Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • New figures from the Insolvency Service show that early termination rates of IVAs have dropped 11% in the past year, while total IVAs have risen by almost 20,000 in the past two years. View the full article
    • Amigo Loans has posted an £87m loss for the nine months to December 31 2020, a 289% drop on the same period in 2019 View the full article
    • I've had a brief look over the thread and I see that there principle point is that he didn't take out insurance. Your answer to this is very simple – that it is absurd that you are required to pay to protect them against their own negligence or criminality of their employees or the people who are acting for them – in this case, Hermes.Your point here is that any requirement that a customer is required to pay extra to protect against the breach of contract is unfair within the meaning of the unfair terms provisions of the Consumer Rights Act. Please have a read of the unfair terms provisions of the Consumer Rights Act. In In particular, after you have read the sections within the act itself, get a schedule two and you will see examples of unfair terms. These are nonexhaustive which means that they are simply examples and lots of others can be added. An important point is that it forms a significant imbalance between your interests and their interests. They are using a standard form contract which is nonnegotiable. There is no competition because all the courier industry are doing this so there is no opportunity for you to go elsewhere and get a different type of deal. You will need to point out to the defendant – through the mediator – that included in the unfair terms provisions of the Consumer Rights Act is a provision that gives the court the power – in fact a duty – on its own initiative to examine the fairness or otherwise of any term. Point out to the defendant that if they want to go to court then you are happy about it. That you will then raise the question of unfairness to the judge and also you will invite the judge to look at the entirety of the contract and to pronounce on the fairness or otherwise of the contractual terms. Tell the defendant that you expect that the judge will decide unequivocally that a term of the contract which requires the customer to pay extra to protect themselves against the service providers breach of contract is grossly unfair – and in fact it is ridiculous. Basically they are saying "pay us to deliver your goods – and pay us extra if you don't want us to lose them."   Explain to the defendant that you are fully aware that this is a culture within the courier industry which has developed over 30 or 40 years or more but it's not acceptable and that when you get a judgement in your favour which confirms that the term is unfair, (as will surely happen) that you will then make sure that copies of the judgement find their way all over the Internet including social media that is concerned specifically with complaints against the courier industry and then the game will be up for the loss of them. One the mediator to tell the defendant that once you get this judgement, not only will people be claiming for ongoing lost items, but they will also be claiming retrospectively for legitimate claims which have been rejected on the basis of this unfair term. Make it clear to the mediator – that they should tell the defendant that you're not dealing with very much money here – and you are prepared to risk it all in order to go to court and to demonstrate this principle. If the mediator says that you should compromise then you should tell the mediator that if the defendant pays up in full – including costs and interest – that they will then be spared the problem of going to court and getting a judgement against them which will result in the loss of millions of pounds in the future. Tell the mediator that this is the benefit to the defendant and you are not prepared to hand them any further benefit if it means sacrificing a single penny of your claim. Tell the defendant to take it or leave it – you are happy either way.   It is very important that the defendant understands that you don't care either way whether you settle now mediation or goes to court. The defendant as a huge amount to lose if it goes to court. You have very little to lose  
    • Firstly I am disabled and have brain fog so can forget anything.  Today I went online to check when the MOT is due as just had to renew my car insurance and know it comes quickly after that. I was shocked to see my car was flagged as NOT TAXED.  I have had disability tax for years so dont even have to pay. After ringing DVLA I eventually found out papers had been sent to my old house which I left 3 years ago. With the stress of moving etc I never changed the car address but did change the address on my licence as that is correct.   Now I am worried I may have picked up a speeding ticket sometime in the 3 years and also maybe recently on a day trip to London (2 miles too fast coming out a tunnel). The old house is 150 miles away so cant pop in and no idea who lives there now. Thats how I got caught out with tax as they sent the paperwork there to renew. The lady renewed the tax easily on the computer for me which I was so grateful for and backdated it to 1 Feb. Can anyone tell me how I can find out if there are any tickets out there in my name that I know anything about please? I have had a really awful week with so many problems and this is now really making me feel sick so dont want to worry for months to catch up with me.   Thanks  
    • Presumably you have received your own NIP/s172 request after the lease company identified you as the person the car is leased to?   First thing to say is that, regardless of any questions over the date of the first NIP, you must still reply to your own NIP/s172 within the time limit given otherwise you are committing an entirely separate and more serious offence than any speeding infringement.  If you were the driver you should nominate yourself.   You need to be careful arguing that the first NIP was not sent out in time.  Note that it is only the first NIP that is subject to the 14 day limit, and that NIP needs to go to the Registered Keeper.  There is no time limit on subsequent NIPs.   So are you 100% certain that your lease company is the registered keeper and do you know that for a fact?  Please note that the registered keeper of lease vehicles is often not the lease company, but a finance company.   If the police are saying that the first NIP was sent to the RK within the time limit, you can be 99.99999% certain that they will have evidence proving that fact.  Assuming it was sent out first-class, there is a legal presumption that it was delivered two working days after posting, unless the addressee can prove it was never received.  So if the police are saying the first NIP was sent out within 12 days, the RK would have to prove it was never received within 14 days to provide a defence.  As you might imagine, that is very difficult to prove otherwise everybody would claim it.  Unfortunately, "reminder" NIPs are usually not marked as such and may be indistinguishable from the original.   So you need to confirm (preferably by sight of a copy of the actual V5C document as staff of lease companies do not always know) who the Registered Keeper is, and when they recived the first NIP.  If it was received after 14 days can they prove that fact (eg by a date received stamp and an appropriate system for dealing with mail received) and can they prove that they didn't receive an earlier NIP?   Hope that makes sense!  If it doesn't another poster called Man in the Middle will clarify what I 've not explained well or got wrong.
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 33 replies

Landy_alert v MBNA PPI **WON**


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 4029 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

have u got origional cc agreement was it ticked?

 

Hi jdes26:)

 

Yes, I have the original agreement and there is no box for PPI on it at all.

 

Regards,

 

Landy x

LTSB PPI on various loans (current/settled) - Refunded inc 8%

 

MBNA 1 Charges - Refunded inc CI

 

MBNA 1 PPI - Refunded

 

MBNA 2 Charges - Refunded inc 8%

 

MBNA 2 PPI - Refunded

 

MBNA 2 Accident Ins - Refunded

 

Swift Advances (settled) Mortgage Charges -Partially refunded

 

Swift Advances (settled) Mortgage PPI - Refunded inc CI & 8%

 

Sainsburys (settled) Loan PPI - Refunded inc CI +8%

 

Sainsburys (closed) Card Charges - Refunded inc CI + 8%

 

M&S Money (closed) Card Charges - Refunded inc CI

 

M&S Money (closed) Card PPI - Refunded inc 8%

 

Direct Line (settled) Loan PPI - Refunded inc CI + 8%

 

Debenhams Card (closed) PPI - Refunded inc 8%

 

Swift Mortgage Charges -Refunded

 

Hitachi Finance (closed) Charges - Refunded

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 99
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi everyone:)

 

Just to say I am going to do what others in the same situation regarding MBNA, the FOS and credit card PPI are doing and send another letter to the FOS letting them know I am not happy with their decision to let MBNA not only pay back no contractual interest, but also in our case no 8%!

 

I will explain that Mr Landy did have a credit balance where MBNA say he didn't, ask why in the light of this MBNA have only paid £30 odd interest on £600+ of premiums, ask for a better explanation of their redress rcommendations and let them know their guidelines appear to be open to what appears to be deliberate misinterpretation by the more unscrupulous firms.

 

Will keep you posted as to how I get on!

 

Regards,

 

Landy x

LTSB PPI on various loans (current/settled) - Refunded inc 8%

 

MBNA 1 Charges - Refunded inc CI

 

MBNA 1 PPI - Refunded

 

MBNA 2 Charges - Refunded inc 8%

 

MBNA 2 PPI - Refunded

 

MBNA 2 Accident Ins - Refunded

 

Swift Advances (settled) Mortgage Charges -Partially refunded

 

Swift Advances (settled) Mortgage PPI - Refunded inc CI & 8%

 

Sainsburys (settled) Loan PPI - Refunded inc CI +8%

 

Sainsburys (closed) Card Charges - Refunded inc CI + 8%

 

M&S Money (closed) Card Charges - Refunded inc CI

 

M&S Money (closed) Card PPI - Refunded inc 8%

 

Direct Line (settled) Loan PPI - Refunded inc CI + 8%

 

Debenhams Card (closed) PPI - Refunded inc 8%

 

Swift Mortgage Charges -Refunded

 

Hitachi Finance (closed) Charges - Refunded

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hiya Landy,

 

I have done the same as you letter ready to send of in the morning in my case I feel they have only looked at one side i.e. agreed with the bank there offer is fair lol far from it I have spent time and money for them to investigate both sides.

 

And there medical guidelines they are supposed to follow is hogwash.

 

There is a new chief ombubsman at the fos now as from the 1st November so lets see if he has teeth.

 

Good Luck.

 

PF

If I have been of help to you please feel free to click my scales to the left Thanks.:)

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is what I have learnt here and offered as a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

 

Finally if you succeed with your claim please consider a donation to consumer action group as those donations keep this site alive.

 

CARTER V Co-Op

BANK CHARGES

REFUNDED £3567

 

POMPEYFAITH V Co-Op PPI

OFFER MADE BUT REFUSED

ONGOING AND STILL ONGOING

NOW WITH THE OMBUDSMAN

 

R.I.P BOB aka ROOSTER-UK you have always been a Gent on these boards and you will be remembered for that.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi PF:)

 

Glad to see you're still fighting the good fight on the PPI front - I noticed you have been busy lately with your MBNA/Optima issues.

 

Thanks for the encouragement and hope all goes well for you too - in both cases:D

 

Take care,

 

Landy x

LTSB PPI on various loans (current/settled) - Refunded inc 8%

 

MBNA 1 Charges - Refunded inc CI

 

MBNA 1 PPI - Refunded

 

MBNA 2 Charges - Refunded inc 8%

 

MBNA 2 PPI - Refunded

 

MBNA 2 Accident Ins - Refunded

 

Swift Advances (settled) Mortgage Charges -Partially refunded

 

Swift Advances (settled) Mortgage PPI - Refunded inc CI & 8%

 

Sainsburys (settled) Loan PPI - Refunded inc CI +8%

 

Sainsburys (closed) Card Charges - Refunded inc CI + 8%

 

M&S Money (closed) Card Charges - Refunded inc CI

 

M&S Money (closed) Card PPI - Refunded inc 8%

 

Direct Line (settled) Loan PPI - Refunded inc CI + 8%

 

Debenhams Card (closed) PPI - Refunded inc 8%

 

Swift Mortgage Charges -Refunded

 

Hitachi Finance (closed) Charges - Refunded

Link to post
Share on other sites

Landy,

 

Yes i have been busy with the MBNA/OPTIMA case lately, cannot do anymore now with that until i have had a response to the N244 aplication.

 

So time to get back on with the CO-OP/FOS.

 

Regards

 

PF

If I have been of help to you please feel free to click my scales to the left Thanks.:)

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is what I have learnt here and offered as a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

 

Finally if you succeed with your claim please consider a donation to consumer action group as those donations keep this site alive.

 

CARTER V Co-Op

BANK CHARGES

REFUNDED £3567

 

POMPEYFAITH V Co-Op PPI

OFFER MADE BUT REFUSED

ONGOING AND STILL ONGOING

NOW WITH THE OMBUDSMAN

 

R.I.P BOB aka ROOSTER-UK you have always been a Gent on these boards and you will be remembered for that.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad to see that we are all getting together on this contractual interest issue - its good that we are lending support to each other over this.

 

Good luck everyone

GE MONEY - DEBENHAMS CARD

Settled in full after prelim :)

 

MBNA

Settled after LBA

however mistake made by me on contractual interest so going after the rest now

SETTLED IN FULL JAN 2007:)

 

MINT

Offer after prelim rejected

Settled in full after LBA:)

 

to go:

Barclays Bus Ac - to mcol

Barclays CC - to mcol

Nat West (over 6 years) no action taken yet

Creation Financial - awaiting statements since Dec

Goldfish - offer after prelim rejected

and some more

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Tink:)

 

Letter gone off to FOS today - will let you know as soon as they respond.

 

Hopefully they will realise once our letters start arriving that they need to make their redress recommendations for credit card PPI complaints less open to misinterpretation as well as clarifying the whole contractual interest issue.

 

Keeping everything crossed for all of us on this!

 

Regards,

 

Landy x

LTSB PPI on various loans (current/settled) - Refunded inc 8%

 

MBNA 1 Charges - Refunded inc CI

 

MBNA 1 PPI - Refunded

 

MBNA 2 Charges - Refunded inc 8%

 

MBNA 2 PPI - Refunded

 

MBNA 2 Accident Ins - Refunded

 

Swift Advances (settled) Mortgage Charges -Partially refunded

 

Swift Advances (settled) Mortgage PPI - Refunded inc CI & 8%

 

Sainsburys (settled) Loan PPI - Refunded inc CI +8%

 

Sainsburys (closed) Card Charges - Refunded inc CI + 8%

 

M&S Money (closed) Card Charges - Refunded inc CI

 

M&S Money (closed) Card PPI - Refunded inc 8%

 

Direct Line (settled) Loan PPI - Refunded inc CI + 8%

 

Debenhams Card (closed) PPI - Refunded inc 8%

 

Swift Mortgage Charges -Refunded

 

Hitachi Finance (closed) Charges - Refunded

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Tink:)

 

Letter gone off to FOS today - will let you know as soon as they respond.

 

Hopefully they will realise once our letters start arriving that they need to make their redress recommendations for credit card PPI complaints less open to misinterpretation as well as clarifying the whole contractual interest issue.

 

Keeping everything crossed for all of us on this!

 

Regards,

 

Landy x

 

Nice one Landy I am stil in the loop to see what happens.

aa

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

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

Bank charge successes:

Halifax - Full settlement incl interest.

HSBC - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 75% of claim.

RBS - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 70% of claim.

2 ongoing claims for bank charges with HSBC with more to come. (Supreme Court ruling could have upset these claims) They did :mad:

PPI Successes

PPI 4 settlements on 9 loans. FOS involvement on 7 added on the 8 % Statutory interest another 30% to both.

2 claims settled in full with LV without FOS involvement.

2 claims settled in full with HSBC without FOS involvement

 

PPI Claims ongoing with:

Cap one Now with the FOS

Barclays. Paid up today 24/04/10 cheque received for over £4,500 and in the bank.

LTSB still have to decide on this as their SAR production was abysmal. Papers data mixed up documents missing etc

 

1 Complaint not upheld by FOS they said it was ICO issue. Complaint upheld by ICO. See this..

Post 290 from

***RBS PPI Claim Long fight but, WON***

 

Please do not PM me for advice as it may be sometime before I can respond.

 

Keep at them. Do not give way and do not accept all they tell you, they will delay and stall for as long as they can to prevent repaying you your mis-sold PPI.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your continued support with this aa:D

LTSB PPI on various loans (current/settled) - Refunded inc 8%

 

MBNA 1 Charges - Refunded inc CI

 

MBNA 1 PPI - Refunded

 

MBNA 2 Charges - Refunded inc 8%

 

MBNA 2 PPI - Refunded

 

MBNA 2 Accident Ins - Refunded

 

Swift Advances (settled) Mortgage Charges -Partially refunded

 

Swift Advances (settled) Mortgage PPI - Refunded inc CI & 8%

 

Sainsburys (settled) Loan PPI - Refunded inc CI +8%

 

Sainsburys (closed) Card Charges - Refunded inc CI + 8%

 

M&S Money (closed) Card Charges - Refunded inc CI

 

M&S Money (closed) Card PPI - Refunded inc 8%

 

Direct Line (settled) Loan PPI - Refunded inc CI + 8%

 

Debenhams Card (closed) PPI - Refunded inc 8%

 

Swift Mortgage Charges -Refunded

 

Hitachi Finance (closed) Charges - Refunded

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Hi everyone:)

 

Just a further update on this -

 

Mr L today received an email from the FOS adjudicator dealing with his complaint, asking him to call him to discuss the matters raised in his (my) last letter. As Mr L is at work I had to email him (Mr L) copies of the last pieces of correspondence between himself and the FOS as well as some prompting notes as to what he should be saying.

 

Mr L has just got back to me having spoken to the adjudicator, who seemed to understand the crux of the contractual interest issue, but was still insistant that there was never a credit balance on Mr L's account for interest to be applied to.

 

He said that the FOS have copies of all Mr L's statements as supplied by MBNA and these show there was never a credit balance:eek:

 

The adjudicator assumed we had copies of all Mr L's statements (we don't) but he is going to forward copies to us to prove MBNA is correct.

 

I should point out that although we have several statements we do not have the full set - MBNA only ever sent a list of charges/payments made and unfortunately we never pursued them for the remainder of Mr L's SAR.

 

However, I have been through the statements we do have and the lists of charges/payments and know that for many months there was a credit balance.

 

Mr L said to the adjudicator that unless one spent up to the full limit on their card in its first month of use (which he did not), that would imply there was at least one month with a credit balance, yet MBNA say there were none:eek:

 

The adjudicator was quite helpful nonetheless and fully understood that if Mr L was still not happy on receipt of the copy statements we would be asking for the complaint to be escalated to an Ombudsman for his/her decision.

 

Mr L did say that his wife has been putting together much of his correspondence - cheeky so and so, I've done it all - and that I had received support from the Consumer Action Group (despite me telling him on more than one occasion that the FOS prefer non-clued-up consumers!) and the adjudicator didn't appear to know what CAG was:eek:

 

Anyway, once the statements are received I'll have a better idea of how to proceed. Will keep you updated as and when!

 

Regards,

 

Landy x

LTSB PPI on various loans (current/settled) - Refunded inc 8%

 

MBNA 1 Charges - Refunded inc CI

 

MBNA 1 PPI - Refunded

 

MBNA 2 Charges - Refunded inc 8%

 

MBNA 2 PPI - Refunded

 

MBNA 2 Accident Ins - Refunded

 

Swift Advances (settled) Mortgage Charges -Partially refunded

 

Swift Advances (settled) Mortgage PPI - Refunded inc CI & 8%

 

Sainsburys (settled) Loan PPI - Refunded inc CI +8%

 

Sainsburys (closed) Card Charges - Refunded inc CI + 8%

 

M&S Money (closed) Card Charges - Refunded inc CI

 

M&S Money (closed) Card PPI - Refunded inc 8%

 

Direct Line (settled) Loan PPI - Refunded inc CI + 8%

 

Debenhams Card (closed) PPI - Refunded inc 8%

 

Swift Mortgage Charges -Refunded

 

Hitachi Finance (closed) Charges - Refunded

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr L did say that his wife has been putting together much of his correspondence - cheeky so and so, I've done it all - and that I had received support from the Consumer Action Group (despite me telling him on more than one occasion that the FOS prefer non-clued-up consumers!) and the adjudicator didn't appear to know what CAG was:shock:

Time for some boots up bums me thinks :D

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

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

Bank charge successes:

Halifax - Full settlement incl interest.

HSBC - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 75% of claim.

RBS - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 70% of claim.

2 ongoing claims for bank charges with HSBC with more to come. (Supreme Court ruling could have upset these claims) They did :mad:

PPI Successes

PPI 4 settlements on 9 loans. FOS involvement on 7 added on the 8 % Statutory interest another 30% to both.

2 claims settled in full with LV without FOS involvement.

2 claims settled in full with HSBC without FOS involvement

 

PPI Claims ongoing with:

Cap one Now with the FOS

Barclays. Paid up today 24/04/10 cheque received for over £4,500 and in the bank.

LTSB still have to decide on this as their SAR production was abysmal. Papers data mixed up documents missing etc

 

1 Complaint not upheld by FOS they said it was ICO issue. Complaint upheld by ICO. See this..

Post 290 from

***RBS PPI Claim Long fight but, WON***

 

Please do not PM me for advice as it may be sometime before I can respond.

 

Keep at them. Do not give way and do not accept all they tell you, they will delay and stall for as long as they can to prevent repaying you your mis-sold PPI.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr L did say that his wife has been putting together much of his correspondence - cheeky so and so, I've done it all - and that I had received support from the Consumer Action Group (despite me telling him on more than one occasion that the FOS prefer non-clued-up consumers!) and the adjudicator didn't appear to know what CAG was:shock:

 

Time for some boots up bums me thinks :D

 

Yep, sounds about right to me Alan :lol:

LTSB PPI on various loans (current/settled) - Refunded inc 8%

 

MBNA 1 Charges - Refunded inc CI

 

MBNA 1 PPI - Refunded

 

MBNA 2 Charges - Refunded inc 8%

 

MBNA 2 PPI - Refunded

 

MBNA 2 Accident Ins - Refunded

 

Swift Advances (settled) Mortgage Charges -Partially refunded

 

Swift Advances (settled) Mortgage PPI - Refunded inc CI & 8%

 

Sainsburys (settled) Loan PPI - Refunded inc CI +8%

 

Sainsburys (closed) Card Charges - Refunded inc CI + 8%

 

M&S Money (closed) Card Charges - Refunded inc CI

 

M&S Money (closed) Card PPI - Refunded inc 8%

 

Direct Line (settled) Loan PPI - Refunded inc CI + 8%

 

Debenhams Card (closed) PPI - Refunded inc 8%

 

Swift Mortgage Charges -Refunded

 

Hitachi Finance (closed) Charges - Refunded

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Hi Landy,

 

Quick update - received email from FOS with this reply:-

 

I have raised your concerns with MBNA and they have informed me that the method in which it calculates the associated interest is not merely based on the premium and contractual interest rate at the time, as the firm must consider the way in which payments are allocated to the outstanding balance. A summary of this information is explained within the account terms and conditions.I should point out that the interest calculated is simple and not compound. In addition, the PPI premium will always be included within the minimum payment for each individual month and therefore if the minimum payment is paid off in full each month; the interest charged will not roll from month to month.I can confirm that the way in which this refund has been calculated is broadly in line with FOS guidance.As you will be aware, your case has not been fully adjudicated by the Financial Ombudsman's Service and the offer has been made by the firm on a goodwill basis which included an award of £100 distress and inconvenience. I note you request us to forward your case through for a full adjudication for an Ombudsman to review the issue of associated interest. I am obviously happy to carry out this request but I must point out that following a full review, an adjudicator may agree or disagree with the decision of the firm to uphold your complaint and it is possible that your complaint may be rejected or the award of Distress and Inconvenience withdrawn. In addition, I should point out that even if an adjudicator agrees that the firm should uphold your complaint, the settlement awarded by the firm is unlikely to be improved as it is broadly in line with FOS guidance and you have been put back into the position you would have been in had you not had PPI put on your loan from the outset.Please let me know how you would like to proceed. Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.

 

The paragraph about the interest being simple and not compounded as the payment would be included in the minimum payment and if the minimum payment was made every month it would not roll on to the next month - surely the same would have applied to charges applied ie late payment, over credit limit etc. and these were paid back with compounded interest.I am mindful to still continue this to an ombudsman but if anyone else has any thoughts on the matter or has heard anything different from the FOS concerning this issue - please let me know.It seems that I am being advised not to proceed further but it also seems like they are saying take it any further and you may loose the lot, however as what has already been given back has been a "goodwill gesture" I dont think they can take it back!Any comments appreciated.

GE MONEY - DEBENHAMS CARD

Settled in full after prelim :)

 

MBNA

Settled after LBA

however mistake made by me on contractual interest so going after the rest now

SETTLED IN FULL JAN 2007:)

 

MINT

Offer after prelim rejected

Settled in full after LBA:)

 

to go:

Barclays Bus Ac - to mcol

Barclays CC - to mcol

Nat West (over 6 years) no action taken yet

Creation Financial - awaiting statements since Dec

Goldfish - offer after prelim rejected

and some more

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Landy,

 

Quick update - received email from FOS with this reply:-

 

I have raised your concerns with MBNA and they have informed me that the method in which it calculates the associated interest is not merely based on the premium and contractual interest rate at the time, as the firm must consider the way in which payments are allocated to the outstanding balance. A summary of this information is explained within the account terms and conditions.I should point out that the interest calculated is simple and not compound. In addition, the PPI premium will always be included within the minimum payment for each individual month and therefore if the minimum payment is paid off in full each month; the interest charged will not roll from month to month.I can confirm that the way in which this refund has been calculated is broadly in line with FOS guidance.As you will be aware, your case has not been fully adjudicated by the Financial Ombudsman's Service and the offer has been made by the firm on a goodwill basis which included an award of £100 distress and inconvenience. I note you request us to forward your case through for a full adjudication for an Ombudsman to review the issue of associated interest. I am obviously happy to carry out this request but I must point out that following a full review, an adjudicator may agree or disagree with the decision of the firm to uphold your complaint and it is possible that your complaint may be rejected or the award of Distress and Inconvenience withdrawn. In addition, I should point out that even if an adjudicator agrees that the firm should uphold your complaint, the settlement awarded by the firm is unlikely to be improved as it is broadly in line with FOS guidance and you have been put back into the position you would have been in had you not had PPI put on your loan from the outset.Please let me know how you would like to proceed. Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.

 

The paragraph about the interest being simple and not compounded as the payment would be included in the minimum payment and if the minimum payment was made every month it would not roll on to the next month - surely the same would have applied to charges applied ie late payment, over credit limit etc. and these were paid back with compounded interest.I am mindful to still continue this to an ombudsman but if anyone else has any thoughts on the matter or has heard anything different from the FOS concerning this issue - please let me know.It seems that I am being advised not to proceed further but it also seems like they are saying take it any further and you may loose the lot, however as what has already been given back has been a "goodwill gesture" I dont think they can take it back!Any comments appreciated.

 

I believe it is unlikely you would get any claimed compounded interest. I accepted the adjudicators decision on my claims. The choice of acceptance must of course fall to you. It would be totally inappropriate for me to advise on acceptance of your claim.

 

The choice to continue to the ombudsman over an adjudicator ruling is again your choice.

 

Whatever your decision I wish you good luck.

 

The red bit above you could be asking for £200 as other claimants have received this amount for inconvenience and distress. Sadly I got nothing but I am wiser now to the situation and would certainly insist on a compensation for a claim taking 12 months to resolve.

 

I would firstly ask for £200 and then you decide on accepting a settlement ;)

 

aa

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

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

Bank charge successes:

Halifax - Full settlement incl interest.

HSBC - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 75% of claim.

RBS - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 70% of claim.

2 ongoing claims for bank charges with HSBC with more to come. (Supreme Court ruling could have upset these claims) They did :mad:

PPI Successes

PPI 4 settlements on 9 loans. FOS involvement on 7 added on the 8 % Statutory interest another 30% to both.

2 claims settled in full with LV without FOS involvement.

2 claims settled in full with HSBC without FOS involvement

 

PPI Claims ongoing with:

Cap one Now with the FOS

Barclays. Paid up today 24/04/10 cheque received for over £4,500 and in the bank.

LTSB still have to decide on this as their SAR production was abysmal. Papers data mixed up documents missing etc

 

1 Complaint not upheld by FOS they said it was ICO issue. Complaint upheld by ICO. See this..

Post 290 from

***RBS PPI Claim Long fight but, WON***

 

Please do not PM me for advice as it may be sometime before I can respond.

 

Keep at them. Do not give way and do not accept all they tell you, they will delay and stall for as long as they can to prevent repaying you your mis-sold PPI.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Companies house brings up these results for MBNA

 

05762092

D MBNA LIMITED Dissolved 02922208

MBNA DIRECT LIMITED

02783251

MBNA EUROPE BANK LIMITED

FC028615

MBNA EUROPE FINANCE LIMITED

BR010201

MBNA EUROPE FINANCE LIMITED

02950906

MBNA EUROPE FUNDING PLC

02898169

MBNA EUROPE HOLDINGS LIMITED

06427367

MBNA FUNDING COMPANY LIMITED

04853435

MBNA GLOBAL SERVICES LIMITED

FC022307

C MBNA HALLMARK INFORMATION SERVICES, INC. Company Removed 02833317

MBNA INTERNATIONAL PROPERTIES LIMITED

04330136

MBNA INVESTMENT & SECURITIES LIMITED

BR005548

MBNA IRELAND LIMITED

FC022534

MBNA IRELAND LIMITED

06854301

MB NA1 INVESTMENTS LIMITED

06740752

MBNA PARTNERSHIP INVESTMENTS LIMITED

02910645

MBNA PROPERTY SERVICES LIMITED

FC023974

C MBNA RECEIVABLES LIMITED Company Removed FC028443

MBNA RECEIVABLES LIMITED

BR010050

MBNA RECEIVABLES LIMITE

 

You will have to decide which compny you are dealing with :)

 

 

 

This is from the FSA Register.

 

Basic details for:

 

204487 - MBNA Europe Bank Limited

 

Current status: Authorised Effective Date: 01/12/2001 Tied Agent:

Undertakes Insurance Mediation: Y Registered under Money Laundering Regulations:

Address: Stansfield House

Chester Business Park

Wrexham Road

Chester

Cheshire

CH4 9FB

Phone:

Fax:

Email:

Website:

44 01244 672 000

44 01244 672 100

No email address supplied

 

Notices: UK authorised firms who have a deposit-taking permission do not usually need to obtain separate permission from the FSA to receive money from clients.

Other information:

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

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

Bank charge successes:

Halifax - Full settlement incl interest.

HSBC - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 75% of claim.

RBS - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 70% of claim.

2 ongoing claims for bank charges with HSBC with more to come. (Supreme Court ruling could have upset these claims) They did :mad:

PPI Successes

PPI 4 settlements on 9 loans. FOS involvement on 7 added on the 8 % Statutory interest another 30% to both.

2 claims settled in full with LV without FOS involvement.

2 claims settled in full with HSBC without FOS involvement

 

PPI Claims ongoing with:

Cap one Now with the FOS

Barclays. Paid up today 24/04/10 cheque received for over £4,500 and in the bank.

LTSB still have to decide on this as their SAR production was abysmal. Papers data mixed up documents missing etc

 

1 Complaint not upheld by FOS they said it was ICO issue. Complaint upheld by ICO. See this..

Post 290 from

***RBS PPI Claim Long fight but, WON***

 

Please do not PM me for advice as it may be sometime before I can respond.

 

Keep at them. Do not give way and do not accept all they tell you, they will delay and stall for as long as they can to prevent repaying you your mis-sold PPI.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Hi everyone:)

 

Just a belated update to this thread -

 

Despite asking for this complaint to be passed to an ombudsman Mr L received a letter from a new adjudicator stating that they would be re-assessing his file as they understand he has queried the manner that the redress in his calculation was worked out. They will contact him when their investigations are complete - the waiting continues...........

 

Landy x

LTSB PPI on various loans (current/settled) - Refunded inc 8%

 

MBNA 1 Charges - Refunded inc CI

 

MBNA 1 PPI - Refunded

 

MBNA 2 Charges - Refunded inc 8%

 

MBNA 2 PPI - Refunded

 

MBNA 2 Accident Ins - Refunded

 

Swift Advances (settled) Mortgage Charges -Partially refunded

 

Swift Advances (settled) Mortgage PPI - Refunded inc CI & 8%

 

Sainsburys (settled) Loan PPI - Refunded inc CI +8%

 

Sainsburys (closed) Card Charges - Refunded inc CI + 8%

 

M&S Money (closed) Card Charges - Refunded inc CI

 

M&S Money (closed) Card PPI - Refunded inc 8%

 

Direct Line (settled) Loan PPI - Refunded inc CI + 8%

 

Debenhams Card (closed) PPI - Refunded inc 8%

 

Swift Mortgage Charges -Refunded

 

Hitachi Finance (closed) Charges - Refunded

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone:)

 

Further update on this as promised -

 

Yesterday Mr L spoke to the new adjudicator reviewing his complaint. Apparently the adjudicator has discussed the issues surrounding the interest not awarded to Mr L in great depth with someone at MBNA and they have assured him that they are not prepared to pay out another penny in interest. The adjudicator said the most the FOS would have awarded is the 8% simple, definitely not contractual, and that they are convinced that MBNA have paid out as much as Mr L is entitled to.

 

As the 8% would have only amounted to an additional £120 on top of what has been refunded already, we have decided not to take this any further.

 

I feel like I'm giving up, but I am bogged down with trying to sort out my LTSB bank charges issues - I have to apply for stay to be lifted by 26/2/10 or my case will be struck out and I'm getting somewhat panicky as its a big one and if I lose the costs could be huge - and Mr L is currently unable to work due to severe mental and physical exhaustion, which is rather a worry so I really need don't have time to fight anymore on this one.

 

Apologies to the rest of you guys holding out for contractual interest from MBNA and hope you all have more success with this than me;)

 

Landy x

LTSB PPI on various loans (current/settled) - Refunded inc 8%

 

MBNA 1 Charges - Refunded inc CI

 

MBNA 1 PPI - Refunded

 

MBNA 2 Charges - Refunded inc 8%

 

MBNA 2 PPI - Refunded

 

MBNA 2 Accident Ins - Refunded

 

Swift Advances (settled) Mortgage Charges -Partially refunded

 

Swift Advances (settled) Mortgage PPI - Refunded inc CI & 8%

 

Sainsburys (settled) Loan PPI - Refunded inc CI +8%

 

Sainsburys (closed) Card Charges - Refunded inc CI + 8%

 

M&S Money (closed) Card Charges - Refunded inc CI

 

M&S Money (closed) Card PPI - Refunded inc 8%

 

Direct Line (settled) Loan PPI - Refunded inc CI + 8%

 

Debenhams Card (closed) PPI - Refunded inc 8%

 

Swift Mortgage Charges -Refunded

 

Hitachi Finance (closed) Charges - Refunded

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi everyone:)

 

Further update on this as promised -

 

Yesterday Mr L spoke to the new adjudicator reviewing his complaint. Apparently the adjudicator has discussed the issues surrounding the interest not awarded to Mr L in great depth with someone at MBNA and they have assured him that they are not prepared to pay out another penny in interest. The adjudicator said the most the FOS would have awarded is the 8% simple, definitely not contractual, and that they are convinced that MBNA have paid out as much as Mr L is entitled to.

 

As the 8% would have only amounted to an additional £120 on top of what has been refunded already, we have decided not to take this any further.

 

I feel like I'm giving up, but I am bogged down with trying to sort out my LTSB bank charges issues - I have to apply for stay to be lifted by 26/2/10 or my case will be struck out and I'm getting somewhat panicky as its a big one and if I lose the costs could be huge - and Mr L is currently unable to work due to severe mental and physical exhaustion, which is rather a worry so I really need don't have time to fight anymore on this one.

 

Apologies to the rest of you guys holding out for contractual interest from MBNA and hope you all have more success with this than me;)

 

Landy x

 

It seems that the best we can hope for on PPI reclaims is the 8% statutory interest back to the start of the premium payments.

 

Shame as they the banks have been sitting on shed loads of our money putting it into other ventures and gaining massive returns.

 

At least we have the satisfaction of knowing the PPI bubble has burst and 90% of folks are getting money back.

 

aa

I have no legal training and the advice I offer is a matter of support. Before you commit to any Legal action you are advised to contact a qualified legal practitioner.

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

Bank charge successes:

Halifax - Full settlement incl interest.

HSBC - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 75% of claim.

RBS - Settlement, goodwill no admission of liability about 70% of claim.

2 ongoing claims for bank charges with HSBC with more to come. (Supreme Court ruling could have upset these claims) They did :mad:

PPI Successes

PPI 4 settlements on 9 loans. FOS involvement on 7 added on the 8 % Statutory interest another 30% to both.

2 claims settled in full with LV without FOS involvement.

2 claims settled in full with HSBC without FOS involvement

 

PPI Claims ongoing with:

Cap one Now with the FOS

Barclays. Paid up today 24/04/10 cheque received for over £4,500 and in the bank.

LTSB still have to decide on this as their SAR production was abysmal. Papers data mixed up documents missing etc

 

1 Complaint not upheld by FOS they said it was ICO issue. Complaint upheld by ICO. See this..

Post 290 from

***RBS PPI Claim Long fight but, WON***

 

Please do not PM me for advice as it may be sometime before I can respond.

 

Keep at them. Do not give way and do not accept all they tell you, they will delay and stall for as long as they can to prevent repaying you your mis-sold PPI.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
It seems that the best we can hope for on PPI reclaims is the 8% statutory interest back to the start of the premium payments.

 

Shame as they the banks have been sitting on shed loads of our money putting it into other ventures and gaining massive returns.

 

At least we have the satisfaction of knowing the PPI bubble has burst and 90% of folks are getting money back.

 

aa

 

Very true Alan. At least we're getting somewhere, so we should give ourselves a well-earned pat on the back!

 

I suppose this thread should finally have a ***WON*** added to it now that its over at last;)

LTSB PPI on various loans (current/settled) - Refunded inc 8%

 

MBNA 1 Charges - Refunded inc CI

 

MBNA 1 PPI - Refunded

 

MBNA 2 Charges - Refunded inc 8%

 

MBNA 2 PPI - Refunded

 

MBNA 2 Accident Ins - Refunded

 

Swift Advances (settled) Mortgage Charges -Partially refunded

 

Swift Advances (settled) Mortgage PPI - Refunded inc CI & 8%

 

Sainsburys (settled) Loan PPI - Refunded inc CI +8%

 

Sainsburys (closed) Card Charges - Refunded inc CI + 8%

 

M&S Money (closed) Card Charges - Refunded inc CI

 

M&S Money (closed) Card PPI - Refunded inc 8%

 

Direct Line (settled) Loan PPI - Refunded inc CI + 8%

 

Debenhams Card (closed) PPI - Refunded inc 8%

 

Swift Mortgage Charges -Refunded

 

Hitachi Finance (closed) Charges - Refunded

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

First congrats on getting cash out of MBNA but I would ask, do MBNA appear to have got their 'feet under the table' at FOS Offices? I'm going to bypass FOS and take them to court on the subject of interest - as I understand it Compound (or contractual) interest is still a legitimate target of have I missed zummit zumwhere?

Link to post
Share on other sites
First congrats on getting cash out of MBNA but I would ask, do MBNA appear to have got their 'feet under the table' at FOS Offices? I'm going to bypass FOS and take them to court on the subject of interest - as I understand it Compound (or contractual) interest is still a legitimate target of have I missed zummit zumwhere?

 

Thanks Kenny:)

 

I don't think its necessarily only MBNA who have their 'feet under the table' at the FOS - from recent experience it seems that LTSB do as well and the general consensus appears to be that all financial institutions are looked on more favourably by the FOS than us mere mortals!

 

It is definitely possible to get contractual interest back from some institutions, but it seems to be much easier on loans than cards - I did on a Sainsbury's loan - but I haven't had any joy on a card as yet.

 

Court could well be your best option and there are Caggers who prefer this method - Castlebest I believe, is one who has done this with great success, so it might be a good idea to have a look at his threads. If I don't get anywhere with LTSB via the FOS (who are currently insisting I sign an acceptance form with no knowledge of how much is being offered) I will probably be joining you!

 

Good Luck with your claim!

 

Landy x

LTSB PPI on various loans (current/settled) - Refunded inc 8%

 

MBNA 1 Charges - Refunded inc CI

 

MBNA 1 PPI - Refunded

 

MBNA 2 Charges - Refunded inc 8%

 

MBNA 2 PPI - Refunded

 

MBNA 2 Accident Ins - Refunded

 

Swift Advances (settled) Mortgage Charges -Partially refunded

 

Swift Advances (settled) Mortgage PPI - Refunded inc CI & 8%

 

Sainsburys (settled) Loan PPI - Refunded inc CI +8%

 

Sainsburys (closed) Card Charges - Refunded inc CI + 8%

 

M&S Money (closed) Card Charges - Refunded inc CI

 

M&S Money (closed) Card PPI - Refunded inc 8%

 

Direct Line (settled) Loan PPI - Refunded inc CI + 8%

 

Debenhams Card (closed) PPI - Refunded inc 8%

 

Swift Mortgage Charges -Refunded

 

Hitachi Finance (closed) Charges - Refunded

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still pushing the compound contactual interest issue, the way I see it we got it on credit card charges so why not ppi payment as they are added to the account the same way. The FOS dont seem to want to take this into account though!

GE MONEY - DEBENHAMS CARD

Settled in full after prelim :)

 

MBNA

Settled after LBA

however mistake made by me on contractual interest so going after the rest now

SETTLED IN FULL JAN 2007:)

 

MINT

Offer after prelim rejected

Settled in full after LBA:)

 

to go:

Barclays Bus Ac - to mcol

Barclays CC - to mcol

Nat West (over 6 years) no action taken yet

Creation Financial - awaiting statements since Dec

Goldfish - offer after prelim rejected

and some more

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...