Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Now some at this stage might think I'm leading to doggerland as the site of Atlantis   https://www.winterwatch.net/2019/01/did-the-inspiration-for-atlantis-flood-and-ark-legends-stem-from-paleo-doggerland/           but for a number of reasons, I'm not ... although I think it is a part of the larger story,   Its a little late. I believe the final inundation of doggerland is part of the later Biblical flood and related myths. (Black Sea, Arabian Gulf, West coast of India etc) ... but worthy of mention is that it could effectively make up one of three 'larger' islands as detailed in the legends far better than the Azores does. ... and mammoths/elephants crossed that bridge - although carefully check the dates of those mammoth/elephant migration evidence. They seem to end 11000bp.           http://www.bbc.co.uk/earth/story/20150722-lost-beasts-of-the-ice-age   http://www.canada.com/technology/Massive+Canadian+melt+have+triggered+flood+biblical+proportions/3954124/story.html   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outburst_flood   http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/flood-myths.html#Sproul    
    • Hi.   Someone reported that your pg1 still had the reg number showing, so I've removed it and left pg2.   HB
    • Yes because you have not entered into an agreement with the claimant...nor do they state you ever did.   2.The loan was funded by Ferratum Uk Ltd.
    • Hi DX   Thank you for that.   No house move    Doh ... I know what a PAP LOC is now (apologies for being slow !)   I have had a tinker and found another defence example which I have taken account of.    How does the following now look ?  (bit lengthy apologies in advance !) **********************************                                                                           Particulars Of Claim 1.The claimant claims this amount in respect of an unpaid loan, regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974. The loan was funded by Ferratum UK Ltd.   2.The Defendant has failed to make payments in accordance with the terms of the credit agreement. The credit agreement was assigned to the Claimant upon which a Notice of Assignment was sent to the Defendant.    3.The Defendant has either failed to respond to the Claimant or has failed to maintain regular payments.   4.The Claimant has issued a Letter of Claim, providing the Defendant with a further opportunity to arrange repayment of the outstanding balance to no avail.    5.The Claimant claims interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year from 11/02/2019 to 23/07/2019 on  £417.00 and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgement or earlier payment at a daily rate of £0.09."    " Defence    1.            The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim vague and are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5(3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.   The Claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC ( Pre Action Protocol) Failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st October 2017.It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant to 7.1 PAPDC   2.           Paragraph 2 is denied. I am unaware of what alleged debt the claimant refers to having failed to adequately particularise its claim.  And it is denied the claimant has served any Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law & Property Act 1925    3    Paragraph 3 of the particulars is not admitted with regards to the Defendant entering into an Agreement referred to in the Particulars of Claim for an amount of £431.81. It is denied the defendant failed to abide by the terms of contract.   4.       Paragraph 4 is noted although I have no record of ever receiving a Default Notice or Notice of intention to serve a Default Notice in this matter.    5. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of assignment/balance/breach requested by CPR 31. 14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:   6. On receipt of this claim I requested by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a section 77/78 for copies of any documents referred to within the Claimants particulars to establish what the claim is for. To date they have failed to comply to my section 77/78 request and remain in default and with regards to my CPR 31.14 request.   (a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement ; and (b) show and evidence the nature and service of a default notice pursuant to sec87.1CCA1974 © show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;   7 .As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.   8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974.   9.By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any   ******************** end of defence ************
  • Our picks

HammyUK

HammyUK v Egg

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3037 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

Right ARC dealt with - how's this for Munn?

 

ACCOUNT IN DISPUTE

I ACKNOWLEDGE NO DEBT TO YOUR COMPANY OR ANY COMPANY YOU CLAIM TO REPRESENT

Dear Sir/Madam

 

I refer to your letter of 21st May 2010, the content of which is noted.

On the 17th April I responded to your threat of legal action by letter.

As of today Egg still remain in breach of my s78 request made under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. They have also failed to comply with a legal request for information made under the Data Protection Act 1998. A complaint for which has been forwarded to the Information Commissioners Office.

As you are aware from this letter I made a formal request to Egg Banking PLC pursuant to s.78 (1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. They have since supplied a partial copy of an alleged agreement along with copies of various terms and conditions. This document provided recently, which Egg claims is the agreement, is invalid due to the fact that it is missing a number of the prescribed terms as required by law and under the CCA1974.

Furthermore the terms and conditions supplied show that the Payment Protection Insurance added to the account would have been inappropriate and Egg were aware of this from inception of the account. Yet Egg continued to take payments for this product on a monthly basis for the duration of the account.

Egg's failure to provide me with any of the information requested under the Subject access request has left me unable to calculate the total amount taken inappropriately by Egg as PPI premiums.

 

However an approximate calculation, taking into account that the premiums taken by Egg were around £60 per month gives a base figure of £2880.00 to Feb 09. Taking this figure and under restitution, add the interest as charged by Egg (approx 21.7% accumulative) and the balance owing BY LAW to be refunded to myself will far outstrip the alleged balance owing to Egg.

 

 

I suggest that Egg Banking PLC review their files and either provide myself with ALL of the documentation requested forthwith under the regulations as provided by in law or close this case, reduce the balance to £0.00 and provide me with documentary evidence that this has been done for my records to prevent further unlawful collections procedures as evidenced by ARC Europe's involvement in this account.

 

Any further actions will be seen as vexatious and will be defended in court and recompense sought.

However these documents notwithstanding, they still have failed to comply within the statutory time limit, or at all. It should not be necessary to have to remind solicitors that the provisions of s.78 (6) now apply.

As of the 8th October 2010, Experian show the account as settled. The date of settlement being 27th February 2009, with the file updated to the date 01/03/09.

 

In the circumstances, your threat of legal action would appear to be a breach of the Consumer Protection From Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 and the Office of Fair Trading Guidance on debt collection. Should you or your client bring proceedings, they will be robustly defended, and the Court's attention drawn to the above statutory breaches.

Furthermore, I reserve the right to bring the conduct of your client to the Court when the issue of costs is being considered.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds good to me, Hammy :D


Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy -

HERE

2: Take back control of your finances -

Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors?

Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt

Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated -

Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

 

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just hit print then!

 

Can't wait to see what their reply is - hopefully (in some ways) I hope it is a claim form as that'll be crackin when they can't show compliance after 17 letters and 39 phone calls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep us updated :D


Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy -

HERE

2: Take back control of your finances -

Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors?

Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt

Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated -

Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

 

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well letter yesterday from both ARC and Egg

ARC - "on hold whilst we refer back to the client"

Egg - " tell us why the agreement is bad"

 

So gonna fire this at them - comments please incase I'm missing anything out.

 

You have asked me to state why I consider your agreement unenforceable at law and the reasons are this...

 

  • The word Approved Limit is used, which is insufficient to advise me what the credit limit is or how it will be decided therefore a prescribed term is not correctly stated.
    The case I refer to is Central Trust Plc V Spurway [2005] CCLR,where HHJ Overend states:
    24. In my judgment, the passages of Lord Nicholls’ speech cited by Mr Say persuade me that:
    (a)The amount of credit must mean credit in its technical sense, and
    (b)That although the use of the word “credit” is not prescribed, there should not be any confusion in the mind of the lay reader as to what the amount of credit is.
     
    Following HHJ Overend’s view, the agreement should make clear to the consumer, what the credit limit is or how it will be determined. It is not possible to say with any certainty that the documents EGG have provided are clear, unambiguous or that a consumer would understand that approved limit would be their credit limit.
  • You may also wish to consider other relevant case law to running credit agreements in particular:
    1. Wilson v Hurstanger, where LJ Tuckey makes clear that the prescribed terms MUST be there

    2. Wilson v First County Trust where Sir Andrew Morrit says that if the creditor got it wrong the money must be a gift.

    3. Wilson v Secy of State for Trade and Industry where it is stated: Wilson and others v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry [2003] UKHL 40 paras 4 & 71confirms that errors in the prescribed terms preclude a court from making an enforcement order and that Parliament expressly intended that such errors should render credit agreements unenforceable. At para 49 Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead stated
      “The message to be gleaned from sections 65, 106, 113 and 127 of the Consumer Credit Act is that where a court dismisses an application for an enforcement order under section 65 the lender is intended by Parliament to be left without recourse against the borrower in respect of the loan… when legislation renders the entire agreement inoperative, to use a neutral word, for failure to comply with prescribed formalities the legislation itself is the primary source of guidance on what are the legal consequences. Here the intention of Parliament is clear"

    [*]The agreements fail to state the rate of interest for cash withdrawals. From what I have seen the agreement only states an APR which is not sufficient for cash purchases as cash purchases includes a 1.25% handling fee which is included in the APR so it cannot be an accurate reflection of the rate of interest. Again a prescribed term is missing

    [*]The heading of you credit agreements is worded in contravention of the Consumer Credit Act Regulations 1983 (1983/1553) section 2, paragraph 4, which states:

     

    “Subject to paragraphs (5) and (9) below, the information, statements of the protection and remedies, signature and separate boxes which this regulation requires documents embodying regulated consumer credit agreements to contain, shall be set out in the order given by paragraphs (a) to (f) below under, where applicable, the headings specified below--

    (a) the nature of the agreement as set out in paragraph 1 of Schedule 1 to these Regulations;”

If we look at paragraph 1 of Schedule 1, this makes clear that the order of presentation required by paragraph 4 of section 2 requires the agreement to be headed "Credit Card Agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974". The document you have sent to me quite clearly fails to do this.

 

  • Also it is worth noting that, Paragraph 22 of Schedule 1 Consumer Credit Agreement Regulations requires that the agreement details the default charges payable and your Agreements DO NOT

Finally you will purport that the missing information is set out within your terms and conditionslink3.gif, for which I have to inform you IT CANNOT BE. The reasons for this is that Regulation 2 (4) Consumer Credit Agreement Regulations 1983 (SI1983/1553) requires that the statutory information set out within Para 3-19 of schedule 1 and 2 SI1983/1553 should be shown as a whole and not interspersed with other information if the agreement is to be properly executed and compliant with section 61 CCA 1974

 

We have the details to hand of Mr Bradley Say of Gough Square Chambers London.

Kind Regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm, you might want some more comment on that one, perhaps diddydicky.

 

At the end of the day, they have a legal team that should be advising them in respect of their documents. Is it really for you to save them money by informing them ?


Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy -

HERE

2: Take back control of your finances -

Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors?

Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt

Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated -

Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

 

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True - but if I don't tell them "why" I thoink it is wrong then they'll just close the complaint yet again (4 currently open FFS!) and send ARC/Munn back again.

Not worried about either of those idiots TBHjust don't need the hassle.

As my credit file is clear as far as Egg is concerned - they informed both Experian and Equifax that the account was settled in Feb 09 and still showing as settled - just want the PPI back really as it amounts to an awfull lot.

BUT if I go after PPI then they could possibly find some way of opening the report back open again.

Not sure - the money would be nice................. but they've yet to do the SAR in anyway at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now this is REALLY p*ssing me off.

Egg have now managed to change my "settled" account to a default!

Had a 50min call to them the other day and the guy was running round in circles trying to understand WTFwas going on.

None of the dates he waslooking at matched, nothing on his system matched the letters I have, nothing he could find showed anything at all!

He has asked if I can "kindly" send copies of the Experain file showing it as "settled" as he stated that a settled account can't suddenly become a default.

Really want to know how the f*ck Egg have managed this - even Experian can't tell me other than Egg have requested the change but even they are not sure on its legality? If so why the hell have they allowed Egg to change the status then?

 

Any ideas?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

take it up with experian. their complaint process makes it clear they have 28 days to deal with a reported error (s159 CCA1974). the grounds for your complaint are that the information is incorrect and cannot be substantiated. at the same time, make the same complaint to Egg (s10 Data Protection Act) the data is inaccurate and is damaging to your reputation, and causes you distress and financial harm. Then send copies of both to your MP, Ray Watson, Director of Consumer Credit at the OFT and to the ICO. With Egg, you should claim their time starts from the day you contacted them rather than your written confirmation (hope you have the date and name you spoke to)

 

This needs dealing with not only because there is a mistake, but becaue they cannot explain how the mistake happened.

 

Be aware also that there are several other referencing agencies and you have to deal with each of them

Edited by HeftyHippo

To those who give me reputation points, thanks. I don't usually pay attention to how much rep I receive, so I don't acknowledge it but I appreciate the favourable comments I receive when I sometimes talk sense.

"The attempt to combine wisdom and power has only rarely been successful and then only for a short while"Albert Einstein

 

"One should examine oneself for a very long time before thinking of condemning others".

Moliere (Jean-Baptiste Poquelin)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have phoned Experian and what a waste of space.

As far as they are concerned they only "hold" the information on behalf of other organisations. WTF???

Egg have"informed" them of a "change of status" in the account and they have "recorded" it.

They cannot explain at all how the account can go from "settled" to "default" after a year and a half of being "settled".

They have agreed to place a notice of correction on the file but will not remove the file. Even though they can see there is a serious cock up they won't actually do anything even when threatened with legal action and a notice to cease processing of data under s.10.

What the f*ck do you have to do to get these muppets to do what the law says they must actually do and not what they feel like doing.

They cannot give me a valid reason as to why they will change data on a file without ANY VERIFICATION WHATSOEVER!!!!!!!!

AAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if you have a copy of your credit report from them, it came with a booklet explaining what to do to correct a error. Follow those instructions. Why phone them? they'll have no record of your phone conversation. As for 'holding' info - what the hell does any one do with data except hold it. They are not simply holding it or recording it they are collecting info from different sources and combining it

 

the activites of cred ref agencies are detailed s159 of the CCA as I said earlier. they are OBLIGED to follow procedures. They can only put a note of correction if they disagree with the rreasons why yu want the info changed. You want teh info changing because it is inaccurate. under the DPA ALL information HELD (a tense of the verb ' to hold') MUST be accurate. If they think its accurate, let them justify it.

 

Now, if you want to make progress, follow the procedures and dont let them wriggle out of it. You need to make a complaint under s159 of the CCA 1974. They have 28 days to respond. That is the Statutory time limit.


To those who give me reputation points, thanks. I don't usually pay attention to how much rep I receive, so I don't acknowledge it but I appreciate the favourable comments I receive when I sometimes talk sense.

"The attempt to combine wisdom and power has only rarely been successful and then only for a short while"Albert Einstein

 

"One should examine oneself for a very long time before thinking of condemning others".

Moliere (Jean-Baptiste Poquelin)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well to update this after a lengthy layoff - Egg have sold this to Lowell.

I have multiple credit reports showing this debt as settled with both Egg and Lowell, yet they still insist on sending letters asking for money.

They have refused to send the PPI information in any way shape or form outright by letter as they would like "justification" as to why I feel I do not need to verify my identity and address to them. Funny as they were happy to send statements, letters and demands to me all this time.

Experian have added the correction notices but will not remove the insertions as they "have verified that the information is correct with the account holder" so back to round one with that one.

Anyone else had recent success with Egg?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hammy, I am a little confused.

 

You say this account has been "settled" and has been shown as such on the CRA records. Then all of a sudden it started to show with defaults? If there is no outstanding balance, then how is this so ?

 

Do you have statements showing the PPI payments ?

 

If you dont have statements and they have refused under SAR to provide those statements, then make a complaint to the Information Commissioner.

 

Are you 100% certain that PPI was mis applied to the account, if so then make your complaint for mis sold ppi.

 

HTH


Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy -

HERE

2: Take back control of your finances -

Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors?

Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt

Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated -

Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

 

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

B- it's really odd.

I complained to them way back after failure if the CCA and SAR requests.

They then came back with the usual responses and then a final "bog off" letter.

I then made the complaint for PPI and the following month I get an alert notice from Experian. So I logged in to find that the Egg account was suddenly showing as settled and the settlement date was fairly recent to the alert!

Then a few DCA letters came and I politely pointed them to the fact that Egg had updated the account to settled. They all went away!

I then had another alert about 3 months later with Lowell showing as a new account in default!

Letter to Experian put a notice of correction on the account but no removal.

At one point there was TWO accounts on there for the same debt!

Pointed Lowell at the fact that the account is "settled" by Egg previously and if they have "purchased" the account then produce the assignment notice and other papers which I have NEVER had.

They have never done this and still keep putting the account in and out of dispute.

Egg are refusing to acknowledge any letters and Lowell won't entertain a PPI dispute as it's "Eggs problem".

The PPI would if never ever paid out due to both "Self employment (even with a letter from HMRC stating I wasn't ) and an "existing medical condition which was unrelated to the injury but was refused because it was "too similar".

It's utter crap and I've really had enough of it but trying to get info out of either of the idiots is harder than a quick fondle with Kate Middleton!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMHO, you have to deal only with EGG for the PPI situation. If your Subject Access Request is older than 6 months old, then you should be sending them a new one with the inclusion of the £10.00 fee. You must stipulate that you require statements going back to inception of account.. it is unlikely you will obtain more than 6 years back.

 

You can ask for details of any Payment protection information, ie policies, terms and conditions. Wait the 40 days then slam in a complaint to the Information Commissioner if they fail to provide.

 

If it is not older than 6 months then you need to be quick and ask for the same information reminding them that it is still outstanding from teh original request. If they fail to provide at the minimum the statements.. then get in touch with the Information Commissioner.

 

HTH


Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy -

HERE

2: Take back control of your finances -

Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors?

Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt

Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated -

Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

 

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont know if it applies to credit cards (am assuming this account is for one) but the Bank's challenge against the FSA in respect of PPI was lost by the banks and in theory, they should be reopening / looking at PPI sold and getting in touch with the customer... whether or not a complaint has been made in respect of mis selling.

 

HTH


Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy -

HERE

2: Take back control of your finances -

Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors?

Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt

Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated -

Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

 

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The SAR is older than 6 months so will have to spend yet more money on them.

Their last letter stated the refusal to provide any of information requested in the SAR as I had " not provided sufficient reason for the supply of the information requested and that I would also have to verify my identity to them as I had not provided a signature".

Funny as they had replied to the 11 other letters quite happily without one!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1: You dont need a reason to send a Subject Access Request. You are entitled under the DPA to have sight of information relating to your financial dealings with the company.

 

2: You can get round the signature aspect very easily.. either purchase signguard from CAG or sign over a grid of

"X's" like so....

 

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

or

type your name ...

HammyUKHammyUKHammyUKHammyUK

HammyUKHammyUKHammyUKHammyUK

HammyUKHammyUKHammyUKHammyUK

HammyUKHammyUKHammyUKHammyUK

I would make the grid a light to mid grey or a lightish yellow and just sign over the top :) That stops any funny business that you might be concerned about.

HTH


Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy -

HERE

2: Take back control of your finances -

Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors?

Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt

Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated -

Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

 

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a quick update B - made a mistake in regards to the default notice and who registered it.(confused with BC because of Lowells)

Lowells are chasing this BUT its Egg's name on the report.

 

This is where it gets daft as a report dated 2/03/10 clearly showing it as SETTLED on the 27/02/09 with the file updated on the 01/03/09. There are reports going back to 08/10/09 showing this as settled too!

 

Jump forward to a report dated 08/12/10 and the account is now DEFAULT - with the default date of 04/08/09, updated on the 07/11/10.

 

Is this even legal?

 

I can't get my head round how they can do this?

 

The settled appeared after the original PPI complaint went in in the January of 09, along with charges for the whole duration as well as the charges that make up about £1500 of the default amount (over limit, recovery, etc) - I got a "we are investigating your complaint" letter and then nothing afterwards for about 6 months other than an "alert" from Experian for an update on my file which turned out to be the Egg account showing as settled!

Strangly the next letter from them came around the time of another alert where the "addition of an account" showed to be Egg back again?????

I'm baffled by this one as Egg refuse to correspond in anyway shape or form, their legal dept won't take calls and letters go unsanswered. I haven't bothered to send anymore for quite sometime.

I got a CCA eventually via the DCA which is utter rubbish, with an application, screen dump and pages of T&C's - none of which match.

TBH - my file is trashed now anyway - BUT I want the PPI and charges back. IF it clears stuff then fine but I'd rather take it and use it elsewhere as other bills need paying rather than dead accounts with a red box on a file.

I don't care IF they leave it there or remove it ( was nice to see "settled" for 6 months) as at the moment it isn't doing anymore harm than the ones from Crap1, Lowell(BC), Barclays(overdraft charges), HSBC(who have admitted mis-selling the PPI and made a prelim offer but not charges) and a default on an account from Clydesdale(BPF) that they have yet to provide proof of who ACTUALLY took the account out and what was supposedly purchased! ( 7 copies of a blurred CCA with a dubious sig but no evidence of the documents used to open the account and with whom).

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...