Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • love the extra £1000 charge for confidentialy there BF   Also OP even if they don't offer OOC it doesn't mean your claim isn't good. I had 3 against EVRi that were heard over the last 3 weeks. They sent me emails asking me to discontinue as I wouldn't win. Went infront of a judge and won all 3.    Just remember the law is on your side. The judges will be aware of this.   Where you can its important to try to point out at the hearing the specific part of the contract they breached. I found this was very helpful and the Judge made reference to it when they gave their judgements and it seemed this was pretty important as once you have identified a specific breach the matter turns straight to liability. From there its a case of pointing out the unlawfullness of their insurance and then that should be it.
    • I know dx and thanks again for yours and others help. I was 99.999% certain last payment was over six years ago if not longer.  👍
    • Paragraph 23 – "standard industry practice" – put this in bold type. They are stupid to rely on this and we might as well carry on emphasising how stupid they are. I wonder why they could even have begun to think some kind of compelling argument – "the other boys do it so I do it as well…" Same with paragraph 26   Paragraph 45 – The Defendants have so far been unable to produce any judgements at any level which disagree with the three judgements…  …court, but I would respectfully request…   Just the few amendments above – and I think it's fine. I think you should stick to the format that you are using. This has been used lots of times and has even been applauded by judges for being meticulous and clear. You aren't a professional. Nobody is expecting professional standards and although it's important that you understand exactly what you are doing – you don't really want to come over to the judge that you have done this kind of thing before. As a litigant in person you get a certain licence/leeway from judges and that is helpful to you – especially if you are facing a professional advocate. The way this is laid out is far clearer than the mess that you will get from EVRi. Quite frankly they undermine their own credibility by trying to say that they should win simply because it is "standard industry practice". It wouldn't at all surprise me if EVRi make you a last moment offer of the entire value of your claim partly to avoid judgement and also partly to avoid the embarrassment of having this kind of rubbish exposed in court. If they do happen to do that, then you should make sure that they pay everything. If they suddenly make you an out-of-court offer and this means that they are worried that they are going to lose and so you must make sure that you get every penny – interest, costs – everything you claimed. Finally, if they do make you an out-of-court offer they will try to sign you up to a confidentiality agreement. The answer to that is absolutely – No. It's not part of the claim and if they want to settle then they settle the claim as it stands and don't try add anything on. If they want confidentiality then that will cost an extra £1000. If they don't like it then they can go do the other thing. Once you have made the amendments suggested above – it should be the final version. court,. I don't think we are going to make any more changes. Your next job good to make sure that you are completely familiar with it all. That you understand the arguments. Have you made a court familiarisation visit?
    • just type no need to keep hitting quote... as has already been said, they use their own criteria. if a person is not stated as linked to you on your file then no cant hurt you. not all creditors use every CRA provider, there are only 3 main credit file providers mind, the rest are just 3rd party data sharers. if you already have revolving credit on your file there is no need to apply for anything just 'because' you need to show you can handle money. if you have bank account(s) and a mortgage which you are servicing (paying) then nothing more can improve your score, despite what these 'scam' sites claiml  its all a CON!!  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 160 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Clydesdale missold PPi - something strange going on!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5362 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi all

 

Mate just paid the last instalment to her 5 year unsecured personal loan with Clydesdale Bank and was a happy chappy...until she received her first ever statement for the loan which showed almost £2K allocated for PPI.

 

Being completely computer illiterate (yes we point and laugh at her at times lol), she knew for a fact she refused it and came to me as she has heard me bang on about the CAG :D

 

Basically, her and her husband (joint loan) consolidated a card and loan with this loan and the advisor did try the PPI sales pitch. Friend flatly refused as she was self employed and husband (first named on policy) worked for local government which gave more than enough cover for sickness/accident/death as a benefit - they also operate a no redundancies policy.

 

They remember going through all this, getting the agreement slid across the desk, they signed and that was that. Now she is fuming, but fighting it.

 

Full SAR sent and they supplied only 2 and a half years statements for the loan...but here's the strange thing, and input appreciated!

 

For the first 34 payment on the loan the full monthly instalment of £234 was deducted from their bank a/c....but only approx £175 (rises slightly month to month)was being paid to the loan a/c :confused:

 

Then on the 35th month, the full £234 leaves the bank a/c every month and goes straight to the laon a/c until it hits zero.

 

My guess is that the missing amount from the first 34 payments will add up to the full PPI cost, meaning that they only paid the PPI over 34 months but were charged interest over the full 60? Until she gets the rest of that statement we have no idea but:

 

does this mean anything to anyone, or am I barking up the totally wrong tree? :confused:

 

(I will also add that between their scanned copy of the CCA and her original - the signatures are VERY different...and her copy is down as unsecured and their copy has the secured box ticked?! Something is going on!:mad:)

 

Thanks again :-)

Dipply75

 

I am in no way a legal advisor and only speak from my own experiences and the helpful advice of those in the same boat! :p

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't advise much on this but find it VERY interesting. I was missold PPI by Clydesdale but when I sent them a SAR they said that they could only supply info on accounts where statements are supplied, and they don't supply statements for loans (It was a few years ago but I certainly never had any statements).

 

If she was paying interest on the PPI I believe that might invalidate it by the way.

 

I signed up for PPI or I wouldn't have got the loan, but I distinctly remember having a seperate agreement for it. According to my bank statements I only paid one amount which makes me wonder if it was a multiple agreement.

 

May be worth looking at this. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/171037-multiple-agreements-falling-within.html#post1845581

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

Advice & opinions given by Caro 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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm interesting. The multiple agreement angle is defo for keeping on the back burner on this one just in case - thanks for that :)

 

The loan statement looked more like just a printed off transaction history of the a/c - so saying statement is probably slightly misleading, but what they told you still sounds like big fat fibs!

 

How did you get on with that PPI, any luck?

 

Thing is, I think that one off statement only came through because of those new regs making lenders supply statements for loans etc....but as she had literally just paid it off, it was sheer luck they sent one just then or they would NEVER have known about it! Loan was over, no further obligation to provide info!

 

She has demanded the missing info - will update when we get it, my nose is twitching now :p

Dipply75

 

I am in no way a legal advisor and only speak from my own experiences and the helpful advice of those in the same boat! :p

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, just to add, even though friend send a full SAR they sent only the basics for the a/c's and letter to say that she has to list EXACTLY what info she wants or they won't suppy it. That is one helluva list to typ up, they must think we won't and go away :lol:

 

I thibk, like you Caro, they are skirting round their DPA obligations with folk :mad:

Dipply75

 

I am in no way a legal advisor and only speak from my own experiences and the helpful advice of those in the same boat! :p

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very strange, just found a link to my thread on Twitter...for some claims management company??? :confused:

Dipply75

 

I am in no way a legal advisor and only speak from my own experiences and the helpful advice of those in the same boat! :p

Link to post
Share on other sites

The secured / not secured thing is interesting.

It would be interesting to find out if the loan was ever secured, there must be a way of finding this out. I don't know if you could ask your mortgage supplier if there was ever another loan secured against your property.

 

If you do find out that there was never a loan secured, and they are claiming it was, when your copy of the contract says it wasn't, then this could be an interesting case as they have clearly altered the contract, which from a legal stance would probably null and void the whole contract ... I guess meaning they should repay the full amount paid plus interest.

 

Im not sure on this though, but as a starting point it could be good to find out exactly if the loan was secured or not. Altering a signed contract is clearly fraud, so if you can prove that the loan was never secured and that they've altered the contract they'll be in a world of trouble and I would throw the book at them.

01/08/06- Royal Bank of Scotland - S.A.R sent

24/08/06- Royal Bank of Scotland - Statements Received

31/08/06- Royal Bank of Scotland - 1st Request sent

13/09/06- Royal Bank of Scotland - LBA sent

23/09/06- Royal Bank of Scotland - Offer received £1544 (Thanks but no thanks)

02/10/06- Royal Bank of Scotland - *WON* Full settlement

Link to post
Share on other sites

How did you get on with that PPI, any luck?

 

Other events in life took over when I started investigating this so I haven't dealt with this yet. I need to get on to it myself

 

Oh, just to add, even though friend send a full SAR they sent only the basics for the a/c's and letter to say that she has to list EXACTLY what info she wants or they won't suppy it. That is one helluva list to typ up, they must think we won't and go away :lol:

 

I thibk, like you Caro, they are skirting round their DPA obligations with folk :mad:

 

I'm afraid they're notorious for this. Complain to the Information Commissioners Office, and also try contacting Clydesdale's compliance department. Some peeps have had success following this route.

 

Very strange, just found a link to my thread on Twitter...for some claims management company??? :confused:

 

Hmmm. Is there any mention on your Twitter about this, or anything to identify you on here?

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

Advice & opinions given by Caro 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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I did a simple google search on Clydesdale Bank mis-sold PPI and a Twitter for ClaimLine UK came up - they had a link to my thread on their 'updates' bit....I don't have a twitter.

 

Doesn't bother me personally but just so CAG knows, I think it's a bit cheeky to use a link to your site to essentially help advertise their 'service'.

 

Do you want the link?

 

Actually just had a look at their sit and their T&C's and they charge 20% +VAT and £250 admin fees for various things. Not the sort of company I think anyone should consider using, and not linked to the CAG : (

Edited by Dipply75

Dipply75

 

I am in no way a legal advisor and only speak from my own experiences and the helpful advice of those in the same boat! :p

Link to post
Share on other sites

As for the DPA waffle from them, sending this:

 

LETTER BEFORE ACTION

Section 7 – Data Protection Act 1998

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Accounts: XXXXXXXX

 

I am in receipt of the documents that you have supplied in response to my Data Protection Act information request dated 3rd July 2009. The disclosure of personal data is incomplete in that at least the following documents are missing.

 

1) You have failed to provide a complete list of transactions and charges. Only a partial transaction statement for loan account no XXXXXXXX was provided from only 16/10/06 to 15/06/09 - 27 months are missing.

2) You have provided no notes, or documents relating to any Insurances, including payment protection insurance i.e.: No demands & needs statement, no pertinent personal, employment or health checks relating to the suitability of the policy, no details of the insurer or underwriter, no screenshots of the application, no financial breakdown (premium, commission, insurance premium tax payable).

3) You have provided no notes, or documents relating to instances of manual intervention, details of any charges or security held on my property or data communicated to third parties (credit reference agencies etc).

This is not an exhaustive list by any means, it is just an example of some of the information I am missing.

 

In your letter dated 7th July 2009 you quoted Section 7, subsection 3 of the Act, stating you are not obliged to comply with any request unless you are supplied with such information as you may reasonably require to locate the information that person seeks and you will not supply any other account information unless I can quote specific account numbers.

Details of my other accounts would be directly linked to the accounts already quoted as my personal loan consolidated my other accounts and they were all serviced from my bank account. Therefore I believe the details I have already provided are more than adequate for locating any previous accounts, especially in a banking institution with integrated computer systems and would be in a ‘relevant filing system’. My local branch is able to see all these accounts instantly just by inputting my bank account details.

I find your assertion that you are unable to provide anything except the basic account details without further information misleading, wrong and wholly unreasonable and interpret this as a deliberate attempt to stop me from accessing the personal data relevant to my complaint against the bank.

Should you insist that I have not provided enough information to locate the information I have listed as missing, please confirm this, along with your reasons and I will refer the issue to the Information Commissioner to decide. Please also confirm the name of your nominated Data Protection Officer.

Accordingly, I have to tell you that you have not yet complied with your obligations under the Data Protection Act 1998.

 

You have a further 26 days to comply

Dipply75

 

I am in no way a legal advisor and only speak from my own experiences and the helpful advice of those in the same boat! :p

Link to post
Share on other sites

And they sent a questionnaire that asked basically everything except the colour of my grannies underwear:

 

Full financial details from the date of application, salary, outgoings, dependants, full employment circumstances, loan details, loan application details, PPI application details, recollection of events, the works!

 

Basically asking for everything that should be in their system anyhoo. So sending letter saying not filling it in as you should have all this already, and gave answers to why it was mssold (again).

Dipply75

 

I am in no way a legal advisor and only speak from my own experiences and the helpful advice of those in the same boat! :p

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not only should they already have the information, if you had it you wouldn't be asking for it. Salary, outgoings, employment details etc are not details they need to comply with a SAR. I would complain about that to the ICO too.

 

Regarding the claims company if you'd send a link to my cag email which is my username followed by @consumeractiongroup.co.uk I'd be grateful. I don't know if anything can be done about it, but it's worth looking into IMO.

 

Why would anyone want to pay for something they can do themselves for free.:rolleyes:

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

Advice & opinions given by Caro 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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Caro, did not make that post clear. The questionnaire was for the PPI claim. Over 20 questions! Sent this letter, will update with their response:

 

I am in receipt of your letter dated 9th July 2009 and am extremely unhappy at the apparent delays in investigating my complaint. I do appreciate you have 8 weeks to resolve my complaint but I have been given no explanation as to why this has been delayed again, yet I am now being asked to complete a questionnaire, in what I can only assume is an attempt to gain information about the sale of the insurances disputed which should already be in your records.

 

I am confused by this request, weeks after receiving my initial complaint, which already stated my reasons and I also clearly explained my reasons to the branch manager when attempting to lodge this complaint on 19th June 2009. I am also very concerned that almost the entire questionnaire is asking for details you should already hold in your system from our loan application, and am at a loss as to why you require me to try and find time to dig out old financial details etc and provide these again. The only questions I need to answer (again) are questions 18 to 20 – which I assume I have to provide more detail on (again).

 

After 3 weeks it is clear that the basic paperwork involved in the sale has not even been reviewed yet. Again, I expect a review to ensure the sale of the above mentioned policy was fair, reasonable and in my best interest and the relevant facts to be taken into consideration:

 

1 - Our employment status at the time, which was clearly explained to your advisor at length whilst applying, would have actually rendered the policy useless. I was self-employed and (I now note) not even covered as the 2nd person on the agreement. Mr Friend worked for our local authority, XX Council, which provided more than adequate accident/sickness and death benefit as a standard work benefit, and operated a no redundancies policy. I can find little or no circumstance in which Mr Friend would have been able to make a claim. Any extremely limited circumstances in which he MAY have been able to claim were then certainly not worth the cost of this expensive insurance.

 

2 – We explained at length our employment circumstances to your advisor and, despite a very strong (and in my opinion very misleading) sales pitch, we completely refused the insurance. Your advisor made no attempt to explain relevant exclusions, ask health related questions, complete demands & needs etc, or provide any ppi details, leaflets or booklets as we had already refused the offer. The agreement was literally slid across the table and we were asked to simply sign the bottom.

 

 

4 – Considering the sales pitch used by your advisor and his actions in then adding an expensive policy to our loan anyway despite being aware of our circumstances and refusal, I can only assume your advisor had a financial interest in selling this policy. Please confirm if your advisor received any commission or incentive, whether bonus or target related or not, for the sale of this insurance.

 

 

In your response to my Subject Access Request, you state you have provided all information relating to this loan account. I note you have supplied absolutely no documentation relating to the PPI, despite my specific request for this. No demands & needs statement, no pertinent personal, employment or health checks relating to the suitability of the policy, no details of the insurer or underwriter, no copy of the application. The PPI element details were specifically requested and was also part of this loan therefore you have not supplied all the relevant information and I require copies of these documents.

 

Even though you have provided a statement showing only half the transactions on a 60 month loan, I note the for the first 34 months the full monthly instalment of £234.62 was deducted from the servicing bank account, yet only varying amounts of between £175-£185 were applied to the loan account? I will require a full explanation of this along with the other irregularities on my account but in this instance, please clarify if this monthly shortfall was in anyway related to my Insurance payments. I am concerned that I actually paid the PPI element of the loan in 34 months yet was charged interest over 60 months.

 

Further to this, I have still received no acknowledgement or response to the serious issues raised in my letter of 3rd July 2009 and require clarification on these matters also - explanation as to how the signatures from a ‘scanned’ copy of the agreement can be different, the need for a ‘cooling off’ period and if this loan was processed as ‘secured’. Please also clarify urgently if there has been any security place on my property.

 

I have not returned your questionnaire for the reasons listed above – every question is requesting details you should already hold in your system - but have answered the relevant questions in this letter. Should you have any further genuine queries please ensure these are put in writing to which you will receive a prompt response. Should you require extra time to review the sale of my PPI policy or you feel I am not entitled to this review, please confirm this along with your reasons.

 

 

 

 

As stated in my letter dated 19 June 2009, unless my complaint has been investigated and there has been some attempt at resolution within the 8 week timescale, I will pass this to the FOS for investigation and I will be advising them of your failure to follow your own complaints procedure.

 

In Summary

Actually now investigate my complaint and confirm your findings urgently.

Provide the information missing from my Subject Access request

Confirm if your advisor received any incentive for the sale of this insurance.

Clarify if the shortfall in payments to the loan account relate in any way to the PPI.

Acknowledge and clarify the irregularities in the loan paperwork – differences, signatures, security, cooling off period etc.

Dipply75

 

I am in no way a legal advisor and only speak from my own experiences and the helpful advice of those in the same boat! :p

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...