Camdenite Vs MBNA Abbey ** PARTIAL WIN**

[TINK660]

Just a snippet I found which I believe explains what compound interest is and that it should indeed be applied to credit card ppi premiums.

 

Compound interest arises when interest is added to the principal, so that from that moment on, the interest that has been added also itself earns interest. This addition of interest to the principal is called compounding (i.e. the interest is compounded).

Will put this in my letter to FOS.

[Camdenite]

Hi Tink, No worries about hi-jacking. There's a few of us in the same boat and I guess the more support we can offer each other over this issue, the better.

 

The CI quote you give is the simplistic logic I have applied to this all along. I can't see any reason why it would be refuted by the FOS. I'm looking forward to seeing what they have to say if they uphold MBNA's calculations.

[landy_alert]

Hi Camdenite:)

 

Just to let you know I have sent another letter to the FOS today, informing them I am not satisfied with their decision and giving explanations why not - confusion over contractual interest, lack of clarity over the 'credit balance' issue and FOS redress guidelines open to misinterpretation.

 

Will let you know how I get on.

 

Good luck with yours!

 

Regards,

 

Landy x

[Camdenite]

I've had a rejection from the FOS :

 

 

Dear Mr ............

 

Thank you for your email.

 

I have put your concerns regarding your redress to MBNA and referred them to your letter of 21 October 2009 of which we have also received a copy. They have responded with a breakdown of the payment and verified that this has been calculated using the contractual interest rate applicable at the time each premium was charged on your account.

 

We are satisfied that the payment has been calculated in-line with our guidelines. If you remain disatisfied with the outcome you have the option of referring your complaint for further assesment by our adjudicators.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

I immediately called and spoke to the "casework support administrator" who'd penned the above and made the point about CI being charged and their recommendation of "reconstructing the account". He failed to grasp the issue at hand and said that I should write to the adjudicator. All he saw was that MBNA had outlined the premiums and paid the 8% interest for the period there was a credit balance. That was enough for him.

 

The fight goes on, but I can see this ending up at court. I'm starting to get the feeling that the banks have hoodwinked the FOS staff on many occasions and they just want an easy life.

 

I came off the phone really angry about the lack of understanding of the issues being raised. How can a Casework Support Administrator make decisions like this with no fundamental knowledge of how credit cards and compound interest work! Even that took a while to explain to him.

[pompeyfaith]

Camdenite,

 

I had exactly the same out come with casework support and furthermore the adjudicators response in my case was exactly the same.

 

So you may find that holds true with your complaint.

 

I have escalated mine to the ombudsman now but to honest i dont hold much hope.

 

I sent a Letter before action to my bank today outlining there wrongs and giving them 14 days and if they still fail to sort it the 15th day will result in a court claim and withdrawing the complaint from the FOS.

 

I am very -issed off it has been 18 months now since i first raised this complaint and got no where except further expense to me.

 

So that's it 15 days time and court action starts.

 

Regards

 

PF

[landy_alert]

Hi Camdenite:)

 

Sorry to hear your response was worse than useless. To echo what PF has said, our last letter was from the adjudicator saying pretty much the same as the reply you received from the casework support administrator, so that doesn't bode well. Despite this I addressed the letter I sent today to that same adjudicator, which with the benefit of hindsight was probably rather stupid of me:(

 

I have to agree with you that the FOS are more than likely just relieved to get shot of another complaint that they feel has been settled as per their guidelines and are not prepared for us clued-up Caggers querying their decisions.

 

What do you think your next move will be?

 

Keep us posted!

 

Regards,

 

Landy x

[TINK660]

Just to let you know I received a letter today from FOS in relation to the telephone call I made about compounded contractual interest and querying the FOS guidelines on such

 

One hopeful looking paragraph reads:

 

"You advised that a complaint in relation to default fees would receive compounded interest and the same should be applicable for this complaint. I would like to point out that default fees and charges are a penalty to be paid in relation to going over and above the agreed limitation with a bank. The nature of these penalty charges may warrant compounded interrest however the same redress guidelines would be applicable to a complaint about PPI"

 

The complaint file has now been reopened for a full adjudication process by an Ombudsman. They are asking MBNA for a full breakdown of the redress calculations and will take it from there.

 

It also says:-

 

" I understand that the query is not that the redress calculation has been incorrectly calculated but that you dispute the redress guidelines as agreed by the Ombudsman and the business"

 

So get those letters in - the more weight we can add to this issue the better!

 

Let you know how things progress but feeling a little more hopeful.

[Camdenite]

That's more promising eh, Tink? I'm still waiting waiting for a response but will be back as soon as I hear anything.

 

I've done a bit of a trawl recently on the PPI Successes thread and can't find any that jump out claiming they managed to get CI. I know there's been one or two but forget who they were, but could someone point us in the direction of the threads.

[landy_alert]

Hi Camdenite and Tink:)

 

That does sound more promising Tink - well done on getting the FOS to re-open your complaint. Hopefully with an actual Ombudsman looking at it we might get somewhere!

 

Camdenite - like you I'm still awaiting a response to my last letter to the FOS on the subject, but hopefully we will get similar replies soon and then maybe they will realise from all our complaints on the subject that there is something fundamentally wrong with their redress guidelines.

 

Slightly off topic, but I do believe the FOS is trying to get these PPI complaints cleared up so quickly that errors are being made/corners cut - I have this week received a letter referring to one complaint (LTSB not MBNA) in which they refer to a telephone call I made asking for my complaint to be fast tracked. I haven't called them at all about that (or any other) complaint or asked for any of my cases to be fast tracked:(

 

Hopefully we'll get this MBNA matter sorted soon!

 

Regards,

 

Landy x

 

BTW Camdenite - I think Livis started a thread asking specifically for people who had received CI back from MBNA - not sure if many responded in the affirmative though.

[reddannio]

The FOS told me yesterday that interest was only attributed for one month on each PPI payment, hence why the amount of 'assosiated interest' they pay back seems quite small. I cant work out from my statements whether that is the case or not but explains the levels they are paying if true.

 

Cheers

Red

[Camdenite]

I've had an acknowledgement of my last letter (going full guns blazing about CI) from the FOS, so that's a start.

 

They have another three weeks to investigate, or I'll be sending an LBA to MBNA and then off to court.

[pompeyfaith]

Camdenite,

 

Well Done keep going never give up.

 

PF

[TINK660]

Good stuff Camdenite, I really hope that they sit up and listen to what we are saying about CI, lets see who gets a reply first, are they passing your file to an Ombudsman now like mine?

 

We can all help each other if the FOS dont take this on board. Like you say it may be off to court we go with this, but I do hope not as so far I havent had to take the court route with any of my claims, but as I have ongoing complaints with MBNA, Mint (rbs), Egg and Goldfish (all with the FOS) it may be that I have to.

 

Keep us informed of any progress as will I.

 

Best of luck.

 

Tink

[landy_alert]

I've had an acknowledgement of my last letter (going full guns blazing about CI) from the FOS, so that's a start.

 

They have another three weeks to investigate, or I'll be sending an LBA to MBNA and then off to court.

 

Well that's something positive at least Camdenite:)

 

I've also had an acknowledgement to my last letter, but am a step behind you and Tink with this I think......there's certainly been no mention of passing it to an actual Ombudsman as yet.

[Camdenite]

Thanks all.

 

Yes, I have written to the Ombudsman rather than the "Casework Support Investigator"

 

I'll be back when I get a response, but will look out for yours in the meantime.