Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Farooq v evri is the judgement you want in.   Do you have a copy of do you want me to upload it again here?
    • I have added the correct format for the court. Country Court ..... as it was on the letter today, other letter had the justice.... . That is on the unredacted copy sent to admins email.   Which Evri judgement, could you give me a steer? Wadhwa one?   It's not in dispute, bar that paragraph you picked up. I was looking at that one, and I do agree it's pointless. Thank you for your help.
    • Firstly, and sorry for not asking earlier but have you submitted your DQ yet?
    • As suggested by JK2054 I'll email Evri to their small claims email address, attaching the label and collection receipt and quoting the Money Claims ref number. Is there anything else in addition to sending the email I should do at this stage? Rgds, J
    • Hi, I'd change justice centre to county court. I also wouldn't be including a telegraph article in the bundle. It doens't prove anything law and you don't have distribution rights on it. I also wouldn't personally break down the exhibits on the index page, normally people have a seperate page for this right before the exhibits. The main index page normally just says Exhibits to WX of [Your Name] or at least that's the format I use/see people here use, although really it makes minimal difference.   I also see that despite referencing several judgements you haven't included the EVRi one   paragraph 46 really needs to go imo it has nothing to do with anything. Your in court to apply the law to your case, not to tell the judge about a newspaper that means nothing to your claim.   I also see you've adopted the issues in dispute/not in dispute, which is also known as a scott schedule. if you are taking this approach, for things not in dispute I would say this needs to be things that are agreed between parties, not things like "There is no dispute that I am happy to supply all this evidence which is included in the court bundle." I would say that issues in dispute is to focus on the aspects of the claim that are in dispute, such as whether liability is limited by insurance or not, so I'd be changing that accordingly.   BF should be along shortly to advise on things.
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 160 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

EGG Defaulting on closed Account!


Cmdenny
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5863 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Thanks ever so much Steven - your a star.

 

Would you definately recomend not using Money Claim? (I have used this for all past succesful claims - but that was pre OFT action)

 

If I have to use a paper N1 where can I get the form from? And can I post this to court of do I have to present it in person to the nearest Court (40 mins on bus from work so prefer to post)

 

Cheers for all your help.

HSBC, FS £100

Hfax Credit Card Full Settlement £330

Lloyds FS £503 (had to do moneyclaim + allocation questionaires

Halifax Full Settlement £979

Lloyds Credit Card Moneyclaim raised.

 

03/05/06 Fraud case with Egg resolved after 2 1/2 months!, full refund of fraud amount+interest+charges (£1060). Apology and cheque for £300 - BBC Working Lunch helped scare them into action.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Would you definately recomend not using Money Claim? (I have used this for all past succesful claims - but that was pre OFT action)
You can't use MoneyClaim because your claim is not primarily for money. In any case MoneyClaim is not recommended for bank charge and similarclaims as there is not enough room on the online form for everything you ned to put.

 

If I have to use a paper N1 where can I get the form from? And can I post this to court of do I have to present it in person to the nearest Court (40 mins on bus from work so prefer to post)
I gave a link in my previous post to where you can download the form. Just beware, that you cannot save the filled-in form, so print it before you close Acrobat. Yes, you can send it by post.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi - I have typed and printed 3 copies. I presume I post them to the local Court (Barnet) and leave the claim No blank. Presumably the Court Address is "In The" box at top left.

 

I also don't know what to do for Fee - I have requested "not more than £5000"

HSBC, FS £100

Hfax Credit Card Full Settlement £330

Lloyds FS £503 (had to do moneyclaim + allocation questionaires

Halifax Full Settlement £979

Lloyds Credit Card Moneyclaim raised.

 

03/05/06 Fraud case with Egg resolved after 2 1/2 months!, full refund of fraud amount+interest+charges (£1060). Apology and cheque for £300 - BBC Working Lunch helped scare them into action.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Just for your information.

I had a similar issue about 12 years ago. I had a loan set up with Direct Line (to buy a motorbike) and, after initial acceptance, it was declined. I then bought the bike with a standard HP which was more expensive. I found out that the Direct Line loan was declined because of an innacurate credit report due to a resolved dispute with BT. My solicitor reclaimed the difference between the 2 loans. Unfortunately I can't remember whether the money came from BT or Experian.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I have now progressed to the stage where I have to submit an Allocation questionnaire.

 

Their defense is based on a standard reclaiming bank fees case - of which my case isn't. My case is that they have placed a default against my account inaccurately which has caused me damages.

 

Interestingly on their defense they wrote "the account was shut on .. ... .." - So even in their defense they acknowledge they don't know when my account was shut.

 

Egg have also failed to respond to a section 10 data request (recorded delivery) and also a Data protection request for a copy of a letter (recorded delivery again).

 

Egg say they have no case to answer as no damages have been caused to me.

 

Can I go to the small claims court and point out that Egg have failed on several requests and win by default?

 

Do I need to send evidence with the Allocation Questionnaire (this is deadline 10th March) - I propose copy of credit rating from experien, duplicates of correspondence, their defense with closing date submission, copy of letter I sent to Abbey National asking for confirmation of Business Bank declined.

 

The fact of the matter is Egg placed a default notice on a closed account. How are my chances looking? The Allocation questionnaire has requested a further £200 payment (presumably because I listed amount at less than £5000 - Shall I proceed?

 

I can if helpful type up their defense and post it here tonight. Please help!:o

HSBC, FS £100

Hfax Credit Card Full Settlement £330

Lloyds FS £503 (had to do moneyclaim + allocation questionaires

Halifax Full Settlement £979

Lloyds Credit Card Moneyclaim raised.

 

03/05/06 Fraud case with Egg resolved after 2 1/2 months!, full refund of fraud amount+interest+charges (£1060). Apology and cheque for £300 - BBC Working Lunch helped scare them into action.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact of the matter is Egg placed a default notice on a closed account.

 

I do not believe there is much mileage in stressing the late timing of Egg's issuing of the DN. Thousands of cardholders retrospectively reclaim unlawful charges on accounts closed years ago. Just as claimants can say they acted late because they were previously unaware, Egg could also say they acted late having overlooked this case.

 

I suspect the contest over this DN will inevitably turn on whether there was default justification for it to be issued at ANY time.

 

However, if your chronology shows that Egg did not bother with this unjustified DN for 17 months, that only after you reclaimed unlawful charges did Egg suddenly apply the DN, then you could suggest Egg's tardiness was due not to oversight but to victimisation. Meticulous dating of events will be essential to make a convincing point.

 

Last year the FOS fined the A&L Bank £125 for vindictively closing the account of a customer who reclaimed unlawful charges. This is the kind of publicity Egg would not like, and a linkage which Egg will find embarassing. In essence Egg will face two courts, the law court and the court of public opinion including the regulators. The first court will rule on the issue of justification for the DN at ANY time, the second on victimisation.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone else agree with Mistermind that I should not bother carrying on? I am faced with paying a further £200. [i believe Small Claims Court have charged me the max should it be £5000] Does anyone think I can win?

 

The Experian report should relate to the recent months, so I am not sure how Egg can do this?

 

Have I any chance of getting Egg to retract this DN, and off winning in the small claims court?

HSBC, FS £100

Hfax Credit Card Full Settlement £330

Lloyds FS £503 (had to do moneyclaim + allocation questionaires

Halifax Full Settlement £979

Lloyds Credit Card Moneyclaim raised.

 

03/05/06 Fraud case with Egg resolved after 2 1/2 months!, full refund of fraud amount+interest+charges (£1060). Apology and cheque for £300 - BBC Working Lunch helped scare them into action.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you read Yasmin's thread it was not the Small Claims Court which was empowered to force Egg roll back the DN. Until or unless you get a ruling that the DN was never justified by a defaulting situation at any time, hard to see how Egg can be forced to pay compensation.

 

After all they held out for 18 months against Yasmin. By the final hearing I believe Yasmin had decided to throw in the towel whatever the result. Luckily Egg threw in the towel first by not attending the final hearing.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not really looking for much in the way of compensation - just covering of costs and my time. Financial compensation would be for having a business banking account at preferential rates declined and emotional distress of having a bad credit rating. Fundamentally they have made a mistake.

 

 

 

Their defense follows:

Defence (typed by hand from their correspondence)

  1. The claimant entered into an Egg Credit card agreement with the defendant in April 2003
  2. it is admitted that charges were added to the claimants account during the course of the agreement. Each charge was made pursuant to the clause 7.1 of the defendants standard terms and conditions as a result of insufficient funds being available from the claimants designated current a/c to cover the amount of the direct debit payment due on the egg card and when he exceeded his credit limit. Clause 7.1 clearly states: “if you break the terms of this agreement we may charge you the following, where relevant, to cover the additional costs:”£20 each month charges [NB my claim isn't about bank charges!]
  3. it is denied that the claimant exceeding his credit limit and the return of payments from the claimants account due to insufficient finds being available are breeches of contract. However in so far as they are deemed to be breeches of contract the defendant will contend: a) that each and every such breech entitled the defendant to levy a charge under the terms of the agreement; b) that the said charge are proportionate and in all the circumstances are fair and reasonable in comparison to the loss, damage, cost or expense incurred by the defendant; and c) that the full particulars of the said charges were supplied to the claimant at the time of inception [ONCE AGAIN I AM NOT CLAIMING BACK CHARGES BUT SEEKING TO GET AN INACCURATE DEFAULT REMOVED!]
  4. Following the office of fair trading investigation into default charges the office of fair trading indicated that it would not proceed further against the defendant upon the basis that they reduced their charges from £20 to £16. Without any admission in relation to the previous level of charges the defendant has reduced the charges accordingly.
  5. It is denied that the charges are “unlawful” [i HAVENT ALLEDGED THEY ARE – This defence is totally irrelevant to my case?] as alleged, such as the claimant sometimes fail to make or are late in paying the required repayments and the defendant therefore puts in place systems and processed to deal with the same. Such systems and processes include the overheads of computers, staff, and other necessary overheads. The charges set out in clause 7 of the T&Cs are calculated by taking into account the total costs incurred by the defendant in maintaining those systems and processed and the estimated number of customers (such as the claimant) who fail to make or are late in paying the required repayments. The defendant avers therefore that the amount of the charges applied under clause 7 represents a genuine pre-estimate of the loss and expense caused to the defendant in respect of such customers failing to make or being late in paying the required repayments.
  6. Further the defendant takes steps to try to ensure that customers such as the claimant do not incur the charges set out in clause 7. for example the conditions of the agreement required the claimant to have a direct debit in place to make his monthly repayments. This was done to ensure as far as possible that the claimant would not fail to make his repayments or make such repayments late and thus avoid the charges
  7. It is admitted that the defendant has disclosed personal information about the claimant to credit reference agencies. This information has been disclosed pursuant to clause 21.4 of the T&Cs of the agreement : “to credit reference agencies and fraud prevention agencies. We will make searches of your details with credit reference agencies and fraud prevention agencies when we consider your application. We will also give details of how you manage your account to credit reference agencies. The information that is given by us and other to fraud prevention agencies and credit defence agencies will be recorded by them and shared with other organisations.”
  8. The defendant is of the view that the claimants personal information has been disclosed correctly.
  9. The defendant has an obligation as a responsible lender to provide accurate information relating to their customers. To remove such information would be contrary to the defendants obligation as a responsible lender and would be misleading to other lenders.
  10. The claimants account was closed by the defendant on [THEY HAVE LEFT A BLANK – EVEN THY DONT KNOW!] pursuant to 20.2 of the t&c's
  11. Clause 20.1 clearly states “20.2 we can end this agreement at any time. We normally give you 30 days advance notice by post or email. However is there are exceptional circumstances we may end this agreement immediately and tell you about it afterwards, unless we are required by law to give you notice first”
  12. the claimant has not pleaded to the nature or basis of his allegation,i.e. How any distress is alleges (sic) to have been caused, who suffered distress, the nature and extend (sic) of any distress. [i have had a ruined credit rating and been turned down for a preferential business banking account]
  13. In the premises the defendant denies that there is a right of action in law for damages of any distress.
  14. Further the defendant denies that the facts set out by the claimant give rise to any cause of action in law.
  15. It is denied that the claimant is entitled to the interest claimed or at all.

 

 

 

- Any suggestions for Allocation questionaire?

- Shall I send evidence with AQ

-Should I point out that they themselves dont know when the AC was shut - is it worth playing my hand now

- Do I need to pay the requested £200 or can I ask for less?

- Must I detail my damages/distress

HSBC, FS £100

Hfax Credit Card Full Settlement £330

Lloyds FS £503 (had to do moneyclaim + allocation questionaires

Halifax Full Settlement £979

Lloyds Credit Card Moneyclaim raised.

 

03/05/06 Fraud case with Egg resolved after 2 1/2 months!, full refund of fraud amount+interest+charges (£1060). Apology and cheque for £300 - BBC Working Lunch helped scare them into action.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The defendant is of the view that the claimants personal information has been disclosed correctly.

  1. The defendant has an obligation as a responsible lender to provide accurate information relating to their customers. To remove such information would be contrary to the defendants obligation as a responsible lender and would be misleading to other lenders.

I.E. Egg remains adamant the DN was justified by a default situation at one point in the past. If the alleged default situation had arisen in October 2006, but your debit situation was put back into a regular situation thanks to your payments in say December 2006(?),

 

but one year later in November 2007 Egg suddenly issued the DN dated November 2007, then that DN would have painted a misleading and inaccurate picture of you in November 2007, a picture which was accurate only briefly in November 2006, then there could be mileage here about Egg misrepresenting and propagating false information far and wide.

 

But if Egg had correctly backdated their DN as October 2006 I doubt if a county court will overturn it on the grounds of Egg being tardy. It would simply have been an historical event reported very late. I doubt if judges would see it as anything worse than inefficiency on the part of Egg -- unless any legal eagles know of explicit regulations and rulings on an upper time-elapse limit on the late issuing of DNs. Egg could of course say your recent charges reclaim caused them to re-examine your file, at which time they noticed a DN which should have been issued earlier. As for issuing a DN on a closed account, if you can reclaim charges on a closed account where justified, why cannot Egg issue a DN against same where justified?

  1. The claimants account was closed by the defendant on [THEY HAVE LEFT A BLANK – EVEN THY DONT KNOW!] pursuant to 20.2 of the t&c's
  2. the claimant has not pleaded to the nature or basis of his allegation,i.e. How any distress is alleges (sic) to have been caused, who suffered distress, the nature and extend (sic) of any distress. [i have had a ruined credit rating and been turned down for a preferential business banking account]
  3. In the premises the defendant denies that there is a right of action in law for damages of any distress.
  4. Further the defendant denies that the facts set out by the claimant give rise to any cause of action in law.

This claim of damages for loss and distress brings to mind Tom Brennan's claim for damages against NatWest in court. But Tom presented no evidence substantiating his claim of distress and loss, and the judge dismissed Tom's damages claim. Doubt if you need to present damages evidence in full at this stage. But do you expect to win in court where barrister Tom lost?

 

Everything comes back to the disagreement, whether a default situation for which the cardholder was responsible did or did not arise at the original date, and it is known from Yasmin-v-Egg that the Small Claims Court will not rule on this issue.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't send evidence with AQ - it is not the place. Since they waffle on about charges being reasonable, blah blah in their defence I would suggest you incude the 'new' directions (http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/11644-allocation-questionnaires-guide-completion.html#post90319) suitably modified - effectively full disclosure. That in itself may be enough to make them back down.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Steven - I will look into this when I finish work. I am a bit worried that maybe I should through in the towel instead of paying the requested £200? I can afford £200 but I still wouldn't want to throw it away. I was hoping that as Egg don't even know when they closed my a/c and have failed to repsond to DPAs they would wish to back down as they show themselves to be totally inept.

 

Chris

HSBC, FS £100

Hfax Credit Card Full Settlement £330

Lloyds FS £503 (had to do moneyclaim + allocation questionaires

Halifax Full Settlement £979

Lloyds Credit Card Moneyclaim raised.

 

03/05/06 Fraud case with Egg resolved after 2 1/2 months!, full refund of fraud amount+interest+charges (£1060). Apology and cheque for £300 - BBC Working Lunch helped scare them into action.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Chris, In response to your PM I think that there is very little that I can add to the very good advice that you are getting from Steven. good luck and keep on going, Stone

=======================================================================================================

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

 

 

Halifax Won £1180.00

NatWest Won £876.00

Halifax 2 N1 submitted 20/07/07 stayed 24/08/07 N244 Application filed 31/08/07 hearing set for 12/11/07 rescheduled for 29/01/2008. Application dismissed stay still in place.

Charity Group £200 compo for lost passport.

HM revenue & Customs; demand for WTC overpayment £632.12. Disputed, their error. Did not have to repay.

All opinions expressed are my own and have no legal standing and no connection to CAG

 

All errors/typos etc are not my fault the blame lies with the spelling gremlins

 

<<<<<< If any of this has been helpful, PLEASE click my scales

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi chris,

The same goes for myself.

In response to your PM, I too would be unable to add anything of any worth to the excellent advice you are already receiving. Not had to deal with such issues myself, but will be watching events here in case I ever do.

 

keep on fighting, and good luck.

 

PM

All opinions and advice I offer are purely my own, and are offered without any liability. If unsure seek the help of a licensed professional

...just because something's in print doesn't mean its true.... just look at you Banks T&C's for example !

Link to post
Share on other sites

CM, I can't really help you either as I've never been to court with Egg although I have done quite a bit of reading on them and apparently, they

are very short staffed and have been for some time.

 

I'm sick of chasing them re my S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) to them some months ago and have now gone into "default mode" ie waiting for them to contact me for a change ;)

 

As far as defaults are concerned, I've found a couple of links that may help although I suspect that you may have already read them:-

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legalities/24013-defaults-proposed-method-removal.html

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt-issues/111211-defaults-background-removal-methods.html

 

Good luck

 

Bo :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Steven - Should I quit at this stage (Egg inaccurate default)?

 

If I have no chance I may just not pay the £200 and not return the AQ?

 

What do you think? My gut reaction is that Egg really don't know whats going on and the Judge will give me the benefit of the doubt. On a side note I am having trouble getting a copy of the letter that Abbey national sent to me informing me I was refused a Busines banking A/c (I have written to abbey requesting this).

 

Does Egg not responding to DPA requests count for nothing in my case?

 

Help - I have to return the forms for Monday!

HSBC, FS £100

Hfax Credit Card Full Settlement £330

Lloyds FS £503 (had to do moneyclaim + allocation questionaires

Halifax Full Settlement £979

Lloyds Credit Card Moneyclaim raised.

 

03/05/06 Fraud case with Egg resolved after 2 1/2 months!, full refund of fraud amount+interest+charges (£1060). Apology and cheque for £300 - BBC Working Lunch helped scare them into action.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's completely up to you what you do. I stick with my advice in my last post if you do deside to carry on. I think you would need to define the information you want disclosed carefully as the standard directions relate to charges - irrelevant in your case. Perhaps ask them for all information regarding your account particularly since the date when you know it to have been closed, ie when the defaults have been added.

 

What you need to consider is the risk to you of carrying on - that is that you might lose (unlikely) and therefore lose the £200 AQ fee as well as the original fee. If it's Small Claims you are not going to have to pay the other side's costs.

 

THe alternative is that you throw in the towel and live with the defaults and all that they cost you (definitley cost you rather than possibly cost you).

 

It all hinges on when the account was closed - as you say, Egg don't seem to know. What evidence do you have?

 

Your case is brought under ss13 & 14 of the DPA. The fact that Egg have not responded to a request undre s7 will surely go against them. It strengthens you case too - you can argue that they have not sent statements for the last 17+ months because there aren't any because the account is closed.

 

If you decide to go ahead, I (or someone esle) will help you with the AQ part G.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is all about time now. I have to hand the forms into the court by tomorrow. I'm going to have to take the forms by hand tonight. I am prob going to ask for a further month and then work on the game plan from there.

HSBC, FS £100

Hfax Credit Card Full Settlement £330

Lloyds FS £503 (had to do moneyclaim + allocation questionaires

Halifax Full Settlement £979

Lloyds Credit Card Moneyclaim raised.

 

03/05/06 Fraud case with Egg resolved after 2 1/2 months!, full refund of fraud amount+interest+charges (£1060). Apology and cheque for £300 - BBC Working Lunch helped scare them into action.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You could say you have been hampered by Egg not providing you with information you require.

 

We didn't get our AQ in on time for the Clydesdale case because we had actually settled and were waiting for the cheque. The court wrote and gave us an extra two weeks or the claim would be struck out without us having to ask - I don't know if this is srandard.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have made an order for directions asking for the following:

-regarding their defense (no 12 on their defense) clarification of when egg closed the claimaints a/c

dates of defaults placed by defendant on claimaints account

- any witness statements

 

I haven't committed to provide any info as I haven't got their letter about my a/c being closed (many many months ago) or Abbey Nat's declining my Bus A/c (written to Abbey for duplicate).

 

I will deliver it by hand before work tomorrow.

HSBC, FS £100

Hfax Credit Card Full Settlement £330

Lloyds FS £503 (had to do moneyclaim + allocation questionaires

Halifax Full Settlement £979

Lloyds Credit Card Moneyclaim raised.

 

03/05/06 Fraud case with Egg resolved after 2 1/2 months!, full refund of fraud amount+interest+charges (£1060). Apology and cheque for £300 - BBC Working Lunch helped scare them into action.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In section G put that this information is vital for the prime objective to be achieved.

 

I would also ask for all statements since the date you think the account was closed - that should fox them ;)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...