Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I am being harrangued for a debt I don't owe whilst in hardship by EDF, who was given this household's supply by OFGEM when it closed down several small companies in 2019. Unbelievably, this is happening during cold months and a full strict lockdown!   I consider that this is a crime on several counts: 1) fraud by nondisclosure, as per 2006 act: that free energy exists and that patents have been suppressed to help us use it, thus giving the illusion that energy can only be supplied by for profit companies (the same is true of water), when it is a naturally occurring, God-given free resource which has been harnessed and sold back to us, and it's hard to avoid or find alternatives 2) the energy industry is a form of modern slavery as per 2015 act, holding us in lifelong custom: something we need, can't easily find an alternative from or not use. This supplier took over without consent or knowledge or warning and will not relinquish me without paying them; but the amount grows as they continue our abusive relationship 3) as utility acts such as the 1989 and 1990 clash with inalienable natural Common Law and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 and various other laws, some to be listed anon, that the so-called powers given to energy companies to gain money and bully are not lawful 4) removal of energy takes our rights (as in the UDHR) to eat, wash, be warm, work, communicate, and have leisure and enjoyment. Particularly, it can cut those off who rely on the internet and battery operated phones, thus making them vulnerable, and causing a snowball effect 5) cutting off, or the fear and bullying around doing so and 'recovering debts', causes mental and physical suffering, as well as great inconvenience and loss. a) These are recoupable in monetary terms of the claimant (ie customer's) choosing b) this amounts to constructive demise or manslaughter  - including attempt and conspiracy to commit this serious crime (attempt and conspiracy apply for all the others below) 6) asking for money in a way which is upsetting, intimidating or distressing is another criminal offence under the Prevention From Harassment act of 1997 - and most debt demands fulfil this, and are not incidental, but designed to cause fear in the way they are worded, in the design of the 'red, urgent' envelopes, in the vagueness of who and where the collector is, offering a generic phone number; bluffing about their powers and a warrant; coming to the door with hand delivered envelopes to embarass in front of household members and neighbours; and the way they appear at your door to actually collect or tamper with supply 7) There is Aggravated Trespass under the criminal justice and public order act of 1994, where if you have given written notice that implied access to your property (I include remotely, in the case of smart meters), to enter the premises (including outside areas) without written permission and especially with ill-intent, is a further summary, ie imprisionable offence 8) this is also exhortion and blackmail 9) it is an aggressive sales technique, no different from drugs barons and loan sharks 10) a prepayment meter is just another way of forcing debt repayment, and as the customer doesn't set the amount, if they do not have resources they are still left without power and heat 11) this is closely related to the data and surveillance and weaponised energy of 5G via smart meters, and so this is a) espionage b) mass experimentation under the Nuremburg code of 1948 c) biowarfare 12) it is also breaking and entering, if they force or pick locks 13) any physical abuse has other crimes - such as battery, grevious bodily harm, assault 14) lying or tricking to gain entry is also a crime 15) their involving your neighbours breaks confidentiality, such as asking about you, getting them to let them in. This is against their industry code and 16) during lockdowns and other restrictions related to covid, they break the coronavirus act 2020. Utility workers are only classed as keyworkers when they are keeping a supply running and safe. They are not permitted to work or travel to harass and cut off - this is especially reprehensible during an extended pandemic when so many are anxious have weakened immunity, and financial difficulties. When most of us are not meant to see loved ones, especially indoors 17) if the operatives are masked - this includes a locksmith or any enforcement with them - this heightens the offence as, despite covid guidance, it is done with criminal intent and knowingly a) makes them look sinister, thus adding to fear of the customer b) hides their identity and obfuscates justice 18) any persons involved, including administrators and the judge who created any warrant 19) to exaggerate one's legal powers is also an offence   Furthermore, utility companies send out - and sell out - debts and debt collectors who have no knowledge of the communications between the company and the customer; such as whether they are misbilled, or even the right person. I also believe that poor service, such as being ignored or bullied, means a rebate on the 'bill'.   The ombudsman have consistently exacerbated and failed to put right, and OFGEM's policies have added to this too.   We need to take the power back into our hands; to choose our energy source and provider; to harness free, safe energy.   I am putting EDF staff on notice for all these.   Has anyone else had any similar trouble for this, especially in the last year? I would like to know the extent of the problem   I am considering class action. An expression of interest in no way commits you, especially financially.   You may be interested in my piece at https://elspethr.wordpress.com/2020/08/22/expulsion-from-the-garden-its-time-we-took-our-energy-back/, via which you can get in touch  
    • No, there is no ombudsman for this kind of thing. It's a huge industry with a lack of regulation which is why it broadly speaking does what it wants without a lot of regard for customers. You haven't addressed the question which I put to you in my last post.
    • Hi - email submitted.   After some sleep (4am wake up yesterday - loooong day) I redrafted email to be a bit more readable whilst clearly stating the points above but being less aggressive/rude 😳    Being very tired I briefly considered just getting the repair and compensation (if they offered) but after some sleep and in the light of day I saw some further damage to the piping (minor, but there) on the same bit of arm so promptly hit send on my email! My sister also told me of her friend who had a whole host of problems trying to get damage on delivery fixed so I’m definitely not going down that road. I’m going for a replacement.    Will update as soon as I hear anything.   Thanks
    • DX - regarding the t&c- do you mean the bit at the very bottom that says "this agreement incorporates t&c set out in the long form version" ?   ill take this up with them in mediation, got nothing to lose   Just so i understand, that signed agreement isnt actually the t&c ? that should be included too? im looking online for the actual govt guidance, but the OFT has shut down and the consumer regualtion guidance doesnt actually mention t&c as far as i can see
    • Thanks Andy. The judge made a big deal about the costs and spend a good 15-20 minutes making sure they had covered everything. 
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 33 replies

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3576 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

I currently have a loan with LMC (taken out 15/09/06) which includes a Single Premium amount of £4,326 in PPI added to the total amount owing on the loan. This PPI amount includes interest.

 

I have no recollection of actually agreeing to the PPI and have requested cancellation and reimbursement. Sterling Insurance who act as the Insurance Broker for LMC have corresponded with me and stated that I am entitled to a partial reimbursement; no actual refund, just a partial amount which is reduced from the total owing on the loan. The letter stated that this includes "incurred expenses" and "incurred risk".

 

I replied to Sterling requesting a breakdown of their costs to include risk and expenses and received a complaints procedure document :confused: Quel surprise!!!!

 

I have issued a complaint through the FSA and their reply followed on 22 February informing me that they will provide me with a response as soon as they can.

 

:roll: ...

 

 

Razz

'Fortune favours the brave.'

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Any advice given is purely on the basis of my own views and opinions and offered in good faith.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I currently have a loan with LMC (taken out 15/0/06) which includes a Single Premium amount of £4,326 in PPI which is added to the total amount owing on the loan. This PPI amount includes interest.

 

I have no recollection of actually agreeing to the PPI and have requested cancellation and reimbursement. Sterling Insurance who act as the Insurance Broker for LMC have corresponded with me and stated that I am entitled to a partial reimbursement; no actual refund, just a partial amount which is reduced from the total owing on the loan. The letter stated that this includes "incurred expenses" and "incurred risk".

 

I replied to Sterling requesting a breakdown of their costs to include risk and expenses and received a complaints procedure document :confused: Quel surprise!!!!

 

I have issued a complaint through the FSA and their reply followed on 22 February informing me that they will provide me with a response as soon as they can.

 

:roll: ...

 

 

Razz

 

Hello Paintball

 

Just a quick question, have you referred a complaint through the FSA or the FOS, or both;) . With regards to the partial re-imbursement. They are refunding the unpaid ppi and interest into the balance of the loan, therefore reducing it. The part of the ppi and interest you have paid, should be returned to you, with contractual interest.

If any of my posts are helpful, please feel free to click my scales. All information is given as my opinion only, based on my own personal experiences. I have no legal training, but have educated myself in aspects of consumer legislation. My motto "NEVER GIVE IN, NEVER SURRENDER", THERE IS A WAR ON YOU KNOW

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Helly..

 

Through the Financial Ombudsman Service complaints procedure. I understand what they have refunded to the balance of the loan, and am concerned now about the lack of reimbursement for the amount paid plus interest.

 

I can wait until the FOS makes its decision and gets back to me (hmm hmm, waiting patiently:rolleyes: ) or I can procede down the LBA and N1 route as I did with my Capital Bank PPI claim (blatant mis-selling to a student!!)

and claim/argue mis-selling ...

 

Painty x

 

 

:)

'Fortune favours the brave.'

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Any advice given is purely on the basis of my own views and opinions and offered in good faith.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Helly..

 

Through the Financial Ombudsman Service complaints procedure. I understand what they have refunded to the balance of the loan, and am concerned now about the lack of reimbursement for the amount paid plus interest.

 

I can wait until the FOS makes its decision and gets back to me (hmm hmm, waiting patiently:rolleyes: ) or I can procede down the LBA and N1 route as I did with my Capital Bank PPI claim (blatant mis-selling to a student!!)

and claim/argue mis-selling ...

 

Painty x

 

 

:)

 

Hello Painty

 

If you have put a complaint to the Fos they will investigate thoroughly, although I do believe they are rather busy, due to the consumer revolt:D They do take time, but I also believe that they are upholding 80% of mis-sold ppi complaints.

 

If you do the court route, this can also that some time, so its your call really.

 

I wish you good luck in your decision:D

 

Keep us posted

  • Haha 1

If any of my posts are helpful, please feel free to click my scales. All information is given as my opinion only, based on my own personal experiences. I have no legal training, but have educated myself in aspects of consumer legislation. My motto "NEVER GIVE IN, NEVER SURRENDER", THERE IS A WAR ON YOU KNOW

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hello Painty

 

If you have put a complaint to the Fos they will investigate thoroughly, although I do believe they are rather busy, due to the consumer revolt:D They do take time, but I also believe that they are upholding 80% of mis-sold ppi complaints.

 

If you do the court route, this can also that some time, so its your call really.

 

I wish you good luck in your decision:D

 

Keep us posted

 

Thanks for the support ... I must admit I'm a bit of a 'Claim Whore'!! I usually proceed straight to the N1 route and no messing about, but on this occasion thought I'd give the old FOS a chance to do their bit on my behalf!

 

However, I'm twitching badly at the mo, partly because I've handed control over to another party and have to wait for their decision and don't have access to every stage of the process and partly a general sense of impatience!! :shock:

 

 

 

:D

'Fortune favours the brave.'

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Any advice given is purely on the basis of my own views and opinions and offered in good faith.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

As part of the FOS investigation process (lengthy!!) LMC have abdicated all responsibility for the selling of the PPI, referring me instead to the broker which was Oryen.

 

I have already received a partial reimbursement of the PPI which was less than half of the Single Premium sum added to the loan; £2119.74 from a total £4326.00 LMC have offset this amount against my monthly loan payments and have not taken any loan payments since December 2007.

 

They did not advise me that this was what they were going to do. I received no correspondence from them and only discovered this 'method' when I called them. As I stated to the Customer Services rep, they have done this "without my knowledge or consent" ...

 

I still have to decide whether I will be going for the full mis-selling of PPI and claiming this from Oryen in which case, I would be claiming the rest of the full amount not reimbursed by LMC.

 

Any suggestions anyone?

 

:rolleyes:

 

BTW, have almost won my case against HBOS (sued as Capital Bank) for return of mis-sold PPI, Judgment issued last week for full payment.

'Fortune favours the brave.'

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Any advice given is purely on the basis of my own views and opinions and offered in good faith.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bump ...

'Fortune favours the brave.'

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Any advice given is purely on the basis of my own views and opinions and offered in good faith.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bumpety bump ... anyone there? :rolleyes:

'Fortune favours the brave.'

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Any advice given is purely on the basis of my own views and opinions and offered in good faith.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i am in a similar situation to yourself. I wrote to sterling to ask them to cancel the single premium policy that was taken out with my initial loan. they sent me a cheque for 40% of the single premium. I wrote a letter to them to ask how they had arrived at the figure and they sent me a breakdown of what costs were incurred e.t.c. I don't believe that 40 % is a fair amount considering that I will be paying this ppi for the duration of the loan with interest added. I am not sure really what to do now. I have written to the broker that set the loan up and asked for DPA. I don't believe that i was told that the ppi only covered me for 3 years. Not received the info yet and the 40 days are near. Will get back to you when i have more info

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nicho, you are a star ;) Thanks for this response, it's exactly what has happened to me except that the T&C's for the PPI that I finally received after the FOS's intervention state that I'm entitled to 49% reimbursement.

 

However, I'm still unhappy with this for the reasons you state in your message and don't think it's fair that I'm still paying the premium in my monthly amount which includes interest. What I feel I need to do is work out what the interest is and how much that would add to the amount 'reimbursed'.

 

Watch this space and I'll be watching yours ...

 

P x

'Fortune favours the brave.'

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Any advice given is purely on the basis of my own views and opinions and offered in good faith.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've done that Nicho but they're stalling so my next step is to send a SAR to LMC and then claim the lot back based on mis-selling. I will need to claim it back from the broker, Oryen.

 

A tad complicated ...:eek:

 

 

:p Razz

'Fortune favours the brave.'

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Any advice given is purely on the basis of my own views and opinions and offered in good faith.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 5 months later...
i am in a similar situation to yourself. I wrote to sterling to ask them to cancel the single premium policy that was taken out with my initial loan. they sent me a cheque for 40% of the single premium. I wrote a letter to them to ask how they had arrived at the figure and they sent me a breakdown of what costs were incurred e.t.c. I don't believe that 40 % is a fair amount considering that I will be paying this ppi for the duration of the loan with interest added. I am not sure really what to do now. I have written to the broker that set the loan up and asked for Data Protection Act. I don't believe that i was told that the ppi only covered me for 3 years. Not received the info yet and the 40 days are near. Will get back to you when i have more info

I'm reviving my claim after a period of confusion with it. Noted your comments Nicho which mirror my own circumstances ...

shouldnt you be sending the S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) to your broker then ???

Yes, I should Nicho :) I have finally unearthed the original paperwork for the loan.

 

It was brokered by Magic Loans and I'm sending the S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) today. I refuse to accept the 40% refund, was mis-sold PPI in the first place as Magic Loans did not follow FSA selling guidelines and Banking Code of good practice and did NOT treat me fairly, and I was not told that I would be paying the premium and interest for the duration of the loan once the three year period of the cover was ended. The latter amounts to concealment at the very least and misrepresentation at worst ...

 

 

The battle continues :-D

'Fortune favours the brave.'

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Any advice given is purely on the basis of my own views and opinions and offered in good faith.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

Received today the most arrogant response from Magic Loans regarding my S.A.R - (Subject Access Request).

 

To quote from the letter: "Our records show that you made a previous complaint about the sale of PPI and a comprehensive reply finding your complaint not to be upheld was issued to you on 25 February by my colleague X. Within this reply, it was clearly stated that you had a period of six months [...] to refer your complaint to the FOS if you were unhappy with the decision. You did not do so and [...] your complaint became time-barred and would not be accepted or investigated by the FOS if you escalated it to them now.

 

As a consequence of this there is no case to answer regarding the sale of PPI. Indeed, my colleague found there was no case to answer in the first instance. As your request under the Data Protection Act 1998 was clearly stated a directly linked to the sale of PPI, there is no reason to involve you in the expense of the request and I therefore enclose your cheque [...] "

 

Firstly, I never received a letter from Magic Loans in February and I have never contacted them before my SAR in September. I have always dealt with Sterling Insurance, the underwriter.

 

Today I called the FOS who began their investigation of the complaint in February for me and who are baffled by this response, in particular the time-barring, informing me that they'll be happy to continue investigating it on my behalf. The chap was also baffled by the refusal to comply with my SAR!!

 

I have informed the chap who sent the letter that his reponse is arrogant, that the case is NOT closed and that I have a legal right to the info they hold on me regardless of whether it relates to a complaint or any other issue.

'Fortune favours the brave.'

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Any advice given is purely on the basis of my own views and opinions and offered in good faith.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Painty,

 

Received today the most arrogant response from Magic Loans regarding my S.A.R - (Subject Access Request).

 

To quote from the letter: "Our records show that you made a previous complaint about the sale of PPI and a comprehensive reply finding your complaint not to be upheld was issued to you on 25 February by my colleague X. Within this reply, it was clearly stated that you had a period of six months [...] to refer your complaint to the FOS if you were unhappy with the decision. You did not do so and [...] your complaint became time-barred and would not be accepted or investigated by the FOS if you escalated it to them now.

 

As a consequence of this there is no case to answer regarding the sale of PPI. Indeed, my colleague found there was no case to answer in the first instance. As your request under the Data Protection Act 1998 was clearly stated a directly linked to the sale of PPI, there is no reason to involve you in the expense of the request and I therefore enclose your cheque [...] " As you say most arrogant and condescending.

 

Assuming a tone of superiority, or a patronizing attitude

en.wiktionary.org/wiki/condescending

 

Firstly, I never received a letter from Magic Loans in February and I have never contacted them before my S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) in September. I have always dealt with Sterling Insurance, the underwriter.

 

Today I called the FOS who began their investigation of the complaint in February for me and who are baffled by this response, in particular the time-barring, informing me that they'll be happy to continue investigating it on my behalf. The chap was also baffled by the refusal to comply with my S.A.R - (Subject Access Request)!! And so another letter goes off to the Information Commissioners Office for Magic Loans failing to comply with the Data Protection Act 1998.

 

I have informed the chap who sent the letter that his reponse is arrogant, that the case is NOT closed and that I have a legal right to the info they hold on me regardless of whether it relates to a complaint or any other issue.

 

True fighting spirit as ever.:grin: Their letter is not funny but your response did make me smile:)

 

aa

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

------------------------------------------------

Bank charge successes:

Halifax - Full settlement incl interest.

HSBC - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 75% of claim.

RBS - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 70% of claim.

2 ongoing claims for bank charges with HSBC with more to come. (Supreme Court ruling could have upset these claims) They did :mad:

PPI Successes

PPI 4 settlements on 9 loans. FOS involvement on 7 added on the 8 % Statutory interest another 30% to both.

2 claims settled in full with LV without FOS involvement.

2 claims settled in full with HSBC without FOS involvement

 

PPI Claims ongoing with:

Cap one Now with the FOS

Barclays. Paid up today 24/04/10 cheque received for over £4,500 and in the bank.

LTSB still have to decide on this as their SAR production was abysmal. Papers data mixed up documents missing etc

 

1 Complaint not upheld by FOS they said it was ICO issue. Complaint upheld by ICO. See this..

Post 290 from

***RBS PPI Claim Long fight but, WON***

 

Please do not PM me for advice as it may be sometime before I can respond.

 

Keep at them. Do not give way and do not accept all they tell you, they will delay and stall for as long as they can to prevent repaying you your mis-sold PPI.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

aa I was stottin' this morning when I read that letter. But chuckling afte I spoke to the nice young man at th FOS and definitely now :D

 

Now, in relation to your comment about another letter going off the the ICO about Magic Loans failing to comply with a SAR, can you direct me to another complaint for this co? Save me a bit of time trawling but happy to try anyway;)

 

Cheers

'Fortune favours the brave.'

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Any advice given is purely on the basis of my own views and opinions and offered in good faith.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Painty,

 

Well I never:eek:. the arrogance of this company, but I am sure you will reply with a suitable response:D pointing out the error of their ways

 

As you know Painty, It really is not up to them whether to respond, or not, to your legal request for information:mad: By law they must comply

 

I am sure that you will report them to the information commissioners office as to their conduct:grin:

 

Is it not great when they give themselves more rope to hang themselves.

 

Why are the being so defensive I wonder:-D Is there something in your S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) that they do not want you to see

If any of my posts are helpful, please feel free to click my scales. All information is given as my opinion only, based on my own personal experiences. I have no legal training, but have educated myself in aspects of consumer legislation. My motto "NEVER GIVE IN, NEVER SURRENDER", THERE IS A WAR ON YOU KNOW

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Painty,

 

As a consequence of this there is no case to answer regarding the sale of PPI. Indeed, my colleague found there was no case to answer in the first instance. As your request under the Data Protection Act 1998 was clearly stated a directly linked to the sale of PPI, there is no reason to involve you in the expense of the request and I therefore enclose your cheque [...] " As you say most arrogant and condescending.

 

 

Assuming a tone of superiority, or a patronizing attitude

en.wiktionary.org/wiki/condescending

 

 

 

I have been thinking about this bit of my post and have to post again to say I was wrong to put in the wiktionary result of cendescending as to do that was in itself condescending.

 

Sorry:)

 

I will look for a suitable complain for you to use for the ICO and post soon

 

aa

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

------------------------------------------------

Bank charge successes:

Halifax - Full settlement incl interest.

HSBC - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 75% of claim.

RBS - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 70% of claim.

2 ongoing claims for bank charges with HSBC with more to come. (Supreme Court ruling could have upset these claims) They did :mad:

PPI Successes

PPI 4 settlements on 9 loans. FOS involvement on 7 added on the 8 % Statutory interest another 30% to both.

2 claims settled in full with LV without FOS involvement.

2 claims settled in full with HSBC without FOS involvement

 

PPI Claims ongoing with:

Cap one Now with the FOS

Barclays. Paid up today 24/04/10 cheque received for over £4,500 and in the bank.

LTSB still have to decide on this as their SAR production was abysmal. Papers data mixed up documents missing etc

 

1 Complaint not upheld by FOS they said it was ICO issue. Complaint upheld by ICO. See this..

Post 290 from

***RBS PPI Claim Long fight but, WON***

 

Please do not PM me for advice as it may be sometime before I can respond.

 

Keep at them. Do not give way and do not accept all they tell you, they will delay and stall for as long as they can to prevent repaying you your mis-sold PPI.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here you go Painty,

 

this was part of my response to a similar situation just fill in the relevant bits for your dates etc and use what you can. Long as my posts always are:D.

 

I would wish to point out that the information requested in my original letter Subject Access Request (S.A.R - (Subject Access Request)) dated xxxxxxxxx has not been forthcoming.

By law under the provisions of the Data Protection Act 1998 Section 7 sub section (1) ( c ) ( i ) and (ii) you are required to communicate to me in an intelligible form the information as requested within the requirements of the Act section 7 (2) (a) and (b), which as the data subject I have met.

 

 

I now must insist that you provide the following for ALL accounts or associated accounts that I as a Data Subject have held with your organization:

 

Full copies of all contracts which you believe exist or have existed between myself and your organization, including true copies of any documents you hold in support of the same.

A complete list of all transactions or statements relating to ALL of my Loan Accounts including all details of payment protection insurance premiums applicable to those accounts with your organization.

 

When I insist on the provision of all details, I take that to include all data applicable to me as a Data subject including the data on payment protection insurance (PPI) including the Terms and Conditions applicable to the insurance applied to the loans.

 

Copies of all documents which include any of my personal information including copies of any contracts or invoices, emails or computer records, or letters containing my personal information, or any records which relate to this information.

 

Full copies or transcripts of any correspondence in postal, email or any other format which you have entered into with any individual, organization or third party which contains my personal or financial information, or which pertains to me.

 

If you are then unable to trace the information on these loans then I will require the following action to be taken by your organisation.

 

Where any previous information or records held have been deleted or disposed of, the methods used to do so, including dates, certificates or references confirming details of destruction. Where you are unable to provide such certificates, please provide a declaration, signed by an authorised officer (preferably the Data Controller) of your company, confirming the dates and methods of destruction of this data.

 

Full hard copy print outs of my personal or financial information, held in a digital, magnetic or any other format which is held in any archives, backups or other storage devices / locations.

To date I have not received this full information. I await the following:

1. Full details of PPI including the terms and conditions as applicable to the loans as detailed in my first request.

2. Full transcripts of all telephone conversations that have been recorded between your organisation and myself.

3. Full copies of all credit agreements and contracts between Magic Loans and myself.

4. Full copies of any and all postal or email correspondence.

 

If there is no information available then I will require written confirmation of this together with as stated before full details on your methods of erasure, disposal or destruction signed by an authorised officer of your company.

 

Failure to respond to this second request in a fully comprehensive and satisfactory manner within 14 days, will result in the submission of a formal complaint to the Information Commissioners Office detailing your failure to comply with the Data Protection Act 1998. Which is a Legal Statute within the Law.

 

You can chop and change to suit their response to you but the Data Protection Act Sections do apply.

 

Data Protection Act 1998 (c. 29)

 

You can confirm through this link.

 

aa;)

PS

have been a bit repetitive in some areas but it might get the message across if they read twice what you require.

Edited by alanalana
a PS added

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

------------------------------------------------

Bank charge successes:

Halifax - Full settlement incl interest.

HSBC - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 75% of claim.

RBS - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 70% of claim.

2 ongoing claims for bank charges with HSBC with more to come. (Supreme Court ruling could have upset these claims) They did :mad:

PPI Successes

PPI 4 settlements on 9 loans. FOS involvement on 7 added on the 8 % Statutory interest another 30% to both.

2 claims settled in full with LV without FOS involvement.

2 claims settled in full with HSBC without FOS involvement

 

PPI Claims ongoing with:

Cap one Now with the FOS

Barclays. Paid up today 24/04/10 cheque received for over £4,500 and in the bank.

LTSB still have to decide on this as their SAR production was abysmal. Papers data mixed up documents missing etc

 

1 Complaint not upheld by FOS they said it was ICO issue. Complaint upheld by ICO. See this..

Post 290 from

***RBS PPI Claim Long fight but, WON***

 

Please do not PM me for advice as it may be sometime before I can respond.

 

Keep at them. Do not give way and do not accept all they tell you, they will delay and stall for as long as they can to prevent repaying you your mis-sold PPI.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Painty,

 

this is the link to complete an online complaint to the ICO.

 

Complaints about data protection policy - ICO

 

You can fill it in and submit and send any copies of letters you get either electronically if you scan and add or as in my case I copied and posted with covering letters.

 

aa

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

------------------------------------------------

Bank charge successes:

Halifax - Full settlement incl interest.

HSBC - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 75% of claim.

RBS - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 70% of claim.

2 ongoing claims for bank charges with HSBC with more to come. (Supreme Court ruling could have upset these claims) They did :mad:

PPI Successes

PPI 4 settlements on 9 loans. FOS involvement on 7 added on the 8 % Statutory interest another 30% to both.

2 claims settled in full with LV without FOS involvement.

2 claims settled in full with HSBC without FOS involvement

 

PPI Claims ongoing with:

Cap one Now with the FOS

Barclays. Paid up today 24/04/10 cheque received for over £4,500 and in the bank.

LTSB still have to decide on this as their SAR production was abysmal. Papers data mixed up documents missing etc

 

1 Complaint not upheld by FOS they said it was ICO issue. Complaint upheld by ICO. See this..

Post 290 from

***RBS PPI Claim Long fight but, WON***

 

Please do not PM me for advice as it may be sometime before I can respond.

 

Keep at them. Do not give way and do not accept all they tell you, they will delay and stall for as long as they can to prevent repaying you your mis-sold PPI.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks aa ;)

 

Magic Loans have until 11 November to comply with my SAR ...

'Fortune favours the brave.'

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Any advice given is purely on the basis of my own views and opinions and offered in good faith.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

From my letter to them, Magic Loans have complied with my S.A.R - (Subject Access Request), up to a point!!

 

They state that:

 

"We are presently unable to locate recordings of the telephone calls we made to you or you to us. In order to help us to locate and retrieve any telephone ranscripts you require, we shall need you to complete and return the enclosed the subject access telephony form giving as much detail as you can in terms of numbers, dates and times."

 

The form asks me for the exact date and time of the sales conversation. Erm, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it Magic Loans who are supposed to be providing me with this info, not vice versa? They have included a few nice forms detailing the calls made to me and comments made by the sales people, but suddently are not able to locate the sales call and content of this. Slight contradiction there?

 

Also attached with the letter is corespondence from Magic Loans from February 25 this year (which I had never received) informing me that they could not uphold my mis-selling complaint:

 

"I would advise you that I have reviewed the sales processes in place and documentation issued to you at the time of the sale and [...] feel that Magic Loans Limited did make you aware at various stages through the process that the insurance was optional."

 

Hmmm, no record of the sales call so how can this be stated with such certainty?

 

I have no recollection of any discussion about the overall suitability of the PPI product nor of true the cost of adding it to my loan compared to alternative options in the market place, nor is there any documentation to prove this took place.

 

Interestingly, no keyfacts document sent to me in the S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) ...

 

Thoughts anyone on the Telephony SAR?

 

:-)

Edited by Paintball
  • Haha 1

'Fortune favours the brave.'

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Any advice given is purely on the basis of my own views and opinions and offered in good faith.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Painty,

 

"We are presently unable to locate recordings of the telephone calls we made to you or you to us. In order to help us to locate and retrieve any telephone ranscripts you require, we shall need you to complete and return the enclosed the subject access (£10.00 fee required here) telephony form giving as much detail as you can in terms of numbers, dates and times."

 

The form asks me for the exact date and time of the sales conversation. Erm, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it Magic Loans who are supposed to be providing me with this info, not vice versa? (Yes) They have included a few nice forms detailing the calls made to me and comments made by the sales people, but suddently are not able to locate the sales call and content of this. Slight contradiction there? (RBS tried this with me ie supply the dates and times of the calls the name of the person you spoke to etc). I said I want recordings of transcripts of all calls made)

Also attached with the letter is corespondence from Magic Loans from February 25 this year (which I had never received) informing me that they could not uphold my mis-selling complaint:

 

"I would advise you that I have reviewed the sales processes in place and documentation issued to you at the time of the sale and [...] feel (They can feel all they want but feel is not proof) that Magic Loans Limited did make you aware at various stages through the process that the insurance was optional." (Without a Customer wants and needs questionnaire or a duty of care checklist and no recordings or transcripts of telephone conversations tell them to prove that they did make you aware). This is the usual fob off.

Hmmm, no record of the sales call so how can this be stated with such certainty? ( Good question maybe you could ask them:D)

 

I have no recollection of any discussion about the overall suitability of the PPI product nor of true the cost of adding it to my loan compared to alternative options in the market place, nor is there any documentation to prove this took place.

 

Interestingly, no keyfacts document sent to me in the S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) ...

 

Thoughts anyone on the Telephony S.A.R - (Subject Access Request)? (You could point out that you sent the SAR with the Statutory fee asking them to supply data in line with the DPA 1998) You therefore require them to supply the information within the 40 day Statuted period. If that has passed then they are not complying with the LAW.

 

Painty you could also suggest that if any more of their letters require you to provide information you will require a fee before responding with the same negative result they seem to have given you.;-)

 

aa

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

------------------------------------------------

Bank charge successes:

Halifax - Full settlement incl interest.

HSBC - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 75% of claim.

RBS - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 70% of claim.

2 ongoing claims for bank charges with HSBC with more to come. (Supreme Court ruling could have upset these claims) They did :mad:

PPI Successes

PPI 4 settlements on 9 loans. FOS involvement on 7 added on the 8 % Statutory interest another 30% to both.

2 claims settled in full with LV without FOS involvement.

2 claims settled in full with HSBC without FOS involvement

 

PPI Claims ongoing with:

Cap one Now with the FOS

Barclays. Paid up today 24/04/10 cheque received for over £4,500 and in the bank.

LTSB still have to decide on this as their SAR production was abysmal. Papers data mixed up documents missing etc

 

1 Complaint not upheld by FOS they said it was ICO issue. Complaint upheld by ICO. See this..

Post 290 from

***RBS PPI Claim Long fight but, WON***

 

Please do not PM me for advice as it may be sometime before I can respond.

 

Keep at them. Do not give way and do not accept all they tell you, they will delay and stall for as long as they can to prevent repaying you your mis-sold PPI.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha aa, just the response I would have hoped for. Many thanks :D

 

I have begun to formulate my reponse. ML really are stinkers and have concealed, misinformed, and taken advantage of my (previous) lack of knowledge and understanding of PPI to add a product that has a whacking great cost attached to it, which had I known this at the time of taking out the loan, I would NEVER have gone ahead with ...

 

This claim is typifies what the FSA and the Competition Commission wish to do away with; PPI sold with poor sales practice as a Single Premium and the true cost of it and the loan not explained to the borrower!!!

 

I'm not so green now though so watch out ML, here I come with all guns blazing ...

 

 

:D:D

'Fortune favours the brave.'

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Any advice given is purely on the basis of my own views and opinions and offered in good faith.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...