which, it turns out, was mostly a complete fabrication. Here is what was offered: Two 42" screens in a GP practice, which were to be used to flash the name of the next patient to call them into their appointment. Full screen display of adverts, which would freeze when a patient's name popped up. I signed a contract on the basis of those promises, however, I became a bit suspicious about the company, when they did not get a reply from the sales rep for a week about an admin error on my paperwork. I popped along to the GP's practice to find that there were not two screens but one, which is 32" not 42", but to make matters worse, the screen was not being used to call patients into their appointment but to advertise the medical services the surgery offered. The receptionist confirmed that the screens will never be used for the purpose stated by the Sales Rep. The screen itself is in a dim corner of the waiting area with no one looking at it. I wrote to the Sales Manager with a full description of what their Sales Rep had offered and asked for a full refund of the 6 months paid on my credit card and the first month's direct debit, as the product had been mis-sold. My advertisement has not gone live. The Sales Manager basically stated that it's my word against the Sale Rep and that the contract I signed did not state exactly what service I would be getting!! I am staggered by their refusal to refund the money when they have not provided a service (he stated that they had done some work, as they had created the graphics, but I pointed out that I had created the advert, all his department did was make the image move on my request). My case has now been referred to the Sales Director, who has not got back to me. I have looked online and found that the Office of Fair Trading no longer exists and that I have to go the Citizens Advice Bureau. Does anyone have any tips from their dealings with this extremely dodgy operation? Cheers

Good Morning All, My dad took out a couple of loans and credit cards in the early 1990s with TSB (Later part of Lloyds). He was advised at the time that he could not take out the products unless he also took out PPI. He did not need the PPI as at the time he had a very good job which had an excellent sick pay/redundancy policy. He recently tried to claim this PPI back through a claim company. The claim company were eventually sent a Data Subject Access Request showing basic details of the accounts my Dad held with the TSB. Lloyds (TSB) claim that my Dad did not have PPI on any of the loans or credit cards. He knows that he did but has no way of proving otherwise. The Loans and CCs were taken out so long ago he has no proof. The claim company have since sent him a letter along with a copy of the DSAR stating that they have rescinded their contract with him. My first question is this, where does my dad go from here. He knows he was mis-sold PPI but has no way of proving this. Secondly, If there is a way of proceeding and he was successful in his claim, can the Claim company demand any of this money from him? Thank you so very much to anyone that takes the time to respond to this post. My Dad and I will be most grateful for any advice.

Hi everyone A couple of years ago I looked into trying to reclaim PPI that was brokered by Norton Finance as part of a secured loan I took out in October 2004 to consolidate some debts. I borrowed £ 40000 repayable over 25 years and the broker insisted I have the PPI which was to cover loan repayments for accident, redundancy and sickness for the first 5 years of the term of the loan. they added £ 9790 for the PPI. In October 2006 I decided to remortgage and so the secured loan was repaid after just two years. Now, when I enquired to First Plus about the mis-sold PPI, they told me that I had to take up the matter with Nortom Finance. However, by that time, the broker had stopped trading so went to the FCSC and they said that no claims before 1st January 2005 could be considered. However, my argument is that the PPI payment would have been paid by Firstplus to the broker and what is more to the fact, I only have the loan for two years so only two years of premium were used - I never was refunded the PPI premium as there were three years of cover still not used ? Firstplus are using the same excuse as the FCSC but they are the ones who paid the premium and they were the ones repaid in FULL when I redeemed the loan in October 2006. I am sure they are just making excuses to not pay but fee that even if I cant make a claim fro mis-sold PPI, I can atleast expect some of the PPI premium paid to be refunded as the original term was for 5 years and I only had the loan for 2 years. thanks - any advice would be great. I dont have statements anymore - just the account number, principal borrowed and PPI paid out in en email from FP. Dean

A unique Which? poll of bank staff at the five major banking groups found more than one in four who work in sales sometimes feel they’re expected to sell regardless of whether it’s appropriate. Which? gained unique access to hundreds of bank staff for the research, which was designed to test whether banks' public statements about scrapping sales targets have translated into real changes in staff behaviour and culture. We found evidence of improvement in some areas - for example, 78% of staff told us there is currently a greater emphasis on customer service than on selling products. However, it's clear the banks have more work to do. In our survey of 383 front-line bank staff from Barclays, HSBC, Lloyds Banking Group, Royal Bank of Scotland and Santander fewer staff said they feel under pressure to sell because of the culture in their bank http://www.which.co.uk/news/2015/08/poll-of-bank-staff-reveals-hard-sell-concerns-412851/

I'm looking for some advice if possible as I believe I've been mis-sold a car. The car in question is a 2015-plate Mini Cooper SD and picked it up back in March this year. It was 'bought' on a 4yr PCP deal and the car was already at the main dealer premises having been 'pre-reg'. I stressed to the salesman on three separate occasions that I go kayaking and therefore the car must be compatible with roof bars. On the evening when I collected the car I explicitly mentioned it again and he responded by saying that "yeah, there is something available that clips onto the trim around the roof". If you've driven a Mini you'll know that this trim is plastic and not structural. I therefore looked into buying roof bars and decided to go OEM as I've always done this in the past, however it became apparent that you can't simply buy and fit these roof bars. It turns out that the car must be spec'd for this at the manufacture stage and given that mine was already on the lot, this was never an option. Needless to say, the salesman never thought to mention this and had I known that this was the case then I'd never have gone through with the deal. Following an initial complaint, the dealership then offered to have the equipment 'retro-fitted' for around £1000. This worried me because when checking Mini forums it was noted that you couldn't retro-fit roof bars to the cars as they must have 'strengthening' works done during manufacture. Infact, one user went on a factory tour and was told by factory staff that retro-fitting was not possible at all. I spoke to Mini UK who have since told it can be done and I've managed to get them down to £300 outlay to me which they say is the cost of the roof bars. Given that never paid more than £180 for OEM roof bars I queried the cost with other Mini dealerships (parts depts) who all to a man said that my car was 'incompatible' according to their systems. In addition, my paperwork on the deal stipulates that the car is a 143bhp version while I was explicitly told that it was a 2015 170bhp version. I have no trust whatsoever in the dealership and would like to look at handing back the car. Is it possible given the lies from the dealer staff above? Thanks

Hello I am looking to see if anybody can give me advice. We (my family) have just come back from a holiday in Belgium. We rented holiday accommodation in a holiday centre. When I booked the accommodation, I talked to the sales people and explained that I needed a property that was disability friendly. e.g. At least one bedroom downstairs, with a walk in shower and toilet. We booked a 3 bedroom house. I have arthritis and very bad circulation and very thin skin. I can't afford to have accidents. I do have a blue badge and use a wheelchair when the distance to walk is too far for me. The wheelchair was bespoke and provided by the NHS. One of our daughters is Autistic and has very bad anxiety issues. When we arrived, we got to our accommodation, which was very run down and didn't have a bedroom, toilet and shower room downstairs. My daughter had a meltdown (very heart breaking to see it happening). So I went to reception and complained (this was 4 oclock in the afternoon, having travelled all the way by car from Lincolnshire). All they could offer me was a 4 bedroomed accommodation and it would cost us an extra €400 for the pleasure. We looked at the accommodation and although it had a bedroom, the tiniest toilet room I have ever seen and a bathroom with bath and overhead shower downstairs, it was not disability friendly. Because of the stress and anxiety that our daughter was going through and having nowhere else to go, we went back to reception and accepted the accommodation. I managed to barter the €400 down to €200. The next day I filled a complaints form in accusing them of miss selling us a holiday home. I put on the form that I wanted all the money back, for them not providing the correct sort of accommodation. It spoiled our holiday and I was constantly hurting my self, because I didn't have support handles for lifting myself up. Anyway, when I got back home, I called the head office up and complained. They offered to return the €200 back, which I still haven't received. I do believe I will get that money. Once I receive that, I want to claim for all the money paid for the accommodation on the basis that they effectively miss sold me the wrong type of accommodation and using the disability act to support it. Can anybody give me any advice on this matter, especially as to whether I have a valid claim. I can't afford a lawyer.

I purchased a car yesterday from quite a big dealer approx 100 miles away from myself. A company went and collected the car after negotiation over the phone and emails with the seller. Upon delivery last night I was quite happy with the car albeit a scratch on the driver inside leather and the anti chip protection that had been poorly fitted, however the car was sold and advertised as a 2013 62 first registered july 2013 to be precise the log book quite clearly shows that it was in fact first registered in 2012. The date of 2013 was when it was first bought into the uk. This in turn makes the car 6 months older that advertised and needing an mot sooner than told. I have emailed the company back and they have detailed an email saying how shoddy the company was I had asked to collect the vehicle , there were no scratches internally or externally as well as intimated that I have no idea what I am talking about and they are at a loss at to why I have contacted them back. They are a very well known company, the car was not a cheap car and I am extremely surprised by their response. Am I correct in saying that the car has been miss sold due to misleading/misguiding information and incorrect information being used to advertise? The car was first registered in 2012 but then registered in the uk in 2013 as it is an import... Any help and advise would be most appreciated thankyou In advance.

...

I am new to this Forum. Thanks for the great works you all do here. This is my first post. I am helping my wife who made a claim against Lloyds Bank plc, for refund of mis-sold insurance protection products (IPP) premiums. She obtained judgement in March this year. But Lloyds applied to set it aside and filed a Defence. The amount claimed is £1,274. We have drafted the Reply to Defence, which we have to submit on 17/08/15. But the Reply, (together with the Defence) need looking at or reviewed before we submit. Please, I should be very grateful if someone or the administrators or moderators can send me your email so I can forward a copy of the documents for your review and return by Friday 14/082015. Many thanks in advance. Good-doer

Hi My wife and i got a new phone for our son for his birthday. We got it from carphone warehouse on their iD network. We were told in the shop that the contract would be limited to £5 above the monthly contract amount. Several days after he started using the phone the service stopped completely. We were not notified as to why. We had to first examine the handset to establish usage and second contact iD customer support. The whole reason we rushed to get a phone was because we were going on holiday and our son was flying out to meet us after the first week so we really needed him to have a working phone. I emailed iD impressing upon them the urgency of our plight but their response was late and worthless. I examined the handset and the usage statistics suggested a lot of data use. In the region of 5 gigabytes! Now our son is fairly tech savvy but he is only twelve. Still, he jelously guards his 3g allocation and is very careful about making sure he uses the house broadband when at home. He had not taken the phone out of the house at all since he got it and he insisted that he had checked to make sure he was using wireless and not 3g. I realize you cant fully trust a twelve-year-old when they think they've done something wrong. Just including this for completeness. So we went on holiday still not knowing if the phone would work. I only had the facts of the matter confirmed while we were travelling through Spain. We were on our way to pick our son up from Malaga airport. I actually managed to get through to iD and they told me our son had accumulated a bill of £138 pounds over the contract payment. Now it's all a bit of a blur but i think i told the person on the phone that i wanted to cancel the contract and it was within fourteen days but i think she said i'd have to apply in writing or something. We were in the middle Now my wife left the carphone warehouse shop with the understanding that we were getting a contract that was limited to £5 overspend so that was a shock. When we got back (On the 29th of june) i made a writted complaint to carphone warehouse. Yesterday(29th of july) i received a response. It said that we were infact on a contract that was limited to £75 and that the charge of £138 was a mistake. They said we would get a refund of £75 and said they were prepared to discuss switching to the contract that we were supposed to get in the first place. So I've set the data limit on the handset so that can't happen again but I'd really like to get the rest of the money back as they have definitely mis sold us the contract we are currently on. Anyway i just thought i'd add my own experience here. If anyone has any advice it would be much appreciated.

Hi My name is Yasmin. I live in London. And I am about to show consumers what 02 are capable of. I want to sue 02 because while I was in dispute with them over a contract they mis-sold to me - they refused to listen, did not once pick up the phone to me. Moreover never answered my questions nor launch an investigation into how they sold me a contract when I expressly told the sales agent I wanted to buy a mobile phone meant for a minor then aged 10 who needed it for her first day at new Secondary school where she would be travelling alone to and fro. Prior to this I had been using pay as you go - the agent advised me that there was a cool new package that was designed to help control spend and that is was called Simplicity. And that she would be given enough mins to ensure that she can report in and for ant emergencies - he told me that if I stuck to PAYG she may get stranded and need that possibility to make that call to keep herself safe. I said ok. As he seemed so lovely and I kept telling him I had never bought a mobile contract for a child before and wanted to do right by her and my money as I was on a strict budget. I told 02 the contract had to be fixed - the agent promised me it was ok I need not go for PAYG and recommended the 'Simplicity' package. But in 2015 I know noted he did not tell me that this contract was a walking bankcard nor did he set any bars. Or explain what limits. 02 gave no info to me. This why I accuse them know of secretly blinding consumers by selling unlimited data contracts - which they wait to rack up charges on. The 02 agent then secretly, without my knowledge sold me an unlimited SIM card/contract (I was so happy to buy this as a Xmas present) - which in 2014 the child now aged 13 took abroad. It got lost. She got scared to mention it. As soon as I found out, I cancelled it. And I was lucky enough to cancel my direct debits as if I had not done so 02 would have swept my bank account of the entire amount the thief had racked up. Once I then started to ask for help it became a dispute as they kept telling me I had to pay. I told them this was mis-selling but the complaints system is set up to make life so hard. 02 then spent months leading me round the houses. They outsourced my complaint. The phone bill which after I reported it grew to £312.71. I kept asking how can this be? I wanted to pay what I owed. But they just would not talk to me. Here is the contract - can you see anywhere it mention that it was unlimited data card? They told me it as a 'Simple' contract (see attached) - how can you call something simple then allow for call/data charges to be applied - internationally? Attached: 1. 02 contract with personal details deleted - but sales agent to reinforce to me how much I can expect to pay each month 2. 02 contract T&Cs (no mention of data or call charges internationally) My issues: I informed them at around the same time that I was a survivor of abuse and therefore need all the pennies I can get. Every penny was tight and I was in a huge personal crisis. I wanted 02 to just to take monies for what I ordered. I was happy to pay the £10 that was due but 02 never accepted that. They never once picked up the phone to me. They did offer to reduce the bill but they never gave me a breakdown of how the newly reduced figure was worked out. The CEO Ronan Dunne was informed that during this time I was also a survivor of domestic abuse - he and his team refused to listen or help and kept demanding I pay the reduced amount. 02 then handed me over to Badenoch & Clarke - who were bailiffs - when they heard my story they were so horrified and halted it - and told me that at no point were they made aware that there was a dispute over mis-selling. My incident is proof that 02 set us consumers up, make it vague and a quagmire to debate or challenge mis-selling and then - cart you across to the conveyor belt of debt - and trash credit reports as punishment for daring to challenge them. Failure by 02 to take the issue of misselling - even now I have contacted the MEP, Ofcom - and they seem very vague and woolly. Hypocrisy by 02 - see image below of Ronan Dunne - yet he says publically one thing and did the other - to me. I even wrote to him but his email account blocked me. Now that these unfair charges have been racked up - 02 refuse to accept or discuss that the contract was for a minor. Nor will it comment why the agent wrote in his handwriting £10.50 verbally (then wrote promotion on the contract) and why they say 'basics data' will not explain why they did not write that this contract was clearly an unlimited sim card (aka walking bank card). 02 say as I am the person on the contract - I am the adult. I must pay. But this is why we consumers in 2011 were blind folded - as today all the retailers esp Tesco Mobile which is powered by 02 I believe now have strong capping. Why are telecoms companies allowed to sell walking bankcards - at least to use these you need a sim - why is the telecoms industry so irresponsible in selling us contracts for minors - when they knew how dangerous it can be. And that there must now be a default which stops consumers from racking up charges for data or for international calls. FYI Until this loss/theft of the mobile phone incident I paid on time - 100% of the amount due since Nov 2011. I of course wrote to Ombudsman - who did not read my complaint properly. Nor addressed mis-selling issue at all and supported 02's stance - that it was fair to reduce the bill as 02 suggested. This was a disgrace and now I am still waiting for Ofcom to reply. I was forced to complain about the Telecoms Ombudsman and there was an independent investigator who upheld my complaint and offered me compensation. This is why I decided to sue 02 after Telecoms Ombudsman - screwed up. Not once did they try to help me and moreover I found evidence they were supporting 02 - when they ought to be impartial. Damages. This is the effect on my life. How much is this worth? You see prior to this I had never been turned down for credit and always paid my way. I am now so reduced and battling 02 who seem to think they have gotten away with this. I am just trying to find the money to sue them via the small claims court. Stress, mental exhaustion Unable to kickstart my new business - which is now on hold. Sept 2014 - failed remortgage due to adverse credit report filed just by 02 - this was supposed to have paid all my debts and raised money to invest in my start up business April 2014 due to inability to get remortgage forced to enter an IVA July 2015 trying to obtain a tour operator's license. Been told that due to poor credit score and IVA unlikely that I will get merchant facilities. August 2015 - obtained a letter in principle to take my business products to a top London venue - where I can sell these as a commercial concession. Due to inability to find investment/sponsorship or money - I will now be forced to lose this opp. This is why I now am so shocked 02 have done this and did so - even with permission of exec office who refused to discuss mis-sselling with me. They just would not call me and refused to have any sympathy and refused to explain their contract. In fact they told me they were licensed to charge us what they want as the sim was unlimited (even though they called it simplicity) - utter madness. Questions: What would you do? Has anyone had the same happen to them? Is it solved? Unresolved? If the latter please get in touch with me as maybe we can do a class suit. I think there are more consumers out there but it takes a mighty persons to still remain standing as I think 02's complaint procedure is designed to ensure consumers like us who accuse them of mis-selling are sent via a maze - never to emerge and complain or be successful. Which small claims court process should I pursue? There are 2 - but it depends on how much you sue for and then of course there are relevant fees attached. Which would you best advise? What do you think is the damages I am due? And which court should I go via?

Whilst helping a friend sort out their PPI claim I was glad to find a link regarding the FOS and what they do/have done in the past here is the link http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/technical_notes/ppi.html It maybe of use to others but I must warn you that the reading in this link is very long winded and this also links to the decision/s that the FOS have taken to date. see the section on "case studies" then you may want to read about the Court case in the section marked "legal challenge".... I hope this is of use to those wanting to reclaim PPI....

Hi everyone, I've been a BT customer for the past couple of years. My Phone/Broadband contract was coming up for renewal so as you do you have a shop about. I found a cheaper deal with Plusnet which I was happy to go with. I phoned BT for my PAC code and a nice lady then started to try and talk me out of leaving. She offered a discount on my current monthly bill (I had to sign up for another 12 months), free caller display for 12 months and the full BT Sports free for 12 months (inc ESPN). Great I'll stay with you for another 12 months then! A month into my new contract I check my bill only to find I had been charged for my caller display. I phoned BT and they apologised and said no further charges would apply (Yet to see if I'll get the money I paid credited to my account). I then get an email saying that a new channel is being released and I am going to get charged an extra £5 a month to receive that, BT Sports 2 and ESPN! One of the reasons I signed up was for the full BT Sports package for free for 12 months. Now a month in they are going to give me 1 channel instead of the 3 I was supposed to get. I contacted BT and the guy on the phone told me that at the time of me signing back up it was true that I'd get all the BT Sports channels but now theres been a change and I can either cancel or pay £5 a month. If I'd have known that this was going to be the case I'd have went with Plusnet when I wanted too as it worked out a hell of a lot cheaper for the same products (minus BT Sports 1 which as of August is the only channel I'll get)! An apology from the guy on the phone but basically I was tied into the contract. I feel like I've been tied into a contract in which I haven't signed up to. No doubt they will say its in the T's and C's (and maybe I should have taken more notice of them when reading through them).

Help Help I have spent years trying to establish I was mis sold a mortgage with all the typical faults..Took me past retirement, unregulated, unsecured to secured etc. Now established I have a good case, but outside the six years,. My last correspondence to the lender was only 2 years ago when they took my property off me. Broker went out of business four months after the he did me up like kipper also. Can any one give me some advice please!

My boyfriends Ex-wife took out a bank account before she left him in 2009. My boyfriend was a joint account holder and signed to say he was happy with this. The account was then changed to a packaged bank account (called a Gold Account) without my boyfriends knowledge. The account was never used and it went overdrawn with charges until Natwest closed the account and added a Default to my boyfriends Credit File in April 2010 which we have only just found out about. My boyfriend wrote to Natwest asking them to remove the default from his Credit File. Natwest replied with a straight NO saying they had the paperwork signed by boyfriend and he had agreed to it. He does not remember signing for a packaged account and I know they were regularly mis-sold (Natwest tried it with me until I changed bank). What do we do next?

Banks could face even bigger bills for mis-selling Payment Protection Insurance after the City watchdog said it was considering new rules following a landmark legal decision. In November last year, the Supreme Court said that Paragon Personal Finance, a secured loans company, had breached the Consumer Credit Act by failing to disclose that the PPI premium paid by a customer included a hefty commission fee to a credit broker. This means that even if the loan insurance was otherwise fairly sold, banks could be liable for mis-selling compensation if PPI was bought via a broker. On Wednesday, the FCA said the judgement in the case, Plevin v Paragon Personal Finance, may mean new rules on dealing with complaints, potentially opening the door for more compensation. “The FCA is considering whether additional rules and/or guidance are required to deal with the impact of the Plevin decision on complaints about PPI,” it said. “The FCA will be engaging with relevant stakeholders in the coming months in respect of this and it expects to announce its views on this, including next steps, at the same time as existing work.” The regulator is considering revamping the PPI rulebook, saying it wants to “meet its objectives of securing appropriate protection for consumers and enhancing the integrity of the UK’s financial system”. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/11633767/Legal-ruling-could-pave-way-for-new-wave-of-PPI-claims.html PPI ruling may trigger a landslide of fresh mis-selling claims The City Watchdog could be forced to introduce new rules around PPI mis-selling complaints following a landmark court ruling. It could open the door to a landslide of fresh claims for compensation, even for those who have already been paid out for being flogged the often useless and expensive insurance. The latest wrinkle to the scandal – which has already cost Britain’s banks an estimated £24 billion – centres on commission payments to lenders and advisers. In November, the Supreme Court ruled in the Plevin v Paragon case that failing to disclose commission made the relationship between lender and borrower unfair. Susan Plevin, a 59-year old college lecturer, was charged £5,780 as an upfront PPI premium on a £39,870 loan. But almost three-quarters – 71.8% – of the premium was commission, with credit broker LLP Processing receiving £1,870 and lender Paragon getting £2,280. Plevin was not told about the commission and took proceedings against the two firms in 2009 for mis-selling because the policy was useless for her, but also on the basis that the PPI agreement was unfair because of the non-disclosure of the commissions. The Supreme Court’s Lord Sumption ruled that failing to disclose commissions led to a “sufficiently extreme inequality of knowledge and understanding”. http://www.standard.co.uk/business/business-news/ppi-ruling-may-trigger-a-landslide-of-fresh-misselling-claims-10277984.html

Hey there, i had this account sold to me 4 years ago. I hadn't opened a bank account in the UK for some years. I was not presented with a possibility of a free account at any time in the meeting. I have never once used any of the packages or so called perks. I complained to RBS they through it out, stating, "having previously lived in the UK i should have known that free accounts were possible to attain". I didn't. I then moved onto the Ombudsman, who have sided with the bank. How can I take this further, it is simply not fair! Any advice appreciated. Thx

I purchased mazda 2 sport in march 2012 along with a 3 year service plan (bristol street motors) I clearly remember the salesman describing everything that was included in service plan & him telling me that it would be a good buy as my car would be due a "major service" during the 3 years that would include a change of belts (cam/timing). I even got him to write this down and sign it ! as i had heard about people being promised all sorts & then that not being the case! I still have the piece of paper he wrote this on - says * belts* included .. after problems with each service e.g car came back to me with a multi meter tester under the bonnet ! customer service desk wouldnt provide me with formal written service check list ,,, car called in at wrong times for services ,,, was told that my last service had happened in 2014 (service plan states last service due march 2015 ... I was given a "free" (erm no not free just what was due to me under plan terms ,,) service today ,, I mention squeek /noise from under bonnet ,,they said they would check .. girl on desk told me that mechanic couldnt be sure but he thought it may be coming from timing/aux belt area , , I told her that surely this was under the service plan ,,, (remember i have written promise ! ) she said no .. not under plan sorry long winded explanation but to my mind surely I have been mis sold the service plan ... it doesnt cover what the sales man promised ?? Id be grateful for any accurate advise on this ..

Hi, Last year I was diagnosed with ADD (Attention Deficit Disorder), and it transpires that I've had this condition since childhood. I'm now taking Methylphenidate, which has given me a bit more focus with detailed finances and small print etc. The effects throughout life have been subtle but profound, and very destructive in a number of ways; though I masked it somewhat due to being quite intelligent in other areas. One of the effects was (and still is) a difficulty working with figures and managing finances; it takes me about 4 times as long as a 'normal' person to deal with spreadsheets, complex calculations, financial concepts such as PPI etc. Only very recently I realised the implications of this, in regard to PPI mis-selling and reclaiming charges. It appears that, according to the Disability Discrimination Act, people should be covered against discrimination in regard to provision of Goods and Services: nidirect(dot)gov(dot)uk/mental-health-and-the-disability-discrimination-act-dda It would have been very difficult for me to fill out a loan or credit card form and make the right choices for my circumstances, and also to realise that something was wrong later. Now, speaking to the Mental Health Professionals in my area, it appears that adult diagnosis of things like Bi-polar and ADHD is becoming increasingly common these days, due to more awareness and improved diagnostic tools. It may be there is a whole demographic of the population who used to be just bracketed (like myself) 'bad with money', where they've actually been struggling with a hidden condition that impairs their ability to make accurate and timely choices regarding their finances. Worse, those that are 'good with money' have been preying on this trait for their own ends. I now feel, on the other side of the diagnostic 'curtain', like I've been 'milked' over the years, due to my naivety and poor skills with forms and numbers. Ring any bells for anyone? Can anyone point me to resources where Mental Disability has been used to get restitution, is there even a case for a US style Class Action suit? Thanks, hope this helps anyways.

Now I have all of the old paperwork out, I have found a forgotten clerical medical pension that I have that seems a bit dodgy to me. Brief history of the policy; Originally taken out with United friendly in the 80's, who were then bought out or merged at a later date with Royal London. This is /was a mutual with profits. In 2007 I was contacted by an independent financial advisor who said he would take a look at the pension as I was considering transferring the pension to an occupational scheme. The advisor advised me to transfer the existing funds (admittedly not much at the time) into a clerical medical personal pension plan as it would be 'a better option' and 'pay a better amount in the long term' Firstly, CM have never contacted me for a review from 2007 to 2015 (considering the volatility of pensions this seems dodgy) Secondly, as far as I can make out the transfer fee was £4k Two things stand out in the small print on the initial review documents; Assumed growth rates: "Compared with your current plan, the new Clerical Medical plan would reduce your fund by 17.8% Minimum transfer accepted You do not have a particularly large transfer value to invest for your retirement, and so you need a plan which will accept a low minimum stand alone single premium Unfortunately, this plan has one of the highest on the market Policy Fee You should choose a plan with a competitive policy fee Unfortunately this monthly policy fee for this plan is above average compared to other plans on the market. One off installation fee You should choose a plan that has a competitive stand alone administration fee, if at all Unfortunately, one of the highest fees applies to this plan. I went with his advice at the time, and forgot about the pension as I later joined the company scheme anyway, and just never paid anything else into the private one, but over the last couple of weeks I have been tracing things including this and after reading the small print it seems like I was really stiffed on this policy. Luckily I still have all of the paperwork for this one, including 'independent review paperwork' with the name of the advisor should I have any grounds to take this further. Why would someone strongly advise a policy that costs 4K, and loses 17.8% ? I wasn't aware that pension policies charge a monthly fee either (£40 per annum), or installation fee (£100). Thoughts anyone ? Just to add to that, if you read the other thread http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?444060-Tibbett-and-Britten-group-workplace-pensionpost I made about the Tibbett & Britten pension scheme, this is the scheme which I was considering transferring the funds to, and it was a final salary scheme, so I guess it was a foolish thing to do by not transferring into a company scheme at the time, but the way things turned out the final salary scheme was wound up in 2012, so in hindsight a stupid decision, and bad advice at the time has actually turned out to be a decision that has worked out I guess. At the point of sale though it was stupid advice, and a stupid move for me to believe that advice.

Six weeks ago i was in the market for a new car and havinf decided to spend $30,000 plus I decided to limit my searches to main dealer outlets. I had decided to purchase the new Range Rover Evoque SD Prestige as this had all the bits I wanted and the power I needed. I went on Land Rovers web site and found a car that had all the bits I wanted and the power I needed and went down to the dealership to strike the deal. The online advert (I have the original copy) said the car was a SD prestigae with 190 BHP. The car check came back and confirmed the car was the one described . I made the purchase with a deposit on y credit card and the remainder via a bank loan. I also traded in the car I owned for £10,000. Six weeks later and not very happy with the cars performance I returned tha car to Land Rover to have some paint work repaired which was agreed at the point of sale. I also mentioned to the salesman that i thought the car was not running well because it didn't seem to have the power it should have. I was given a loan car which was identical to mine and I noticed within minutes that when drove this car performed much better. From the car (using handsfree kit of course) I called the salesman and asked him again to check my car out because there was clearly something not right. he said he would get an engineer to go for a run with me when i picked it up. I picked the car back up today and this was when the salesman said to me that the car I had loaned was a much more powerfull engine and that it was 190bhp. I said the car I had bought was 190 bhp but the saleman said it was not and that it was a 150bhp. Further more the saleman said the car was not the SD version but the TD. i said I would check all my facts and come back to them. I checked the logbook which arrived a week ago and found it says the car is a SD prestigate but a 150 bhp engine. I checked my invoice and it said that the car was a SD Prestige. I checked the print off from the Land Rover web site I tuck when i went down to buy the car and it says its a SD Prestigae 190 BHP. The car its self at the rear says its a TD4 which one the LR web site says its a 150 BHP engine. I'm now left with a car I have paid over the odds for which does not have the power I wanted. I explained when i went into the delaers that i wanted a more powerful care than the one I had which was a 160 BHP engine so they should have known this was not right for me. I have asked Land Rover to look into the issue and i await there reply. Can anybody please give me some advice as to what I can do?

My wife felt her glasses that she uses for driving were not as sharp as they used to be and called Boots to make an appointment. Off she trotted for an eye test. They told her that she needed new glasses for reading, but she told them she was happy with her reading and just wanted her distance vision correcting. They then tried to sell her varifocals, but once again, my wife reiterated she just wanted her distance vison correcting for driving. When she told the optician that her eye consultant told her not to have them due to a slight issue with a cataract, she was answered with a "pfffft', and a shrug of shoulders, the inference being that that was a ridiculous thing to say. Anyway, she chose some frames and I was present when paying for them when the manager said;"You'll really notice the difference with these specs..." When she collected her new glasses, once in the car she did a side by side test with her old glasses to find that they were no better, and possibly worse. She stuck with them for a couple of days, but repeatedly found no improvement. I then took them back to the shop for a refund only to be refused and told" nobody forced your wife to buy them". I left them on the counter and after several failed attempts managed to get hold of the regional manager who repeated the, "nobody forced...", mantra. I was having a measured conversation with her when she said, "We are going round in circles here" and put the phone down on me! My point at this stage was that my wife had been mis sold the specs as apart from her reading requirement, her long distance vision prescription had changed by the smallest amount measurable. After a small amount of googling, it became clear that many opticians would not prescribe new glasses for such a small change as the difference would be unnoticed by the wearer. At no point was my wife asked if she wanted new glasses when there would be no no percetible difference. She already had 2 pairs of glasses which the opticians were aware of, having checked their strength on a machine in the shop. It became apparent at this point as well that the store wasn't even a proper Boots Opticians but merely a franchise. I escalated this to Big Boots in Nottingham and went through customer service levels until I got to the team leader of the Opticians team. She was rude, patronising and completely obstructive. She was talking to my wife as she refused to listen what I had to say, dismissing my points with "You weren't in the room." She constantly tried to trip my wife up on her statements to try and discredit her point. In the end she said,"Nobody told your wife her prescription hadn't changed, she bought the glasses anyway". She seemed to think that was her winning point and would not take on board that proved the specs had been mis sold as it was clear to the optician, if not my wife, that that was the case, and clearly didn't need them from a practical point of view. I spoke to this harridan again (Customer Services shouting? Epic fail!) who just point blank refused to do anything about the £150 wasted and refused to tell me the name of her superior. She also told me that as we had used a franchise it was them I should deal with and not Boots. Utterly gobsmacked with their attitude. Am I being unreasonable in wanting a refund? Can't believe Boots are behaving this way, totally bizarre.

Hi folks, This thread may be over as soon as it's started... Back in the 1990s I was one of the many people who were mis sold a private pension. There was the Pension Reiview in 1994 and the company who sold me the pension admitted they were incorrect in doing so and offerred redress of around £27k (to be added to the pension pot). Of course, muggins here didn't follow it up and I now realise that there was a time limit (31st March 2000) to accept their offer. I think at the time I must have been under the impression that they would just add it by default, which of course they wouldn't. Question is, is it now too late to do anything about it? Thanks.

My wife bought a Mini Cooper from Masters Mitsubishi in September 2014 - They sold it saying the car had run flat tyres - She had an issue with a flat tyre and took it to a tyre specialist who told her they were normal tyres not run flats. We contacted Masters and told them that they have not provided the tyres as detailed in the sales pitch - The managers said nothing he could do now and said the sales agent does not remember saying they had run flats and that there was nothing he would do for us. As far as I am concerned this breaches SOGA / Trading Standards - please correct me where applicable. I find it very frustrating to be fobbed off like they don't care which they obviously do not. What course of action would you say that I now pursue? Thanks Justin

Hi, i bought Nissan micra today from a private seller. Seller didn't mentioned us about any car accident history. It was unluckly rainy weather today.. i couldn't check car properly. When i reached home i noticed car radio security code is locked. then i opened bonnet and noticed that front light is broken as well. then i checked HPI online and findout its category 'D' previous. I did mentioned all this to seller but now he is not picking up my phone call. Please help, i will appreciate your advice.. i paid £2700.