Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Weaknesses in some banks' security measures for online and mobile banking could leave customers more exposed to scammers, new data from Which? reveals.View the full article
    • I understand what you mean. But consider that part of the problem, and the frustration of those trying to help, is the way that questions are asked without context and without straight facts. A lot of effort was wasted discussing as a consumer issue before it was mentioned that the property was BTL. I don't think we have your history with this property. Were you the freehold owner prior to this split? Did you buy the leasehold of one half? From a family member? How was that funded (earlier loan?). How long ago was it split? Have either of the leasehold halves changed hands since? I'm wondering if the split and the leashold/freehold arrangements were set up in a way that was OK when everyone was everyone was connected. But a way that makes the leasehold virtually unsaleable to an unrelated party.
    • quite honestly id email shiply CEO with that crime ref number and state you will be taking this to court, for the full sum of your losses, if it is not resolved ASAP. should that be necessary then i WILL be naming Shiply as the defendant. this can be avoided should the information upon whom the courier was and their current new company contact details, as the present is simply LONDON VIRTUAL OFFICES  is a company registered there and there's a bunch of other invisible companies so clearly just a mail address   
    • If it doesn’t sell easily : what they can get at an auction becomes fair market price, which may not realise what you are hoping.
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
      • 161 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

Complain to FSA about misleading conduct from a High street bank


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5678 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

Does it make you angry when banks try to mislead you?

 

Well now’s your chance to do something about it.

 

You may have noticed in the press and perhaps from this website the fact that Barclays announced they are cutting their overdraft charges to £8. This looked all well and good and seemed a most attractive change for the consumer until you read the small print and found out that in fact it’s not quite as attractive at seemed.

 

We believe that Barclay’s news release on their website was misleading and that the overall package of fees and charges which they are proposing to introduce are unfair, disproportionately affect the less well off and are marketed in a way that amounts to customer abuse. Furthermore it is clear that the overhaul of the charging regime is a blatant attempt to evade the possibility of the charges being found unlawful in a court of law and yet still allowing Barclays to impose the same level of charges.

 

What you can do

 

The FSA has a report facility on their website whereby you can report misleading promotional and advertising material. If enough people complain about the behaviour of Barclays hopefully the FSA will bring Barclays to account demonstrating a clear message to other banks not to follow suit and that customer abuse will not be tolerated.

 

The report facility only takes a few moments to complete and costs nothing. Furthermore you do not have to be a Barclay’s customer to use it.

 

Please help CAG help consumers by taking a few moments to fill in the report. Follow this link:

 

Making a Complaint

 

Guidance for completion:

 

Q1 Select: member of general public

 

Q2 Select: website

 

Q3 Write: Barclays Bank Plc

 

Q4 Write: Restructure of current accounts and charging regimes, new service of reserve facility

 

Q5 Write: 29.05.08 or the date you accessed the website

 

Q6 Write the web url from here:

 

Barclays.com | Media Centre | News Releases | Barclays overhauls current accounts to make banking simpler and clearer for consumers

 

 

Q7 Either write your own comments or copy and paste the following:

 

 

 

A quote from the opening paragraph of the Barclay’s news release from their website states:

 

 

"Barclays is responding to customer feedback by overhauling its current account offering, replacing the unauthorised overdraft with a fundamentally new approach to overdrawn accounts, which significantly reduces the charges for customers who go beyond their agreed overdraft limit.”

 

 

 

I believe that this statement is misleading. Under the present charging system the paid referral fees are capped at 3 per monthly charging period and the unpaid item is capped at one per day. Under the new system a customer can be charged up to 5 times per day in addition to being subject to a new fee of £22 for use of a reserve facility for 5 days. If a customer goes overdrawn on a single occasion and exceeds the reserve limit, the charges under the new system would amount to£30 which is the exact same amount as at present. If a customer were to do this once per week the charges incurred under the new system in four weeks would amount to £120 as oppose to £125 under the present system which is hardly a significant reduction. The maximum charges a customer could possibly incur in a month under the new system is £930 whereas the maximum charges a person could possibly incur under the present system is £790 which represents a significant increase rather than a substantial reduction

 

A further quote:

 

“Personal Reserve is designed to act as a safety net for customers who exceed their agreed overdraft limit if they have one or go overdrawn if they don’t. This gives customers the peace of mind that payments will be met, putting the customer in control of their finances.”

 

I feel this is misleading as it suggests that giving customers, what effectively amounts to an increase in their overdraft, will help them manage their finances. I’m not quite sure how increasing an overdraft will achieve this. The use of the word ‘safety net’ is also misleading as what exactly is it saving the customer from? To me it appears to be an expensive form of borrowing which is a hybrid between authorised and unauthorised borrowing which is far from Barclay’s claim in the headline of the news release that they are ‘overhauling current accounts to make them simpler and clearer for customers’.

 

 

I also object to the fact that the reserve will automatically be applied to customers’ accounts and that if they do not wish to take up the service they must specifically opt out. This means effectively imposing an expensive charge (typical charges for unauthorised borrowing for other banks are £28 per month rather than £22 per 5 days) surreptitiously on to an unsuspecting customer who has not indicated that they wish to take up the service. Barclays have no means of establishing whether the customer had read any literature or fully understood the implications of such a service. This is tantamount to an unsolicited service and represents an unfair trading practice which is likely to materially distort the economic behaviour of the average consumer.

 

 

Also it is not clear from the news release or from the information given on their website relating to the reserve if the new £8 transaction fee applies only where you take up the reserve or whether the current fees will continue to apply.

 

I also believe that the introduction of the new charging regime represents a breach of the FSA waiver conditions which Barclays are currently bound by. (If your department does not deal with the waiver conditions please forward this communication on to the relevant department.) From the waiver conditions:

 

 

2) Whilst this direction is in force, the firm has agreed with the FSA to have regard to its obligations under the general law and the Banking Code relating to the relevant charges complaints. In particular, the firm has agreed with the FSA that it will not:

 

(a) make materially adverse changes in the level of its unauthorised charges (or in the ways that it applies such charges to its customers’ accounts) which could amount to customer abuse;

 

 

I believe the introduction of a £22 fee for 5 days of use of the reserve service which is automatically imposed is a material adverse change which amounts to customer abuse. It also represents a sham practice of simply restructuring the charging regime so that it applies to a service in providing the ‘reserve’ in an attempt to avoid challenge under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. Many customers who are not financially literate may not be unable to understand the true nature of the charges and are being mislead into believing the service is good for them or may simply be unaware of the application of the new fee. As I’m sure you are aware not every customer reads every communication from their bank. I also feel the new fee structure will disproportionately affect the poorer customers. Those who get paid weekly as oppose to receiving a monthly salary are more likely to dip into the reserve more sporadically and therefore incur more fees for using the reserve. A customer on salary may only dip into it at the end of the month and thereby only incur one reserve fee per month. Those on salary tend to earn more than those on weekly pay.

 

 

I also feel the news release breaches the Banking Code in particular relating to the fairness commitment with regard to ensuring that promotional literature is not misleading and is clear for the reasons given above. Furthermore the fact that the reserve will be automatically applied to accounts would surely breach the Banking Code obligation of lending responsibly and assessing whether individual customers have an ability to repay.

 

 

 

2. Fill in your name, e-mail and phone number and then press submit.

 

You will then receive an e-mail confirming receipt of your report with a reference number on.

 

 

 

Thank you for taking the time to report this

:)

Edited by zootscoot
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Done.

 

I so want to swear at Barclays for the way they have affected my life..

 

And thank you team for your endless help..

I Wish you everything you wish yourself.

 

NatWest Claimed £1,639. Accepted £1,344.

Natwest Paid me again as GOGW £1,656. Yes they can have it back if they say please.

Barclays 1 Claimed £1,260. Won by default. Paid in full

Barclays 2 Claimed £2,378. Won by default. Paid in full

Birmingham Midshires. Claimed £2,122. Accepted £2,075.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Misleading - they are all at it....for those of us fortunate enough to have any money sitting around to save the HSBC are offering interest on their "Bank Account Plus" @ 8%.... fantastic I hear you all shout, except the max is £1000 and it costs £12.50 per month to administer the account - hhhmmm £80 interest per year.....£150 per year to keep your money in there....so your £1000 is now worth exactly £930....

Jody123

Please note I have no legal training - the information I have has been gleaned from too many hours on this site! :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

just about to send my complaint. Barclays have wrecked my life over the past 6yrs.

was ok when i had £6k a week going in as soon as i fell ill, they didn't want to know and the rest is history.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Done! - 2 mins :)

 

Any other banks we can place the pressure on? :p

Thanks

- Hobbie

 

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

Under no circumstances should you speak with a Debt Collections Agency via telephone, request that all future correspondence is done in writing, a letter template for this can be located here.

 

Any views expressed are solely that of my own, any advice or information offered is provided in genuine good faith, and should be checked prior to acting upon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The report facility only takes a few moments to complete and costs nothing. Furthermore you do not have to be a Barclay’s customer to use it.

 

Please help CAG help consumers by taking a few moments to fill in the report.

 

 

 

 

Therefore, is it not possible to post a link in all the other bank forums ?.

I Wish you everything you wish yourself.

 

NatWest Claimed £1,639. Accepted £1,344.

Natwest Paid me again as GOGW £1,656. Yes they can have it back if they say please.

Barclays 1 Claimed £1,260. Won by default. Paid in full

Barclays 2 Claimed £2,378. Won by default. Paid in full

Birmingham Midshires. Claimed £2,122. Accepted £2,075.

Link to post
Share on other sites

All done but i can't seem to get the PDF file thats on the thread to e-mail off to the FSA.

George Loveless - “We raise the watchword, liberty. We will, we will, we will be free!"

 

My advice is only my opinion, I am not a legal expert.

 

IF YOU LIKE THE ADVICE I'M GIVING AND ARE HAPPY WITH IT, CLICK THE SCALES ON THE BOTTOM LEFT OF THIS POST AND TELL ME.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...