Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Just a little something for consideration When a card is compromised, the replacements can be set up to automatically allow or manually re-add, old recurring transactions. The card issuer may ask you to confirm legitimate transactions which they would effectively 'migrate' to the new card Some do - some don't. Some staff on some cards seem to be entirely unaware/uncaring about this. Some card issuers expect you to sort it all out manually.   BUT if the leak is an ongoing lyca leakas it seems - as soon as you or your CC supplier give it to lyca/the leak source - compromised again     A note on security DONT use the same email or phone number for your banking as you do for sims etc. Although a bank eg santander leak would compromise this Infp seems to suggest that single/compromised multi factor authentication customers are priority targets, with more robustly secure cards being hit by 0.00 tests first Consider that the email address is one of the OTP recieving options AND one of the OTP security checks prior to sending the OTP - with the phone number being another So if they've got your card and email (same email for banking and end contact) - and you aren't forcing a phone OTP - you are compromised.  
    • Thanks for posting up the back of the NTK. The good news s that as it does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act, it means that you are not liable for the charge as the keeper as I explained in a previous post.  The PC fails for two reasons. The first is that it does not specify the period of parking. All it does is list the arrival and departure times of your car. Obviously that does not include the time taken to drive to the car parking space, manoeuvre the car into the space and later drive from the space to the exit. Nor does their times include things like getting kids disabled people out of and into the car as well as things like returning the trolley whilst still being parked. All of which can add a fair bit of time to the parking period which can then be subtracted from their ANPR times and makes your actual parking time a lot shorter than 118 minutes they seem to think it is. The second reason is that they failed to ask the keeper to pay Schedule 4 Section 9 [2][e]  (e)state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper— (i)to pay the unpaid parking charges You as keeper are now in the clear which is a good reason for you to contact Sainsbury  stating that you are being pursued as the keeper when you are not liable under the Act as well as the oher things I suggested in my previous post. If you don't get it cancelled with Sainsbury this could drag on for months with endless letters unlawfully pushing the price up to scare you into paying.  
    • Brilliant! That's great to hear and honestly pleased I'm wrong, my advice was out of concern. I checked some of your previous posts last night and you've been giving great advice to others at times. Bringing a claim can be serious (counter-claims etc) and it didn't appear you were knowledgeable based on posts so far. Far from an expert myself, just interested and will try to help. I'll sit on the sidelines, best of luck with the claim!
    • Thank you so much for the advice  I will try and up my savings to £500 for the next 6 months. Although I do still have an uphill battle, I feel more able to deal with it.  I hope my experience with the cifas marker helps someone else who finds themselves in that quite horrible situation. It is a huge weight off my shoulders getting it removed.
  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

NatWest are scum! (Allegedly)


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5833 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

12 months ago NatWest removed a default and refunded charges on my girlfriends credit card. They couldn't supply a copy of the original contract for the account, so the default was unforcable.

 

At the time we were turned down for a fixed-rate mortgage with Halifax and ended up with a tracker mortgage with Platform. Of course, we've been paying over the odds with this mortgage with interest rate rises.

 

Having complained to NatWest requesting they reimburse us for overpayments due to interest rate rises, they are not communicating with us. They did respond to our complaint initially, sent to them at the end of 2007, but nothing since.

 

This was sent to cheif exec Fred Goodwin and is being handled by Kay Majid within Group Litigation, so they must acknowledge the seriousness. Their initial response requested a number of things form past statements with Platform, to evidence we had applied to Halifax and been turned down, something our financial advisor has confirmed in writing, of which we sent a copy to them.

 

It has been over 3 months since we sent this and they have not responded. Calling Kay Majid simply results in her saying we'll recieve a response soon - but we've not. Almost 2 weeks ago I sent a letter saying they have broken FSA guidelines and unless they respond within 2 weeks I will refer the case to the financial ombudsman.

 

Is this the right thing to do? They owe us around £1,600.

Edited by forthepeople
Had initially stated this was a curent account. It is a credit card.
Link to post
Share on other sites

12 months ago NatWest removed a default and refunded charges on my girlfriends current account. They couldn't supply a copy of the original contract for the account, so the default was unforcable.

 

For a current account they don't have to have a copy of the original contract. That is only for credit cards, loans and hire purchase.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If its of any use to you, Natwest recently put a late payment marker against our mortgage account, which was a mistake on their behalf and blatantly wrong. They also turned us down for an advance on our mortgage due to their own incorrect information. After a few phone calls and a complaint to Borhamwood got the info removed and got £100 compensation from them. I appreciate your complaint is far more serious and costly, but would think that if you persue it you will get somwhere. Not sure the Ombudsman will be any quicker though. there's better informed people than me who would be able to advise you.

 

Are you certain that the Natwest default was the reason you were turned down by the Halifax? Have you checked both your credit files to see if anything else is lurking on there? just a thought..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks WendyB. The default was absolutely the reason we were turned down as a credit check was done at application and we passed. The default was registered a month later. Halifax later did another credit check and failed us. This was the only entry on our file within this time span. We've both got very healthy credit ratings, this having been the only negative entry.

 

I wonder if I should go straight to court instead of the ombudsman as they've already admitted their error (removing the default) and we're just waiting to be compensated accordingly.

 

Wonder if anyone else has any thoughts on this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok. Spoke with NatWest complaints team to see what the status of our complaint is. They say they cannot find me on their system and no record of any complaint. We are well and truly being messed around and our recorded letters not being replied to.

 

We spoke to the financial ombudsman and they will get in touch with NatWest on our behalf and send us forms so we can refer it to the ombudsman if they fail to deal.

 

Have NatWest broken any rules here in that we should be entitled to further compensation? Don't they have to keep account details for a number of years even after account closure?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I am right in saying it has to be 7 years. If it were me I would keep all communication to the written word on both sides; that way there is no disagreement as to what are the true facts.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I am right in saying it has to be 7 years. If it were me I would keep all communication to the written word on both sides; that way there is no disagreement as to what are the true facts.

 

Have they infringed some Act by losing/deleting account information? Compensation for this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't believe NW haven't got them after only 2.5 years. I understand companies have to keep them for a minimum of 6 years after your contract (account) has finished. Think it's statutory - to do with Companies Act & Statute of Limitations etc. Maybe check on the provisions of the act?

Any knowledge I possess or advice I proffer is based solely on my experiences in the University of Life. Please make your own assessment of legality, risks & costs before taking any action.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...