Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • happy for mod to move it to suitable location under thread title Background: Thanks in advance for any thoughts you can share. This is a very long history, I appreciate your time. In 2011 I took out a £8500. loan from Borro private finance against art and jewellery to make ends meet. The agreements are attached below. This is a CCA. Borro regulated by the FCA. The interest rate is APR 68.8  % for 6 months.  I paid the interest and capital during the period term. On 3 May 2012  I renewed this loan at 79.4% interest for another 6 months.  Last week I requested all evidence the lender holds concerning the agreements. Missing are 03/05/2012 through 14/06 2013.( not under a SAR).  I fell into arrears on the loan and one piece of jewellery was sold, reducing the balance to £6400. Dec 2014.   The lender took a payment of interest £2044.16.  Renewed against the other items ( art etc) on this loan.  The new interest rate increased to 88.8%  . At the time the ring was sold, I requested all documents concerning the sale. Borro produced none. The ring is appraised at $17,5000.  £14,000.  The ring was sold for £3500.  I have an appraisal. I was notified prior to the sale. The ring was sold by "private treaty". I continued to ask for information about this sale until todays date. No information has been provided.  I took a huge loss . The ring is not clearly described on the inventory compared to the appraisal. Documents missing from Borro response to my request include 25/10/2014 to 10/04/2015. I was in arrears on this loan and a new agreement was made. The loan amount was increased to £10,810.00 and the interest rate decreased to  80%.  what is interesting is that the lender should have sold this ring, the value was sufficient to pay off my debts. But that is not what happened. someone got a deal on a nice ring.  II. ON 1, Jan 2012, I took out a second loan in the amount of £3000 against another piece of Jewellery. The interest was 68.8%. I paid the P&I on this loan.    Missing from the requested information is agreement from July 10/2012 until 12/12/2012.  I did pay interest during that period and on 12/12/2012 through 11/06/2013 I renewed  with an interest rate for 79.4 %.  I renewed on 04/07/2013 through 03/06/2014 interest rate 97.8%.  I renewed this loan on 03/01/2014 interest rate was 88.8. Take note there is very little description about this item. I redeemed the loan but ended up back in the pawn. 19/06/2014 to 18/12/2014 interest eat 94.5%. I renewed this loan again 19/03/2015 . Interest rate was 93.2%. Now there is a clearer description of the ring. Documents missing from Borro response to my request include 012/06/2013 to /10/2014 to 10/04/2015. Information on the  description is also scant until I took the loan out again in 2014. The last payment on either loan was March 2015. Default date was September 2015. The lender still has my property.   PROBLEM: In 2013, Borro became aware that the reason I had pawned these items was that I was a plaintiff in a substantial lawsuit in the US. I borrowed because I had lost my job. I was not able to work( I had been FCA regulated). I was facing eviction, had serious financial stability  and some mental health problems. I gave them a copy of the pleadings. They are aware that I had claimed these loans as part of my damages.  In 2015, Periodically I requested the accounting. Some was provided some was not. As a result, in  2016, the head of credit wrote to me " "Thank you for coming in to see me today. As discussed, we will freeze your accounts with us from today the 14th October 2016 until the 31st of December 2016. This will mean that no further interest will accrue until the 31st December 2016 and we will not consign to sale until on or after the 31st December 2016."  I did not hear from them again until  08 February 2017. On 30/03/2017 I responded to Borro request that I give them an update on the accounts. I wrote that I needed a settlement figure.  No response the following week I personally met with the manager I had been dealing with. She told me that " we are not going to sell your property". We understand that you have fallen on hard times, we are human. How long will it take you to sort this out. I responded about 2 months."   I did not hear from Borro again until I wrote to them on 18/03/2019 where I stated, " the last time we met you were going to give me a settlement figure". There was no response. As a result, on  18 March 2019 I sent  an email to - Subject: RE: Borro Accounts. Dear Lender. Hello. The last time we met, you were going to give me a settlement figure. Litigation is still ongoing. We have a potential investor that has asked me to get a figure from you. Depending on that number, I can let you know if I can pay the bill and collect my things in the next few weeks. Please get in touch as soon as possible". no response.   In early July 2019 I received a call from someone at Borro. It was not a good time. I asked him to call me back the following week. I did not hear from him again either. On  6 august 2019 I received an email from Borro that I should log into my account. I was unable to. The following week I wrote to them and in summary: On 13/08/2019 I wrote and included a summary of the events: I am writing to advise you that I am obtaining advice concerning the  account. You are aware that you have not pursued any further action on this account since approximately 2014(or earlier) . This is because I had an agreement with Name Deleted that Borro was not “going to sell my property,  I recited the above summary of events.   Certainly, I had no intention to give up valuable property for almost 8 years and pay interest and principal for this long. I want to develop a resolution to the matter between us. In order to achieve this, Please can you provide me with the following information which is attached in a spreadsheet: I need a very simple accounting and please answer the below: Any renewed loans where additional credit was extended through the re-appraisal of the assets ( ie using the asset as leverage) to extend further credit where the loan proceeds were applied to the loan for reinstatement purposes. What were the source of funds for the last payment made? Because I am seeking advice with a view towards finding a resolution, I would appreciate it if you could hold action on the above account for a period of at least 30 days to give me the time  I need to obtain advice. If you are adding interest or other charges to the account, I would be grateful if you would freeze these during this period so that my debt does not continue to increase. Please can you send me the enclosed spreadsheet and the documents you loaded into my account as soon as possible. This will enable me to obtain accurate advice. I will contact you again as soon as possible with further details of a  proposal to resolve the account. ( so far this lender has not complied with my request)   SETTLEMENT OFFER From: Borro Customer Service <Contact@borro.com> Sent: 14 August 2019 13:22 To: Subject: RE: Your Loan Account   Dear borrower. Thank you for your email and for getting in touch with Borro. As you would be aware there have been many loans with Borro, with two loans that remain outstanding which we are seeking to resolve with you. Given the significant period these have been overdue, the current balance on these two loans is almost £52,000 of which the majority is interest. In order for you to move on from this debt it is proposed to sell the collateral associated with Loan DIAMOND RING 175643 in full and final settlement and return all the items under Loan 198678 to you. This would generate a loss for Borro of approximately £49,000, however given your circumstance this is something we are prepared to offer. While I would love to pay Borro £3000. I do not currently have the funds. Borro is aware because I wrote to them on august 13 advising them i am not working. I do not want to lose my property. I need to find a way for them to walk away, give me my property back. WHAT ARE MY OPTIONS? Below are the questions I have or could raise in order to "negotiate with them". Is this a high interest short term loan? What are the effects of an CCA that has an interest rate of 93.6% and is renewed every six months? It appears that one loan was "Refinanced".  What FCA terms did they violate which might apply to this situation ? After the agreement expired and terms were changed, what rights does the PB have to collect further payments or sell the ring? Did they waive their rights to further payments? How can I use refusal to produce sale information concerning the first ring, to negotiate my way out of this? What is interesting is, they sold a £14,000 ring privately, concealed the buyer and other information, then turned around and INCREASED THE INDEBTEDNESS substantially. In fact they want to do this again, but this time are offering to  write off £49,000  in other interest. What am I missing? What effect does violations of FCA 6 and 7. help me to negotiate a settlement. Is the FOS effective threat to the firm to pressure a settlement? Does a cost cap apply to these loans and if yes what is the amount of the cap? How can I use the current appraisal and FCA or any other rules to stop them from selling the ring for less than market value? I have someone looking at the accounting to see if there are errors. found several when query. anything you can find that voids the agreements? Anything else you can think of THANK YOU!!!   RING.pdf art.pdf
    • I am so sorry I see the confusion now, I was meant to say CAB not CAG. They are just sending him letters to copy and send which doesn't seem helpful at all.    I also apologise for the vague details right now. I actually thought he had got rid of the car already until he mentioned it as he dropped me off home, so I've only got a vague idea myself, i just wanted to see if there was anything he could do other than send letters. I will get more details from him and update this thread, or get him to join as you have advised.  sorry 
    • It was a late payment, no default 
    • As he bought the car last year – well over six months ago, it's not at all clear that he will be able to terminate the contract. I think you need to let us know more about the car, new/second-hand/price/mileage and also the date of purchase. Also I think we need to have a list of the faults which occurred and which have been repaired and the faults which have occurred and which are outstanding. He will probably need to get these faults appraised by an independent inspector and also an estimate for repairs. It is highly likely that the best he can expect is to have the repairs carried out free of charge – but we need to know a lot more really. It really would be much more helpful if your brother would take control of this himself and come onto the forum and start posting a story. I don't fully understand how you say that he hasn't been here before and yet we are telling him to send letters which he thinks are being ignored.
  • Our picks

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2484 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

A REPORT FROM THE OFT........

BBC NEWS | Business | Bank accounts 'not working well'

 

GO TO THEIR WEBSITE TO SEE THE FULL REPORT

 

:p


Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.Thus, what is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy's strategy. What is essential in war is victory, not prolonged operations.

 

Sun Tzu 'The art of war'

POST THE LETTER AND SIGN THE PETITION AT POST 88 ON THE LINK BELOW TO GET THE OFT TO INVESTIGATE THE CRA'S

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/campaign/153512-campaign-oft-against-unfair.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And this take a look at this nugget:

The lack of visibility of insufficient funds charges to consumers has reduced the incentive for the banks to compete on these aspects. As a result some banks appear to see insufficient funds charges in particular as an attractive way to generate additional revenue without affecting demand for their accounts. Insufficient funds charges have increased by an average of 17 per cent in real terms between 2003 and 2007. The average daily unarranged overdraft balance over the year9 in 2006 was £680 million but involved some £1.5 billion in paid item and maintenance fees. This is a return of over 220 per cent on the balances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The OFT will spend the coming months engaging with banks and consumer groups

 

That's CAG then ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest naffedoff
That's CAG then ....

 

Please don't forget ALL the other sites that have done sterling work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The consumer groups main ones consulted will be Which and CAB etc. All stakeholders, which includes CAG and other consumer type forums and groups, have an opportunity to respond in the consultation document.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

£152: The amount the OFT says the banks made from each active bank account in 2006, a figure the British Bankers' Association (BBA) says is "slightly contrived".

 

64 million: The number of personal bank accounts in the UK, of which about 54 million are estimated to be active.

 

£152 x 54 million comes to around £8.3 billion and £2.6 billion is from charges, about 32%.

Edited by tifo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To answer tifo, NO that;s not CAG, PAG, PC,LB, MSE or CCS. No doubt those groups can of course make a contribution/response to the report.(will take a look at the OFT site later).

Its designated consumer groups including Consumer Direct, CAB.


.

FSA Waiver on Bank Charges:http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Doing/Regulated/Notify/Waiver/pdf/dir_quart_0709.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moved here


Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So in light of this report, what now for the defences that bankers have entered for claims under the old "to cover our admin costs" T&Cs?

I have picked out some quotes & figures from the OFT report below. This little collection could almost suggest that some banks may have knowingly lied to the courts in their written defence where they maintained that the charges were purely the cost of administering whatever triggered them.

If that's true, then banks spent 31% of all their income administering unarranged overdrafts?

 

A combination of complexity and a lack of transparency means that consumers and competition are focused almost exclusively on more visible fees, and not on the less visible elements such as insufficient funds charges and forgone interest – despite the fact that these make up the vast bulk of banks’ revenues.

 

Banks earned over 85 per cent of their revenues on PCAs from two sources: net interest income from credit and debit balances (£4.6 billion), and levying charges associated with insufficient funds (£2.6 billion).

 

During the course of this market study, the OFT has seen banks’ internal documents on the level of charges that include statements such as: ‘in order to maximise fee revenue, whilst maintaining our competitive position, selective increases in [insufficient funds charges] are proposed’, and ‘Increasing insufficient funds] charges will have less impact on our marketing position… due to its lower visibility.’

 

 

We found that the banks earn over 30 per cent of all their revenues from insufficient funds charges.

 

Although banks apply charges in different ways the unit price for charges, where applied, is similar across suppliers. Overall the level of individual charges has gone up considerably in the last seven years whether adjusted for inflation or not. This is particularly the case for paid item fees, which increased from an average of £16 to £28, a nominal increase of 75 per cent over the period.

 

 

The 16 banks lent £680 million as unarranged overdrafts in 2006.

If the insufficient funds charges (excluding charges for unpaid items) of £1.5 billion in 2006 were treated as the cost of borrowing on the £0.68 billion average unarranged overdraft balance over the year for the 16 banks, we estimate that the annual interest rate would be more than 220 per cent. While short term loans are distinct in their short duration and can be expensive to administer, this level of charging compares unfavourably with many similar forms of lending such as credit cards and personal loans.

Edited by Gez
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gez, the wording maximising fee income is one I have seen, and while it sounds like a bank being a bunch of greedy beggars, it was about making sure the correct fee for the correct service is keyed, for example, Safe custody in branches, copy statement fee, stopped cheque fees etc,etc. The context of the wording is such that you could not consider it to be within the confines of bank penalty charges.


.

FSA Waiver on Bank Charges:http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Doing/Regulated/Notify/Waiver/pdf/dir_quart_0709.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gez, the wording maximising fee income is one I have seen, and while it sounds like a bank being a bunch of greedy beggars, it was about making sure the correct fee for the correct service is keyed, for example, Safe custody in branches, copy statement fee, stopped cheque fees etc,etc. The context of the wording is such that you could not consider it to be within the confines of bank penalty charges.

No problem with that, but it is as clear as a dogs sensitives what context "maximising fees revenue" is used within that paragraph.

That is really only a small part of it. Even without those comments, the banks want us and the courts to believe that they spent over 30% of their total income on administering instances of unarranged overdrafts.

So the costs of running all those thousands of branches, call centres and marketing would be separate from these costs. Its as black & white as that. Either: a) the truth is absent, b) call centres, branches & marketing is free, c) banks have a very small profit margin.

 

What bothers me more is that this report states pretty much that there was no point in examining banker's costs. WHY NOT? This was the basis of their defence and the very legality of their charges hinges on an examination of their costs. Don't they have a similar system to Cynthesis?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i found this.....you can read the full article at the web address at the bottom of this post..

 

Customs bank on the Halifax

by Technical Department at 00:00 23/07/01 (Technical Articles)

Article by Stanley Dencher, Senior Technical Editor, Croner.CCH Group

Ltd, published in the July 2001 issue of Tax Adviser.

Customs are apparently involved with several test cases in the

campaign against VAT avoidance. One such case is Halifax plc No.

17,124.

 

The Halifax's supplies are generally VAT exempt because it is a bank

(VATA 1994 Sch 9 Grp 5). During the relevant periods, its VAT recovery

rate was under five per cent. For the purpose of its banking business

it needed to construct call centres. If it had directly constructed

the call centres, most of the VAT on the construction costs would have

stuck. However, it used a scheme which involved three other companies

and which used the standard method of calculating a partically exempt

person's recoverable VAT. If the scheme had worked, the Halifax and

the three companies would together have recovered all of such VAT

which amounted to over £5m. Each of the three companies was separately

VAT-registered and was a subsidiary of the Halifax.

 

 

CIOT - Customs bank on the Halifax

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry, I put that post on the wrong forum. it is about tax avoidance by the banks when they set up call centres.

:oops:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...