'valid' reasons for credit card interest rate alterations

[egg-sterminator]

That's interesting thank you,i suppose another way roun dit would be to try and increase the deposit maybe

Hi blue do they have a signed CCA as if they do not they breach the Data protection act and have illegally processed your Data with third parties ?

[captain2]

You could also send your explanation in to the CRA and they have to publish that too - if for instance the accounts were in dispute because you did not agree with the balance due or interest charges or any mis-sold PPI that would at least present a reasonable explanation and a balance to it -

[InformedSearcher]

You could also send your explanation in to the CRA and they have to publish that too - if for instance the accounts were in dispute because you did not agree with the balance due or interest charges or any mis-sold PPI that would at least present a reasonable explanation and a balance to it -

 

 

I'm sure that a CRA will insert a notice of correction for upto 28 days. That means the person holding the account must make a responce within that time - adjust, deny or confirm changes. Once done the NOC will be removed. I don't think there's a facility for you to attach notes with no time limit.

 

Michael

[basa48]

Hi there ! I mean 'unenforceable'' the recent case with Royal Bank of Scotland and McGuffrey recently where the borrower had never made any payments under a loan agreement and he sued via his claims advisor on grounds he could not be defaulted if agreement was unenforceable - judge held that even if the agreement is unenforceable the debt is still there and thus can be reported to the CRA's. It is potentially unfair and much depends on having good credit rating. I have a mortgage so as long as I can keep up with that I don't need any more credit my job now is to hang onto what Ive got. It sounds a tough situation arising in your case can you get help somewhere or a housing association place ?

 

I'm not sure why everyone is so upset by the McGuffick verdict.

 

The case was about an enforceable agreement that became unenforceable only whilst RBS located the agreement and then subsequently whilst the bank refused to supply the required account statements in order to precipitate the hearing.

 

Of course the creditor had a right to issue a default. The debtor had not paid for 8 months against a totally valid loan account.

 

The idea an unenforceable agreement becomes completely void once declared unenforceable is also not right. It simply means (in this case at least) the creditor cannot enforce an otherwise valid agreement.

 

The judge himself in the case admitted it had little value as a test case entirely because of the very particular circumstance under which it arose, i.e. a temporarily unenforceable agreement.

 

As far as the Supreme Court judgement yesterday. I'm afraid again I have to agree with the judges. All they have stated is that the OFT cannot look into the unfairness of prescribed and published unauthorised overdraft fees because they are not separately agreed as part of a contract, they are "part of the price paid by the customer for the banking services provided."

 

The judges even suggested the OFT had "other avenues" open to them to fight this case.

[MandM]

subbing

[captain2]

Anyone know if bank charges are subject to VAT ? For example in a business account a VAT registered account holder could at least claim the VAT back ?

[michellej1]

Valid reason for credit card interest rate alterations ,.. Yeah to Rip you off ,.. and keep you in debt ,..