(Thought i had posted this but it didn't show) Hi everyone, i have just had a nice big cheque from the FSCS for mis sold PPI plus interest - it is only 90% of the claim but it is a nice place to be after all these years. My question is - Do i still owe the loan company for PPI now it has been declared mis sold? i will be asking them to redress the loan but can i expect them to remove the PPI from it? any advice very much appreciated cheers

Hi all - I've successfully claimed from MBNA for missold PPI - incredibly easy so I thought I'd have a go at Barclaycard. I submitted SAR and got 6 years of statements showing my PPI active from 2006 - 2007 when I cancelled it (I realised it was a pointless expense). However I noted PPI has been on the account since 1989. Now initially BC turned down the complaint so I went to the FOS and strangely they've caved in as soon as the FOS process was started. I've received a letter from the FOS telling me I will receive an offer by the 4/1/13 however I'm not sure what a fair offer would be - ie will it only be for the year I can show PPI payments or should it include the payments back to 1989? As I can't prove how much I paid can I be paid an amount based on a average yearly balance etc and do barclays keep records like that? Thanks all

I've been helping my flatmate with her claim for ESA for 18 months now. When we both moved house, the JCP investigated us and found that we were living as a couple [ consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?324511-ESA-Suspended-(-quot-Living-with-Partner-quot-)&p=3598108#post3598108 ]. After several months of frankly talking to a brick wall, we finally got our local CAB involved. The CAB themselves said actually everything we'd done was good, and just gathered up a few more statements and forwarded them on. Within a couple of months, the JCP had reversed the decision - hurray... ...except in the meantime, my flatmate (the claimant) had attended a medical assessment, which she failed with a score of 6 points (she had previously attended an assessment and passed), so she was back on the appeal route. Oh well, at least she was now able to claim the assessment rate and be able to live to some extent. The CAB helped enormously again, getting the Doctor to write a letter - a note about this, the Practice Manager kept 'bouncing' the requests (on CAB headed paper) with a counter-request for £50. The claimant made an appointment with the Doctor herself who was not happy about the situation, and wrote the letter - apparently it's a common problem and the CAB will pay out if there's no option, but as a rule of thumb if this happens to you then go and see your doctor yourself, they tend to be more sympathetic. This was submitted with a request for redetermination - which resulted in the JCP adding 3 points for a total of 9 (all on the "Getting About" descriptor). Still not enough. Finally got a date, exactly around the time the Tribunal suggested she'd get an appointment. Two weeks to the day before Christmas. Another letter was written by the claimant's CBT therapist. The date came. [ youtube.com/watch?v=tbWXG6Ho4i8 ] This video really helped us both prepare. Entering the court was far from ideal - full body scanners, and the "waiting area" in Sheffield is essentially a cellar - "if you plead guilty" posters everywhere - not settling. If this is how things are going to continue, more appropriate facilities need to be sought. The Judge was an absolute credit to the British Justice system; friendly, taking her time to explain everything. The Doctor too was really good. The questions themselves were not that different to those asked at the Medical Assesment, but obviously a lot more professionally, and the doctor and judge both encouraged as much detail as possible (where the Atos monkeys obviously just assume whatever they like). I had a chance to put forward my comments - which I used to clarify some of the examples bought up through the cross examination from my perspective, along with a couple of things I felt had been left untouched. Again, the Judge was clearly keen to ascertain as many specific examples as I could give. Sent outside, longest 5 minute wait ever, back in - "we've upheld your appeal". YES! From 6 points initially, to 9 points at reconsideration to 30 points at Tribunal! They've also recommended to the JobCentre that they wait the maximum period of 2 years before reassessing. Can anybody confirm if that's from today or from the previous assessment? From my perspective - something has to be done about the Medical Assessment - it's wasting valuable resources at the CAB, with (real!) medical professionals and the courts. It's really not on. Just glad to have finally got to this stage, what a relief. Wanted to thank everybody who's posted their stories here and elsewhere before - really got my friend and I through the hardest of times. Fantastic resource - viva la web!

I received a letter regarding my ppi complaint today upholding my claim for ppi. From the first letter I sent on the 5th of July 2012. I received a reply on the 24th of July stating that they needed 8 - 10 weeks to investigate my claim, then after the initial 10 weeks I received another letter stating that they would require another 4 weeks to still investigate, the 4 weeks passed and I still hadn't heard anything from them I decided to phone them and they told me a letter had been sent to me on the 18th of October which I received today (24th of October), I will receive a cheque from them within 21 days, I was just wondering if they do take the full 21 days to send me the cheque or are they quicker. It is well worth sending off a letter, I wasn't expecting to get anything from them, so I am really pleased, I will pay off all my debts and definitely not get any more credit cards!!

[16 Sept 2012] From 1 October 2012, a new code of practice will govern the activities of private parking companies that belong to the British Parking Association (BPA). For the first time, the code will require members to put a large sign at car-park entrances stating the main type of parking available, eg ‘pay and display’, in lettering 60mm (2.4in) high. This is a success for our campaign to get private car-park signs improved, but there remain doubts about whether it will lead to generally beneficial change for motorists because the rest of the code remains highly ambiguous and weighted strongly in favour of the companies, which chase drivers for more than £160million a year in phoney (ie, non-official) fines. (See our other recent new stories, and our Articles page under ‘Parking’.) Both the BPA and the government’s Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) avoided consulting Plain Language Commission on the draft of the new code, despite (or because of) our frequent contacts with them about mislewading signage. Martin Cutts of Plain Language Commission wrote to BPA president Anjna Patel giving our reaction to the new code. ‘I... am pleased it has adopted some of the points I and others have raised with your officials over the past two years. On signage, for example, the new draft will require a clear sign at the entrance saying, eg, ‘pay and display’ in lettering 60mm high. The new draft also references the DfT signs manual, which my article ‘Phoney fines and dodgy signs take drivers for a ride’ suggested should be the model for private parking signs. The BPA had previously insisted that signs were perfectly clear when the words ‘pay and display’ were only 13mm high, eg about five times smaller than you now require, and had resolutely supported member companies that had imposed thousands of PCNs [parking charge notices] on motorists who had omitted to pay and display because of such signs. ‘Of course it remains disappointing that while the BPA wants sign wordings to be clear, it sets no standards whatever for clarity. This means that its current bankrupt inspection regime will continue to find ungrammatical and nonsensical signs absolutely clear, to the detriment of motorists. ‘I’m pleased the expected contravention charge has been cut to a maximum of £100, tacitly accepting that charges of up to £150, fully approved by the BPA for more than five years, have been immoral and unjust. I’m also pleased that the BPA has made clear that the charges levied by many private members have been unlawful as they have been penalty charges: this is the only possible interpretation of draft code para 19.5, which says the charge must now reflect the “genuine pre-estimate of loss that [the landowner] suffer”. This crucial phrase was absent from the previous code.’ We’ve now written to the DVLA, the government agency (in partnership with the BPA) that provides its government-accredited trade association status, to ask for its interpretation of the word ‘loss’: ‘Please provide us with the DVLA’s/BPA’s agreed and accepted interpretation of the phrase ‘genuine pre estimate of “loss”. What legal precedents have the DVLA/BPA relied on in support of their interpretation of the phrase “genuine pre estimate of loss”? What elements [of parking company expenses] have the DVLA/BPA agreed will be interpreted as “loss”? Please provide examples of what the DVLA/BPA will consider acceptable and unacceptable as “loss”.’ The draft code requires charges not to be ‘punitive or unreasonable’ but does not say how this phrase is to be interpreted. We have asked the DVLA for clarification. The BPA has produced a code that allows it wriggle-room for interpretations that will favour its members, to the detriment of motorists. While we await the DVLA’s answers to our questions with interest, all the indications are that this duplicitous agency will continue to collude in the BPA’s efforts to take as much money from drivers as possible. The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 allows private parking companies to chase registered keepers, not just drivers, for their unpaid phoney fines. It also requires a supposedly independent appeals service to be introduced. We have asked the Department for Transport to explain how the service will be independent when it will not operate to ombudsman rules, is under contract to the BPA, and is paid for by the BPA's private members. We have pointed out that it will be forever looking over its shoulder at its paymasters, the BPA. The BPA has said it will get its new, ambiguous code accredited for plain language by the Plain English Campaign Ltd. Now there’s a marriage made in hell if ever there was one: a trade body that pretends to be the motorist’s friend while enabling its members to extract increasing amounts from drivers, teamed up with an firm that gives prizes to its own customers in a supposedly public competition without revealing its commercial tie-ups with them (click here for ‘The Plain English Awards Scandal’). http://clearest.co.uk/news/2012/9/16/small_signs_of_success_in_parking_campaign?page=1

Right! In December of last year I SAR'ed Barclaycard and after many months of waiting for a reply, I finally got all of my statements in May! I used the advise here and in particular absorbed a lot of information from the legendary IMS and Slick and sent off my prelim letter, Spreadsheet and FOS Questionnaire. I calculated my PPI claim at around about £800 including statutory interest and compound interest. This morning, Almost 8 weeks later I received a letter from Barclaycard telling me that they weren't confident that PPI was a suitable option for me and that they'd like to put me in a position that I would have been in if I hadn't have had PPI. The offer.. Just pence short of £700 Maybe my calculations were slightly out. I'm not even going to argue with them over this amount. I'm more than happy with it and it'll come in very handy. I've filled in my acceptance form and snatched their hand off lol. Now, Credit Card charges. They've ignored my timescale and told me it'll be sorted by 13th August. We'll see, I think there will be a LBA heading for them on tuesday if nothing is heard. (See my other Barclaycard thread to keep updated on my progress) Thanks to everybody here for inspiring me to fight back. I'm using the extensive knowledge and advise learnt here in helping colleagues and friends also go after their money! Of course, a donation will be on its way to the site as soon as the funds clear. Regards BM

Hi I've had a Morgan Stanley now Barclaycard account since 2000. The card balance has been up and down and now has about £100 balance. I've claimed (via one of those companies) who first contacted Barclaycard being as they own the debt etc now, and shortly afterwards I received a letter. All it contained was a "thank you for contacting us, here are our terms and conditions", nothing else whatsoever. The company are now pursuing Morgan Stanley and this has been going on for months now. Has anyone ever had a success with these guys? I'd be very interested as to where to go next and to share stories. Many thanks

Having recently sent out the FOS questionaire to Barclaycard, ref to the EGG card I took out in 2001, as many others I had there card protector on it. I have answered the questionaire as with the box was prechecked and following phonecalls nothing was mentioned about there insurance. As anybody actually had any success with claims on EGG cards in this time period. It was paid from when I took out the card until Barclaycard took it over last year, then it stopped

just got home from having a puncture on my mobility scooter lol, and came home to find that Vanqis are having a bop now ffs lol.... i sent in all required information to them recorded delivery ( i have proof of delivery and signature) disputed the excessive charges currently (£400)+ i do have repayment option plan and they have now said they will respond to my complaints for refund within 56 days, so using this snippet of info if i now get a DCA write to me i wait 56 days or near enough to reply

Thank you everyone on here for your help and guidance. Today I have received a cheque from egg after sending a claim letter and a calculation sheet.They have sent a breakdown of how they get the figure sent ( which is more than I made it ) so I'm off to the bank first thing in the morning. One down many more to go !

Hi i'm new here but i have used the advice on this website to submit a ppi claim against egg for three loans (two of them top ups). The PPI was a single premium policy added to the start of the first two loans. Happily they have upheld my complaint and sent through a final offer BUT i'm not sure if what they have offered me is the correct amount it seems a bit low? I'm not very good with the figures and my maths has never been any good would anybody on this forum be able to double check my figures for me please? I've got the full breakdown so can provide any info needed if anybody can help me? Thanks for any help in advance Atty