RBS CCA request refused due to CCJ

[paulwlton]

There is no legislation which permits the altering/producing of accounts which are then enforced on customers without their consent.

 

There is no legislation for that but there is legislation against committing fraud

 

I noted in the press the SFO have requested that the publice should get in touch if they suspect fraud.

[Sparkie1723]

The only thing you may rely on is the Banking Code of Practice and the Banking Act.....Transparency and due dilligence, and duty of care etc etc..and the Banking Code Standards Board Statement of Principles

 

 

sparkie

[paulwlton]

The only thing you may rely on is the Banking Code of Practice and the Banking Act.....Transparency and due dilligence, and duty of care etc etc..and the Banking Code Standards Board Statement of Principles

 

 

sparkie

 

If this erroneuos internal practice has been systematic within RBSs debt recovery department, shouldn't MPs demand some sort of investigation?

[andrew1]

If this erroneuos internal practice has been systematic within RBSs debt recovery department, shouldn't MPs demand some sort of investigation?

 

...on behalf of its' new shareholders ?

[debbbbsy]

Still no comment from the Rbs about the article.

 

But they got a call from our local newspaper yesterday, & again they are refusing to speak about what theyv'e done. This article will be published on Tuesday.

 

If they think that by ignoring us that we'll just go away. They are wrong.

 

Debs

[DandD]

Just had a call from the journalist at the Sunday Times.

 

He's seriously annoyed!!

 

He's been phoning the Bank constantly about the allegations in the articles in the Sunday Times a couple of weeks ago and they are refusing to comment.

 

All that they will say is that we don't owe £100,000 but we owe 'about' £40,000. They can't even give an accurate figure!

 

We are sure the the Sunday Times will be writing more abour Paul, Sparkie and us soon

 

Going to send a LONG letter of complaint to the bank tomorrow.

 

D

[paulwlton]

Just had a call from the journalist at the Sunday Times.

 

He's seriously annoyed!!

 

He's been phoning the Bank constantly about the allegations in the articles in the Sunday Times a couple of weeks ago and they are refusing to comment.

 

All that they will say is that we don't owe £100,000 but we owe 'about' £40,000. They can't even give an accurate figure!

 

We are sure the the Sunday Times will be writing more abour Paul, Sparkie and us soon

 

Going to send a LONG letter of complaint to the bank tomorrow.

 

D

 

RBS have secured an amount greater than £40,000 on your property by means of legal charge...or is this just one of their "phanton" charges "that have never existed"

 

I suggest you contact your MP and ask him to write to the new Chief Exec on your behalf.

 

I have no doubt the press will be revealing further accounting irregularities in due course.

 

Imo the SFO and HR&Cs should start asking questions.

 

Regards

Edited December 21, 2008 by paulwlton

[Sparkie1723]

I second what Paul has said..........as you know I made all the authorities aware of these "Router Accounts" including Gordon Brown over 9 months ago.

 

sparkie

[DandD]

Hi All

 

I just wanted to post one of the final paragraphs of our letter of complaint.......it reads......

 

'It has been your objective to gain a dishonest advantage by reducing our assets. You have followed an incremental pattern limited only by your greed, opportunity and success. Greed has been your motivation. Concealment has been an essential part of this prolonged deception. You have secretly abused your position of trust with the clear intent to make a gain and to cause us financial loss.

 

There is only one word that can be used to encompass this conduct and that word is .....fraud.

 

As a result of this, we demand that, as a minimum, you contact the Courts to have our CCJs removed, you remove the Charging Orders on our Home and you repay the money that we have paid towards these unlawfully created accounts (with interest). You must also take into account the financial damage that you have caused us over the past 10 years, and the incredible personal upset caused by your fraud.'

 

Can't post the whole letter as the forums a bit too public.

 

But what do you think of this snippet?

 

Thanks

 

D

[spiritgirl59]

Just had a call from the journalist at the Sunday Times.

 

He's seriously annoyed!!

 

He's been phoning the Bank constantly about the allegations in the articles in the Sunday Times a couple of weeks ago and they are refusing to comment.

 

D

 

Hmmm...doesn't it all smack of the bank being VERY worried ?? I am sure that there is an even huger can of worms out there just begging to be opened, and the bank are worried sick as to what will be found if the journalists keep "digging"....so lets hope they do!

 

And D I think your snippet is excellent!!

 

Love SG x

[paulwlton]

RBSs latest take on the matter.

 

 

Royal Bank of Scotland¦bank charges¦torrington¦debt¦T-shirt business

[car2403]

RBSs latest take on the matter.

 

 

Royal Bank of Scotland¦bank charges¦torrington¦debt¦T-shirt business

 

Backing up faster than a Securicor Van in reverse...

 

"Beep... Beep... Beep... Warning, Securicor Vehicle reversing... Beep... Beep... Beep"

[DandD]

This could be a sticky situation for the bank....

 

Stickier than when Sticky the Stick insect got stuck on a sticky bun!!

 

D

[DandD]

This comment from the Bank concerns me..

 

The couple were concerned that their bank accounts and overdrafts were changed into loans, without their knowledge or their agreement.

 

However, the spokesman said these claims were "completely unfounded" and changes in details were a "historic internal administrative practice that has had absolutely no legal impact whatsoever on the amount of debt."

 

It's strange that they didn't quote this to the Sunday Times, if they had I think that the Journalists there wouldn't have left it at that.

 

Any comments?

[paulwlton]

This comment from the Bank concerns me..

 

 

 

It's strange that they didn't quote this to the Sunday Times, if they had I think that the Journalists there wouldn't have left it at that.

 

Any comments?

 

The bank are in a mess: "historic internal administrative practice"

 

The bank has been setting up defaulted overdraft/personal loan accounts in their debt collection depts pursuant to t&cs that the customer has never agreed to, this has allowed the bank to apply compound interest and thus create a part ficitious book debt (an asset). The question now is how many have been shafted.

 

PW

Edited December 23, 2008 by paulwlton

[DandD]

How can they say that our concerns about our 'current' accounts being changed to 'loan' accounts are

 

"completely unfounded"

 

and then say

 

'changes in details were a "historic internal administrative practice that has had absolutely no legal impact whatsoever on the amount of debt."'

 

Either they did or they didn't change these accounts!!!

 

D

[debbbbsy]

"Historic internal administrative practice"

 

Oh well thats okay then, the fact that they were doing it all the time, to other poor sods like us, must mean its okay.

 

Debs

[car2403]

"Historic internal administrative practice"

 

Oh well thats okay then, the fact that they were doing it all the time, to other poor sods like us, must mean its okay.

 

Debs

 

But why is it a historic internal administrative practise? This suggests that it isn't the current process, (as it's now historic) only applies to RBS, (as it's internal) and is (or, now, was) an administrative practice. If all that is the case, why have they provided evidence of it happening to you?

 

Also, doesn't the term "joint and severable" mean that the debt is a single debt owned in both names (joint) where each party owns the whole. (Severable) Again, I think they are opening up a whole new can of worms here, as reporting the debt (as they suggest in this article) as existing in both your names could fall foul of the requirements of the DPA. "Joint and severable" is an industry standard term that RBS is adapting to suit their defence of your claims, but their adaptation of that term is fundamentally flawed.

 

I hope these Journalists are going to continue digging. I also wonder when the bank will decide enough is enough and roll over to play dead - surely the benefit of some sort of agreement in your (and Paul's) case must now outweigh the clear impact this is having on their reputation. The banks PR machine simply can't reverse that amount of damage, so they should give up now, IMHO.

[paulwlton]

"Historic internal administrative practice"

 

Oh well thats okay then, the fact that they were doing it all the time, to other poor sods like us, must mean its okay.

 

Debs

 

"Historical internal administrative practice"

 

I think RBS need to fully explain why, and for what purpose this administrative practice has took place.

 

RBS claimed Sparkie's book debt account was just a mirror of his personal account.

 

RBS claim my greatly inflated book debt account "isn't a real account but a post-judgment calculation sheet intended to record payments".

 

What have they claimed your book debt account is?

 

PW

[DandD]

"Historical internal administrative practice"

 

I think RBS need to fully explain why, and for what purpose this administrative practice has took place.

 

RBS claimed Sparkie's book debt account was just a mirror of his personal account.

 

RBS claim my greatly inflated book debt account "isn't a real account but a post-judgment calculation sheet intended to record payments".

 

What have they claimed your book debt account is?

 

PW

 

We have proof that they are declaring that our 'Book Debt as at 18th April 2008 is £100,876'.

 

This is no doubt recorded on their long list of assets.

 

So they are artificially inflating their balance sheet by at least (if our £40,000 debt is real) £60,000.

 

D

[paulwlton]

We have proof that they are declaring that our 'Book Debt as at 18th April 2008 is £100,876'.

 

This is no doubt recorded on their long list of assets.

 

So they are artificially inflating their balance sheet by at least (if our £40,000 debt is real) £60,000.

 

D

 

We know and others do too.

 

ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND CAUGHT COOKING BOOKS WITH FICTITIOUS LOANS AND ASSETS

[Tobes]

subaciousness

[DandD]

We've been doing a bit more digging and have found out a bit more info.

 

Most people who have issues with RBS have had letters from their solicitors Cobbetts (not sure about the spelling).

 

The solicitor dealing with us is called FLADGATES in London. we always beleived that they were mislead by RBS and that they hadn't done anything wrong........BUT, it looks like they might be in a bit of trouble too.

 

If you have the time it might be interesting to have a look at these links...

 

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/technology/article4449605.ece

 

http://www.propertyweek.com/story.asp?storyCode=3123966

 

Luckily, this is our allies The Times.

 

Has anyone else had dealings with FLADGATES?

 

D&D

[JonCris]

We've been doing a bit more digging and have found out a bit more info.

 

Most people who have issues with RBS have had letters from their solicitors Cobbetts (not sure about the spelling).

 

The solicitor dealing with us is called FLADGATES in London. we always beleived that they were mislead by RBS and that they hadn't done anything wrong........BUT, it looks like they might be in a bit of trouble too.

 

If you have the time it might be interesting to have a look at these links...

 

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/technology/article4449605.ece

 

http://www.propertyweek.com/story.asp?storyCode=3123966

 

Luckily, this is our allies The Times.

 

Has anyone else had dealings with FLADGATES?

 

D&D

 

 

I'm confused but aren't these allegations of criminal conduct rather than just negligence & if so where are the city police fraud squad???

[DandD]

Thanks JC

 

Had an email from our MP. He's already written to the RBS about our case. But he's now getting seriously pee'd off.

 

He's had a converstion with PaulW's MP's office but hasn't had a chance to talk to him directly....this will happen this week. He will also be sending another letter, following up on our letter of complaint (Not posted here,sorry)

 

D

Edited January 4, 2009 by DandD
Really bad typo's