Debenhams card - PPI WON CHARGES WON - now LINK afrer a CO.

[beachcomber60]

And part of the reasons for such a heavy fine by the FSA was for 'poorly trained telephone sales staff who regulary gave consumers misleading information in order to the customet to take out PPI'.

 

Beachy

[alanalana]

They have just refused my claim on the basis that I chose to do so ,account cover added on the telephone for the 30 day trial ,they say in the letter that the 30 day period allows time to compare the policy to that of any other insurance company and that it was clearly shown on my statements and could have been cancelled at any time . Therefore there is no evidence of misselling .

 

I would go to the FOS with this one. I would not just accept what they tell you.

[crampers]

Thanks FOS FORM DONE AND SENT

[TINK660]

Here is my letter posted to GE Money (now Santander):-

 

I refer to my account with you that has been passed to Link Financial for collection. I have contacted Link Financial for a copy of my original credit agreement as is my right under legislation contained within S78 (1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 (s.77 (1) for fixed sum credit. They have informed me that they are unable to supply this information and cannot supply all statements relating to this account. They also cannot provide me with a transcript of the telephone conversation in which I purportedly purchased PPI insurance. An Subject Access Request request only supplied me with a few statements and transcripts of conversations with Link. As I am sure you are aware it is a legal requirement for you to keep records on a running account for 6 years from the date of the last payment. To this effect I will be reporting you to the Information Commissioners Office without further ado.

 

I am also sure you are aware that an account cannot be passed to a collections agency when the account is in dispute and also that without an existing credit agreement the account is unenforceable. I therefore believe that you should take this account back from Link Financial as the account is clearly in dispute for missold PPI insurance.

 

What I require from you now:-

 

To refund all ppi payments made on this account from inception plus interest at your rate that you have been charging me. Failure to comply will leave me no option but to either take this matter to the FOS or proceed with court action to recover this missold ppi insurance.

 

I look forward to hearing from you.

 

AND HERE IS THEIR REPLY,

 

I write further to your letter dated 4th August 2009. I understand your complaint is regarding Account Cover Insurance.

I can confirm that the insurance was added on 23 June 1995, after a discussion that took place on the telephone with a member of our Telemarketing Dept. Unfortunately, due to the length of time elapsed we are unable to retrieve a recording of the telephone conversation that took place.

As advised in our previous letter dated 7 January 2009 I appreciate that due to recent press coverage regarding insurance regulations and GE money now Santandar Cards being fined by the FSA you feel that you may have been mis-sold Account Cover Insurance. The FSA fine, and the associated media coverage, however relates to policies purchased after 14 Januay 2005 when FSA's ICOB regulations came into force. As set out above, I note that your policy was set up on 23 June 1995. As this was prior to January 2005, the FSA's decision is not relevant.

The policy is called Account Cover and comprised of price, purchase and payment protection. It was sold to ou over the telephone by one of our advisers who explained the main features of the product and the price. The insurance was added to your account because you chose to do so. However, you still had an opportunity to change your mind as once you decided to take the product, a policy summary and policy document was mailed to you for your review. We offer a 30-day no-quibble guarantee where the product may be cancelled and any premiums refunded (subject to no claim being made). This allows time to compare the policy to that of any other insurance companies.

Since then, this insurance has been clearly shown on your statements, when a balance has been outstanding, and could have been cancelled or a claim made at any time.

As you did not contact us to advise that you did not wish to proceed with the insurance or did not understand the policy, the cover was not cancelled and whilst it remained on the account, the relevant insurance premiums charged monthly.

The insurance was upgraded on 17 September 1998 and 29 July 2003 and new Terms and Conditions would have been sent out at this time.

I have considered the comments in your recent letter and the concerns raised in your original complain. However, I do feel that we have fully addressed all the issued you have raised in our previous correspondence. Therefore as you have not provided any new eivdence to support your claim that the policy was mis-sold our decision remains the same and I an unable to refund any of the insurance premiums charged to your account.

The insurance was cancelled on 12 July 2004 and no premiums have been charged since this date.

In your letter you have requested a copy of the agreement for your Debenhams account under Section 78 Consumer Credit Act 1974.

This agreement has been terminated by the sale to Link Financial and there is therefore no obligation for us to provide a copy of the agreement under Section 78. This section is included within part V1 of the Consumer Credit Act "Matters arising during currency of Credit or Hire Agreements". As the agreement is now terminated, this part of the Act no longer applies.

The account is not and never has been in dispute (says who?) As Link Financial now administers the account, if you require any information you will need to contact them directly.

(been there, done that)

I note that you submitted a Data Subject Access Request to Link Financial. However I would advise that they are only obliged to provide you with any information they hold. If you would like us to provide you with any information we hold you would need to submit a Data Subject Access request to us with the required £10.00 fee. (My next step)

Whilst I appreciate that this may not be the outcome you were expecting (oh, I most certainly was, lets say I wasnt in the slightest bit surprised) I trust that I have addressed all of the concerns that you raised. As you purchsed your policy in 1995 the Financial Ombudsman Service has no jurisdiction over your complaint. Therefore, if you remain dissatisfied with our response you may refer the complaint to the Finance & Leasing Associated (I understand they are a complete and utter waste of time!) at the contact details provided below. To do this you must refer the matter within six months from the date of this letter.

Should you require any further information, please contact me on my number below. Any correspondence relating to your complaint can be sent to Santandar cards, PO Box 700, Leeds, LS99 2BD.

Sorry its long winded but if anyone takes the time to read it I would appreciate your comments and suggestions.

I am clearly disputing this account so how can they say that it is not in dispute? They have also not addressed the fact that because there is no agreement the debt is unenforceable.

I am now going to send the Data Subject Access request with the fee and see what this brings up, however if it is anything like what I received from Link it will be a waste of time and money.

Should I inform them again that the account is in dispute as they dont seem to grasp the concept of that one.

Thanks for reading

TInk

[diamondgirl]

I most certainly would remind them it is in dispute and if you've got a copy of your letter send a copy with it.

If your response to the SAR is the same as mine I got quite a few statements and a letter telling me that we could not retrieve all the statements - but it was amazing that they managed to type out a load of pages with details on it. They never sent me a copy of the CCA nor anything to do with the so called sale to Link to I don't hold out a great deal of hope for you getting everything you want.

Don't know if I missed something on your post but did you inform the low life Link that the account was in dispute and should not have been sold onto them?

DG:)

[TINK660]

Thinking about this I dont think I will waste another £10 on an SAR as when I claimed back charges on this account I did a Subject Access Request about 2 years ago and the information they supplied only went back to 2001 but after Sept. 2004 there is a note on the account that says "ppi cancelled - never had CPP" and this is duplicated every month since.

 

I am going to draft a letter reminding them that the account definitely IS in dispute due to my belief that the ppi was mis-sold, that they should take the account back from Link because it is in dispute and that without a credit agreement the debt is unenforceable and I will not be paying any more to them until they can produce such. It is an absolute farce that they cannot supply a copy of the telephone transcript in which I purchased PPI but they can state exactly when the phone call was made when I purchased it. I will also be asking them exactly what "ppi cancelled - never had CPP" as detailed on my statements after Sept 2004 is supposed to mean. I expect they will skirt around the issues I raise as they normally do and then revert to the "you paid it for so many years why didnt you query it before" stance. I am now very sick of these monkeys and I do not intend to give up. This one will go all the way - especially as Link have a charging order.

 

Any comments gratefully accepted as I think I will need as much help as I can get.

 

Beachcomber - if you read this - lets have a bet - who can get their ppi payments back first!

 

Tink

[beachcomber60]

Thinking about this I dont think I will waste another £10 on an SAR as when I claimed back charges on this account I did a Subject Access Request about 2 years ago and the information they supplied only went back to 2001 but after Sept. 2004 there is a note on the account that says "ppi cancelled - never had CPP" and this is duplicated every month since.

 

I am going to draft a letter reminding them that the account definitely IS in dispute due to my belief that the ppi was mis-sold, that they should take the account back from Link because it is in dispute and that without a credit agreement the debt is unenforceable and I will not be paying any more to them until they can produce such. It is an absolute farce that they cannot supply a copy of the telephone transcript in which I purchased PPI but they can state exactly when the phone call was made when I purchased it. I will also be asking them exactly what "ppi cancelled - never had CPP" as detailed on my statements after Sept 2004 is supposed to mean. I expect they will skirt around the issues I raise as they normally do and then revert to the "you paid it for so many years why didnt you query it before" stance. I am now very sick of these monkeys and I do not intend to give up. This one will go all the way - especially as Link have a charging order.

 

Any comments gratefully accepted as I think I will need as much help as I can get.

 

Beachcomber - if you read this - lets have a bet - who can get their ppi payments back first!

 

Tink

 

Hiya Tink,

 

Your on , first one buys the drinks

 

Seriously though, I am not surprised by their bog off attitude.

 

I have reminded them that as they keep quoting about their fine by the FSA being after they became regulated it shows what an utter shambles their organisation was prior to becoming regulated.

 

I've submitted a complaint to the ICO for non compliance of my SAR, however, I phoned the ICO regarding missing data from my Barclaycard SAR - this was made in April & last week I was told that it'll be at least another four months before they can look at it, as they haven't cleared last Decembers complaints yet.

 

So it looks like a court claim to get the missing data, regarding my ppi, I know its going to have to be a court claim to make them take me seriously. As mine is over £9k I feel I have to get a solicitor or a claim company (no win no fee) to act on my behalf because of the costs.

 

GE Money keep banging on that they have sent a signed cca where I also signed for the ppi, what they sent is an unreadable microfiche, the ppi box was ticked (doesnt look like my sort of tick) but the wording in that box is unreadable.

 

Mines been sold to CL (before I found CAG) so I cant claim that it was sold while in dispute, CL have failed to provide the cca (in fact they failed to even acknowledge my request - kept the quid tho') so they've been told their not getting a penny more until such time as they come up with an enforceable cca.

 

Keep the faith - GE will be defeated.

 

Beachy

[TINK660]

I have now drafted a reply - as below

 

Please take a look and comment suggest changes as nec.

 

Thanks

 

Beachy - the clocks ticking! Mines a bacardi and coke!

 

Thank you for your letter dated 13th August, you say you wrote further to your letter dated 4th August 2009, I have not received this letter, please let me have a copy forthwith as I will need to keep all correspondence from you for future reference.

I was disappointed with your reply for the following reasons:

1. You state that the account is not and never has been in dispute. I reiterate that the account clearly IS in dispute due to the fact that I believe I was mis-sold PPI insurance and also because you have failed in your obligation to supply me with a copy of my original credit agreement. I have previously a Data Subject Access request from yourselves dated 13th September 2006 so I will not be sending £10 for another one as the previous request did not include the original credit agreement that I require. Therefore neither you or Link Financial have been able to supply this, thus making the debt unenforceable.

2. You are unable to provide a copy of the telephone transcript during which I purchased PPI insurance however you are able to confirm that the discussion took place on 23 June 1995, clearly then you must have some notes to confirm this and I request a copy of these.

3. As you mention the FSA fine that was imposed upon you for mis-selling ppi policies, and the fact that it relates to policies purchased after 14 January 2005, I have researched the reasons why you were fined, and part of the reason for such a heavy fine was for 'poorly trained telephone sales staff who regularly gave consumers misleading information in order to get the customer to take out PPI'. This clearly indicates that your organisation was not following correct procedures prior to this date also.

4. The statements that you supplied me with after my Data subject access request in 2006 detail ppi payments up until September 2004 – after this date there are no further statements but a transaction history and every month thereafter there is a note stating “Cancelled PPI insurance, Never had CPP insurance”. Please enlighten me as to what exactly this means and what CPP insurance refers to.

I also request that you confirm whether when you assigned the account to Link it was an Absolute assignment or an Equitable assignment.

I expect for you to answer all the issues raised above and I look forward to your prompt reply.

To summarise, this account IS in dispute and I still maintain that I have been mis-sold ppi insurance.

What I require:

Repayment of all ppi payments made on my account plus compound interest at your contractual rate that you have charged me. As I have stated in my previous letter failure to comply with my demand will result in legal action to recover this mis-sold ppi insurance.

Yours faithfully,

Mrs. S. Brown

[alanalana]

I have now drafted a reply - as below

 

Please take a look and comment suggest changes as nec.

 

Thanks

 

Beachy - the clocks ticking! Mines a bacardi and coke!

 

Thank you for your letter dated 13th August. You say you wrote further to your letter dated 4th August 2009, I have not received this letter, please let me have a copy forthwith as I will need to keep all correspondence from you for future reference.

 

I was (extremely) disappointed with your reply for the following reasons:

 

1. You state (in your letter) that the account is not and never has been in dispute. I reiterate that the account clearly IS in dispute due to the fact(s) that I believe I was mis-sold PPI insurance and also because you have failed in your obligation to supply me with a (true) copy of my (the) original (consumer) credit agreement. I have previously (submitted) a Data Subject Access request from (to) yourselves dated 13th September 2006 so I will (most definately) not be sending ( second fee of ) £10 for another one as the previous request did not include the original credit agreement that I require. Therefore neither you® (organisation) or Link Financial have been able to supply this, thus making the debt unenforceable.

 

2. You are unable to provide a copy of the telephone transcript during which I (allegedly) purchased PPI insurance however you are able to confirm that the (a) discussion took place on 23 June 1995, clearly then you must have some notes to confirm this and I request a copy of these (notes that are relevant with regard to this conversation).

 

 

3. As you mention the (Financial Services Authority) FSA fine that was imposed upon you for mis-selling ppi policies, and the fact that it (the fine) relates to policies purchased after 14 January 2005, I have researched the reasons why you were fined (by the FSA), and part of the reason for such a heavy fine was for 'poorly trained telephone sales staff who regularly gave consumers misleading information in order to get (solicit) the customer to take out PPI'. This clearly indicates that your organisation was not following correct procedures prior to this (the date of the fine) also.

 

4. The statements that you supplied me with after my Data subject access request in 2006 detail ppi (PPI) payments up until September 2004 – after this date there are no further statements but a transaction history and every month thereafter there is a note stating “Cancelled PPI insurance, Never had CPP insurance”. Please enlighten me as to what exactly this means and what CPP insurance refers to.

 

I also request that you confirm whether when you assigned the account to Link it was an Absolute assignment or an Equitable assignment.

 

I expect for you to answer all the issues raised above and I look forward to your prompt reply.

 

To summarise, this account IS in dispute and I still maintain that I have been mis-sold ppi insurance.

 

What I require:

 

Repayment of all ppi (PPI) payments made on my account plus compound interest at your contractual rate that you have charged me. As I have stated in my previous letter, failure to comply with my demand will result in legal action to recover this mis-sold ppi (PPI) insurance.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

 

Mrs. S. Brown

 

 

Hey Tink still in the fight well done.

 

I have looked over your response and it is very good. I have tweaked it for your considerations to perhaps remove the Bold blue and perhaps replace with the Red in brackets or otherwise. Then see what it looks like and if you are happy away you go.

 

aa

 

 

[TINK660]

Cheers Alanalana, yes I am definitely still in the fight. Got my boxing gloves on and gumshield in and raring to go.

 

Letter revised and sending this morning.

 

Will let you know the reply as soon as I get it.

 

Tink

[alanalana]

Good luck Tink if I do not respond rapidly it is because I am away on holiday soon with family.

 

However if I lose track of the threads pm me with an elbow to wake me up.

 

aa

[TINK660]

Still no joy with GE (Debenhams)

 

Have now been sent a deadlock letter which I can take as their final response, they have apparently sent me a previous letter dated 4th August which they say was sent to the wrong address and say they enclose a copy (no copy enclosed) so I dont know who else has been reading my mail!

 

No copy of telephone transcript sent either, FSA fine relates to policies sold after 14 Jan 2005 so not applicable regards my policy.

 

Link Financial bought account as a full asignment.

 

Decision still the same - unable to refund.

 

I have enough information I think to proceed to court but as a last ditch attempt have contacted FLA, although I know that they cant make them pay I thought I would give it a go, I always have the court option if needs be. I just have a few others on the go at the moment and can leave this one slowly burning while I concentrate on those. If mediation with FLA fails I will be back with a vengeance!

 

Tink

[beachcomber60]

Tink,

 

Your now dealocked like us, I'm not surprised by the response you got.

 

My main argument with them is that, as they state the fine relates to policies sold after that date it just goes to prove how BAD their practises were BEFORE that date.

 

Best of luck if your going the FLA route, I've got this on hold for awhile as I now have Barclaycard firmly against the ropes & statrting to deliver some body blows ( below the belt as well if I can get'em in )

 

Beachy

[TINK660]

You go get em Beachy, I think you and me are at the same stage with GE Money and I am not far behind you with Barclaycard - exactly the same experience as you apart from I am still waiting for the letter you have already received saying that their offer remains the same, expecting it any day so I am following your barclaycard thread with great interest. Who was your letter from? prob the same person that is dealing with mine.

 

Tink

[alanalana]

Still no joy with GE (Debenhams)

 

Have now been sent a deadlock letter which I can take as their final response, they have apparently sent me a previous letter dated 4th August which they say was sent to the wrong address and say they enclose a copy (no copy enclosed) so I dont know who else has been reading my mail!

 

No copy of telephone transcript sent either, FSA fine relates to policies sold after 14 Jan 2005 so not applicable regards my policy.

 

Link Financial bought account as a full asignment.

 

Decision still the same - unable to refund.

 

I have enough information I think to proceed to court but as a last ditch attempt have contacted FLA, although I know that they cant make them pay I thought I would give it a go, I always have the court option if needs be. I just have a few others on the go at the moment and can leave this one slowly burning while I concentrate on those. If mediation with FLA fails I will be back with a vengeance!

 

Tink

 

I mean how clever is that and I have the same on statements from HSBC so Information Commissioners Office is now aware. The banks and stores etc are trying to walk all over consumers and in a lot of cases succeeding so it is time now to complain at the first hurdle do not give them any more breathing space. It is IMO extremely important to keep up the pressure and not to accept at face value anything they tell you in letters.

 

aa

[beachcomber60]

You go get em Beachy, I think you and me are at the same stage with GE Money and I am not far behind you with Barclaycard - exactly the same experience as you apart from I am still waiting for the letter you have already received saying that their offer remains the same, expecting it any day so I am following your barclaycard thread with great interest. Who was your letter from? prob the same person that is dealing with mine.

 

Tink

 

If your refering to GE Money - its a different 'Compaints Resolutions Officer' each time they write in response.

 

If its Barclaycard it was the Customer Relations Manager - In the process of writing the PoC for this one - as I said earlier I've firmly got them against the ropes looking forward to going to court, unless they settle beforehand.

 

Beachy

[TINK660]

Quick response from FLA stating that they have written to GE Money (Santandar) and are awaiting their response.

I will try every avenue with this one especially since GE have such an obnoxious attitude.

[TINK660]

Well, I received a quick reply from GE (Santandar) in response to FLA's letter to them, they even managed to dig in their archives and find the non-existent signed credit agreement/application which was signed in a Debenhams store in December 1994. In my mind there are a few glaring discrepancies between what they are telling me now and what they have already told me. They still cannot provide statements going back further than 2003

1. Previously I was told that I agreed to this insurance during a telephone conversation - in this letter it says that I ticked the box for PPI when I filled in the application form, however they did not add it at the time due to human error and it was added in June after a telephone conversation - how do they know this if they dont have statements before 2003!!

2. On the application form there are clear indicators marked by the sales person at the time that I should fill in or sign - these are next to the boxes for my name and address, home telephone number and signature - the PPI box has no marker against it and has been ticked in a manner that I would not have used - I use small ticks and this is a large scrawling tick, so I know I never ticked the box.

3. The letter says "as you were working at the time you took out this insurance" I actually feel that this may be a mistake in their letter writing skills, as if I take the paragraph in context it would indicate that they mean as you were not working at the time. I certainly was not working - there are no employment details filled in on the application form.

 

The letter has been copies to the FLA so I am awaiting their input on this one.

 

Will keep you posted guys - I think a letter asking for proof of the destruction of all missing previous statements might be in order.

[TINK660]

Wow, just out of interest I have been doing some calculations on this and can now see why GE (Santandar) are fighting so hard on this one. (If my calculations are right that is!)

 

If I started paying ppi in June 1995 and paid roughly £20 (estimate based on later statements received)

 

Therefore £20 paid on 19 June 1995 plus compound interest to date using egalegal.com compound interest calculator at GE rate of 25.9% (estimated guess) gives interest accrued of £516.56 - I dont need to add up the rest of the figures to realise that this would be a vast amount of interest owed up to date.

 

I cant believe this figure and feel that I must have got my calculations wrong - can anyone advise - thanks

 

Tink

[middenmess]

Wow, just out of interest I have been doing some calculations on this and can now see why GE (Santandar) are fighting so hard on this one. (If my calculations are right that is!)

 

If I started paying ppi in June 1995 and paid roughly £20 (estimate based on later statements received)

 

Therefore £20 paid on 19 June 1995 plus compound interest to date using egalegal.com compound interest calculator at GE rate of 25.9% (estimated guess) gives interest accrued of £516.56 - I dont need to add up the rest of the figures to realise that this would be a vast amount of interest owed up to date.

 

I cant believe this figure and feel that I must have got my calculations wrong - can anyone advise - thanks Tink

 

 

Like this?

 

[TINK660]

Yeh middenmiss

but set to 1 compounded annually and tick box for check box for 360 days unticked

[middenmess]

So work it all out and have a very enjoyable afternoon just enjoying the grand total---and there's the good prospect of having 8% added to it;)

[TINK660]

Letter from FLA received basically saying that GE have made their position clear but if I have any further information (ie I was not employed at the time) it puts a different light on the matter and they (FLA) will raise this with GE.

 

GE Money put in their letter "as you were employed" when they should have put "as you were NOT employed", I dont know whether this was a deliberate mistake or an incompetant typist. My agreement also does not have any employment details on it - this section is blank.

 

Phoned FLA and spoke to a nice lady who has asked for copies of all the correspondence from GE (looks like I'm going to be busy as I have a mountain of it now). Also told her that the copy of the application has been marked by the salesperson where they wanted me to fill in - but no mark by the ppi section and the tick is definitely not mine.

 

Sending off correspondence on Monday - I will not give up on this one. I will exhaust every avenue before I go to court but if it is necessary I will have a stack load of correspondence to take with me - I might need a wheelbarrow!

 

I am prepared for a long fight on this one - I have patience and the interest is building day by day.

 

Can anyone point me in the direction of the letter to send about the destruction of data.

 

Thanks

[TINK660]

Well, quick update on this one

 

FLA was indeed a waste of time as I have just received a letter saying that they believe that THEIR MEMBER has replied in full to my comments and although this may be disappointing to me they consider that I have to decide what to do next. Out of desperation, because GE money stated that I would have to take my complaint to the FLA as the FOS would not deal with it I phoned the FOS who have told me that they will indeed deal with this complaint and will write to the company who underwrote the policy.

 

GE have obviously done all they can to mislead me into thinking that the FOS would not deal with this - I only wish I had gone to the FOS in the first place.

 

So those of you out there that are being told that you cannot take your complaint to the FOS, give them a call first before you accept this as gospel as you may well find that they will in fact deal with it.

 

So, here we go again, as I said before I absolutely refuse to give up on this one - I like a good fight and I'm certainly getting one here.

 

Tink

[beachcomber60]

Well, quick update on this one

 

FLA was indeed a waste of time as I have just received a letter saying that they believe that THEIR MEMBER has replied in full to my comments and although this may be disappointing to me they consider that I have to decide what to do next. Out of desperation, because GE money stated that I would have to take my complaint to the FLA as the FOS would not deal with it I phoned the FOS who have told me that they will indeed deal with this complaint and will write to the company who underwrote the policy.

 

GE have obviously done all they can to mislead me into thinking that the FOS would not deal with this - I only wish I had gone to the FOS in the first place.

 

So those of you out there that are being told that you cannot take your complaint to the FOS, give them a call first before you accept this as gospel as you may well find that they will in fact deal with it.

 

So, here we go again, as I said before I absolutely refuse to give up on this one - I like a good fight and I'm certainly getting one here.

 

Tink

 

Its not over yet then Tink , theres me thinking the only course of action was the courts.

 

I phoned the FOS a couple of days ago regarding a GE Home Lending account for double glazing, now GE told me that ppi wasnt their responsibility and to take it up with the double glazing company as they were the ones who sold the policy. The bod I spoke to at the FOS agreed that GE werent responsible and it would be the glazing company to chase, however, he did a quick check and it turns out that the glazing company werent regulated either, the twist is & you've also confirmed it, is that the insurance company WERE regulated at the time and as such the FOS WILL take up a complaint as to why a regulated insurance company was allowing a non regulated firm to sell their products

 

In my case I have to get a response from the glazing company before going to the FOS, all is not lost.

 

Any idea who the insurers were/are for Debenhams? coz it aint in the SAR.

 

Whose gonna be first at the bar then - me or you

 

Beachy