Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Do I send the solicitor a CPR 31.14 form  Or just a letter saying the limited company does not exist so no one to sue
    • are we getting there now .thks DEFENCE  The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and 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 replied to a request made under a pre action protocol   letter of claim  and a Consumer Credit Agreement request , pursuant to s.77 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 )request made   on 19/11/2018 the reply contained  incomplete reconstitutions and with  with documents missing from the list in my request a cpr 31.14 request was made to the claiments solicitor on  02/06/2019 which the claiments solicitor has refused stating cpr  31 does not aplly even though no track has yet been allocated  1- The Claimant claims £657.10  is owed under a regulated loan agreement with  money in advance r. I did not recall the precise details  and have sought verification from the claimant and the claimants solicitor by way of a Section 77 and CPR 31.14 request who are yet to fully comply. 2-the  Claimants statement regarding the assignation of the debt is denied. I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served on the defendant from either the Claimant or  money in advance  3 The claimant has produced  a reconstituted version of  the original agreement , it is considered that this is not a true copy of the executed agreement as it is the claiment has yet to  produced a copy of any legal assignment of this debt 4 It is therefore  not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to: a) Show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for  b) Show the nature of the breach and evidence by way of a Default Notice pursuant to sec 87.1 CCA 1974. c) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.  d as  per Civil Procedureicon 16.5 it is expected that the Claimants prove the allegation that the money is owed.
    • There's a difference in buying a car privately or at auction, and buying one from a retail seller, regardless of the price. buying from a dealer you have certain statutory rights as a consumer, and you pay a premium for the supposed benefit of buying from reputable source.    An engine management light could be a minor problem, the issue here though is that the seller delivered the car with the light on, then dumped it and made a quick exit, that gives a fair idea of his attitude to customer service. If the engine management light came on while the car was in the process of being delivered, any reasonable seller would have told the buyer the light had come on and taken the car straight back to sort it, not done a runner and hoped the customer wouldn't notice.
  • Our picks

    • My personal experiences of Future Comms 
       
      Don't touch them owe me £500 since January 2019 make excuse after excuse. Seem they always have software problems sending money out. Keep saying they will call back or email nothing been chasing it now for 6 mths the phone staff always have the same banter we will chase it up and get back to you then nothing!
      • 0 replies
    • Future Comms is a Big Con. How to get out of it. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/417058-future-comms-is-a-big-con-how-to-get-out-of-it/
        • Like
      • 4 replies
    • Future Comms issues. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/416504-future-comms-issues/
      • 5 replies
    • This is a bit of a lengthy one but I’ll summerise best as possible.
       
      THIS IS HOW THE PHONECALL WENT 
       
      I was contacted by future comms by phone, they stated that they could beat any phone contract I have , (I am a limited company but just myself that needs a business phone and I am the only worker) 
      I told future comms my deal, £110 per month with a phone and a virtual landline, they confirmed that they could beat that, £90 per month with a phone , virtual landline  they also confirmed they would pay Vodafone (previous provider) the termination fee. As I am in business, naturally I was open to making a deal. So we proceeded. 
      Future comms then revealed that the contract would be with PLAN.COM and the airtime would be provided by 02, I instantly told them that this would break the deal as I have poor 02 signal in the house where I live as my partner is on 02 and constantly complaining about bad signal
      the salesman assured me he would send a signal booster box out with the phone so I would have perfect signal.
      so far so good.....
      i then explained this is the only mobile phone I use for business and pleasure, so therefore I didn’t want any disconnection time in the slightest between the switchover from Vodafone to 02
      the salesman then confirmed that the existing phone would only be disconnected once the new phone was switched on.
      so far so good....
      • 14 replies
BankFodder

Financial ombudsman comes under fire as insider reveals litany of bad practices

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 959 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

Before giving specific advice can you give us an idea of how much is alleged to be outstanding, which bank it is or which debt collector it has been sold to, and if it is already on your credit reference file.


RMW

"If you want my parking space, please take my disability" Common car park sign in France.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sure that I have read on this site that OFT have stated that assuming a debt is correct simply because it exists is unfair It is in the debt industry forum ill see if i can find it


HTH (Hope This Helps) RDM2006

 

THE FORCE (OF CAG) IS WITH YOU

;)

 

We've Helped You To Claim - Now Help Us Remain

A live Site - Make a Donation

 

All advice and opinions given by people on this site are personal, and are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, please seek qualified professional legal Help.

 

However, if you have found any advice you have been given helpful.

Why not show your gratitude And

Click the * on the post you found helpful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am sure that I have read on this site that OFT have stated that assuming a debt is correct simply because it exists is unfair It is in the debt industry forum ill see if i can find it

 

Thanks rdm2006 I really appreciate your help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the financial ombudsman were a dissapointment. i had a very clear case that judging by their emails to the bank from the DSAR, they supported, only to turn around and agree with the bank at the last minute!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
. when i said i wanted my complaint looked at again the adjudicator rang me and stated that even if i went to the ombudsman things would not change as they had already discussed my complaint with them and the ombudsman was minded to reject my complaint. surely thats not right or legal that i have a right of appeal but its just a token. .

 

FOS dont have an independent appeals procedure. They work on the basis that all 166,000 decisions made by the service last year are correct. But they do maintain that passing a case upwards to an Ombudsman is the FOS 'appeals' process. If the Ombudsmen have pre-empted this and already made their mind up then that drives a coach and horses through the 'appeals' process.

 

I suggest you ask again for an Ombudsman who has not already seen any aspects of your case to review it. If FOS refuse to allow this, complain using the complaints procedure to the Head of Casework and if necessary Independent Assessor. This will be lengthy and (in my experience) won't get you very far, but its worth a try.

 

Whatever you do dont accept the decision unless you are happy with it. Once the decision is accepted that is the end of it ...The Ombudsman's decision is final...there is no appeal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks rdm2006 I really appreciate your help.

 

I havent managed to find it but i know it does exist so you could try stating that oft have already stated that as FOS should know about that anyway, if they do come back to you asking where you got it from we can look again.

 

sorry

 

 

Auntie P - you can also ask for a judicial review but this has costs or risk of costs I believe


HTH (Hope This Helps) RDM2006

 

THE FORCE (OF CAG) IS WITH YOU

;)

 

We've Helped You To Claim - Now Help Us Remain

A live Site - Make a Donation

 

All advice and opinions given by people on this site are personal, and are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, please seek qualified professional legal Help.

 

However, if you have found any advice you have been given helpful.

Why not show your gratitude And

Click the * on the post you found helpful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Myself and my husband have had an complaint with the fos regarding blackhorse and today we had the outcome and they have fallen in favour of them seems from this thread thats no suprices.....

Here is a run down of our case,

Blackhorse wanted to reposses our house in 2006 and we counterclaimed against them regarding the PPI which took 2 years to get to court, 6 weeks before the court date we wrote to blackhorse head office in cardiff asking for a true copy of our orignal credit agreement which we recieved aweek before the court date and we noticed on the credit agreement that the lender had NOT signed the agreement only us the borrowers ,we were told by our solictor who was a no win no fee PPI solictor to bring it up in court,anyway the friday before the start of the court hearing (which was starting the following monday) we recieved the court bundle from blackhorse inhouse solictors SCM and we saw the credit agreement was then signed.

we brought it up in court that we had a copy of our true orignal credit agreement that we had requested from their head office only weeks before and that it was unsigned by them but the one in the court bundle from their inhouse solictors was signed ,the judge agreed to add it to the case but would be unable to us it as eviendance ,the barrister for blackhorse screamed and shouted that they were being ambushed.

anyway we lost the PPI case but the judge refused to allow blackhorse repossion of the house or for us to pay the £4,000 court fees that BH wanted us to pay with 28 days and referred us back to the district judge.

we contacted the financial ombudsman regarding the unsigned credit agreement and we also wrote many letters to blackhorse headoffice asking who had signed the agreement and when ect as it came to light in the court that the agreement was not signed on site any more or signed in front of the borrowers and that the agreement could not have been signed on the same day as we signed as it was not sent off to their edenburgh ofice until 10pm that evening.

Backhorse sent the same agreements to the fos the one unsigned and the other signed we know this as the fos phoned us to ask some questions and the guy at the fos said and that he thought it rather strange that the agreements where photo copys of each other and the same in every detail including a barcode on the side and that one was signed and one was`nt and that he said it was a very straight forward case and that he was passing it on to the adjudicator

anyway we went back to the district judge every couple of mts on the request of the judge to try and settle the case ,in july of this year blackhorse told the judge they had dropped the repossion order and just wanted payments ,but the judge refused to allow payments to them until the judge had seen what the FOS recommended.

The letter arrived today from the fos saing it is not in the remit of there service to make a finding on whether the credit agreement is enforceable and in their view it is a matter that should be decided by the court becuase they are not a court and don`t have the powers to find it unenforceable and that their view is if you borrowed the money you repay the debt.

they go on to say they recieved the 2 agreements plus the advance copy and that on the balance of probailites that the signed credit agreements are genuine copies of the original loan agreement and have original on them and that the first (advanced copy) is just a printed copy with the loan details and the third copy was signed by blackhorse.

but there is nothing said about the 2nd agreement that was unsigned.

they go on to say of course it is possible that a court which is not bound by section 228 of FSMA would reach a different view and would be able to consider legal arguments relating to the case.their decision is not binding if we do not accept it and their consideration of the matter will not prevent us from raising the argument in court.

i know we are due in court on the first avaliable date after the 15th nov this year as the judge had said when we were there last.

I just don`t know where to turn now.

CAN ANYONE ADVISE US WHAT TO DO NOW

Edited by sugg1
PUT IN WRONG PLACE INSTEAD OF STARTING NEW THREAD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FOS are a complete waste of time from the consumer's standpoint and should be scrapped. The only advantage in submitting a claim to FOS is that it is supposed to cost the banks about £400 for each claim.


Arrow Global/MBNA - Discontinued and paid costs

HFO/Morgan Stanley (Barclays) - Discontinued and paid costs

HSBC - Discontinued and paid costs

Nationwide - Ran for cover of stay pending OFT case 3 yrs ago

RBS/Mint - Nothing for 4 yrs after S78 request

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes after reading other threads regarding fos they are waste of time.

but still leaves the same problem some said .....Did you get the decision from the adjudicator at the FOS if so then tell them that you do not accept it and ask them to refer it to a omsbudman for the final decison.

 

but would`nt the omsbudman agree with the adjudicator.

also we have in the court bundle that the credit agreement was not sent to the headoffice till 10pm at night and their hrs of opening are 9am-6pm mon-friday so it would have been impossible to be signed by head office on the 31st january and if it had been signed on the 31st like BH say then how could a true copy of the credit agreement be available to us and the FOS with out them (blackhorse) not having signed it.

on their terms and conditions it says that unless signed by the lender the agreement is unenforceable.

the adjudicator also never mentions the unsigned agreement in deciding her desision

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The ombudsman can overturn a decision by an adjudicator, It is not final until the ombudsman gives a decision (unless you agree with the adjudicator) although I have yet to hear about an overturned case, but you know what they say nothing ventured nothing gained.

 

You are not bound by the decision of the ombudsman either so you can continue in court.

 

As for my personal opinion of FOS it needs scrapping and a new government run organisation set up but funded in a similar way but by doubling the £400 charge, this may act as a deterrant......


HTH (Hope This Helps) RDM2006

 

THE FORCE (OF CAG) IS WITH YOU

;)

 

We've Helped You To Claim - Now Help Us Remain

A live Site - Make a Donation

 

All advice and opinions given by people on this site are personal, and are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, please seek qualified professional legal Help.

 

However, if you have found any advice you have been given helpful.

Why not show your gratitude And

Click the * on the post you found helpful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for my personal opinion of FOS it needs scrapping and a new government run organisation set up but funded in a similar way but by doubling the £400 charge, this may act as a deterrant......

 

 

Hear, Hear...

Complaint against Trader = Take it to Trading Standards

Complaint against business = Take it to Ombudsman

Complaint against Trading Standards or Ombudsman?....DOH...!

 

Absolutely, no adequate deterrent exists... Typical! The message to all of us consumers? If you want something doing... Do it yourself...:!:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes agree ,after months and months awaiting to hear from the fos all they have done is passed the buck back to the court what a waste of time they are and like you say there is no where to complain about them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FOS needs a panel of customers deciding cases, not more bankers lining their pockets with bonuses.


 

What's Best for You?

 

 

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

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

 

Alliance & Leicester Moneyclaim issued 20/1/07 £225.50 full settlement received 29 January 2007

Smile £1,075.50 + interest Email request for payment 24/5/06 received £1,000.50 14/7/06 + £20 30/7/06

Yorkshire Bank Moneyclaim issued 21/6/06 £4,489.39 full settlement received 26 January 2007

:p

 

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's interesting because, so far the staff at the FOS have emphatically denied any financial connection with the financial organisations.

 

 

Its nothing to do with the staff, but this is also common knowledge.

 

As FOS is a free service for the consumer, they have to be funded somehow, they are funded by charging the bank/ financial institution a fee for looking at the complaints they receive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My complaint against the Halifax was supposed to go to the Ombudsman 2 months ago and I had an email today to say its still waiting. I do know the staff are working really long hours, had a call at 8.30 pm one night and 4.00 pm on a Saturday afternoon, the Adjudicator told me she was working on the Sunday as well. Might help to reduce their hours if (a) they actually read the correspondence sent to them and (b) actually absorbed the information given to them in 2 phone calls, plus followed up by an email.

 

this post is so true it's not funny. i have 2 cases with the fos. both of them are against natwest bank. i just received a letter from the adjudicator who said the bank didn't have

to refund a £200 deposit to a company i made, using a debit card which was covered for purchase transaction at the time (upto 45 days). to make matters worse the adjudicator (after 2 phone calls) didn't know i had already taken the case to court and won and was only asking the fos to uphold

the contract i had with natwest, under it's terms and conditions. (with an advantage gold account). the payment protection covers loss, accidental damage

and theft.

when i explained this over the phone the adjudicator had the balls to say that he has a different interuptation of the word "loss" other than the standard definition. i spent 12 minutes trying to get the adjudicator to express what he thought 'loss' meant. after the third attempt, to get a response i gave up.

the ombudsman will no doubt side with the adjudicator and i'll be forced to go to a county court.

does the fos have to accept the CC decision?

Edited by pop_gun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i sent the above case back to the adjudicator and the assessor (the same one no less) called a few days ago to ask for the particulars of my court case.

what irks me is he will no doubt arrive at the same conclusion he had before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Going through the FOS on behalf of my Mum's estate regarding Natwest charges. Am appealing their decision that as the beneficiary of the estate the bank do not have to take into account my financial situation and had already taken into my Mum's parlous financial circumstances when we raised the claim. Any thoughts .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

 

I have a number of cases with FOS but as of yet they have only ruled on one of them.

 

At first they ruled in the banks favour, but after making an official complaint with regards to the incompedence of the adjudicator and the sheer fact that a monkey could have provided a better explanation than her it got esculated to a higher authority and surprise surprise they ruled in my favour.

 

I still haven't got the outcome I require but just the sheer fact that FOS changed the ruling and the bank concerned have now made an offer, albeit they are not admitting liability, I m starting to get somewhere. I have rejected the offer and I won't back off until I get the outcome I want. Failing that I am prepared to take the bank in question to court as by FOS ruling in my favour and the bank concerned making an offer I already 3/4 of the way there.

 

You can read all about it here.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?219490-Claiming-back-PPI-once-they-have-refused-too&p=3187827&highlight=#post3187827

 

Regards

Scrapper Coco 8-)


"I just want to make people silky-smooth!"

 

Scrapper vs MBNA Partial Settlement Success. Saved £13,000 :lol:

Scrapper vs Barclays Bank Plc PPI Reclaim Success £5,500 :lol:

Scrapper vs Barclaycard Partial Settlement Success. Saved £6,000 :lol:

 

Scrapper vs Tesco's FOS upheld complaint. Possible court action to get default removed

 

Scrapper vs Egg (Barclaycard) Awaiting FOS

 

Scrapper vs Barclays Bank Plc Offered made & Refused. This means war :-x

Scrapper vs Barclaycard (Cabot) Waiting 4 years for CCA. Cabot advised irresolvable :lol:

 

Scrapper vs Intelligent Finance. Success

 

Scrapper vs Picture (Webb Resolutions) Success

 

 

Beginner's guide

 

Advice & opinions given by Scrapper are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i've had a few biased decisions (in favour of the bank) where the same Ombudsman has stated (on 3 different accounts and banks) that legal assignment to a debt agency does not matter, the bank was still left with an unpaid balance and hence has used this as a decision to (1) send my refund to the debt agency or (2) let the bank put it towards their write off.

 

the problem with me accepting either offer was that i'd settled the whole balances at the debt agencies and was fully entitled to the refund but in each case the bank offered to repay to the account at the agency. The FOS didn't check whether there was a balance or not and accepted what the bank offered.

 

the FOS have no power to include a third party into a complaint (I asked them to write to the DCA for info) but seem to have the power to pay them my refund, with no investigation into whether they're entitled to it.

 

this was in 2008 and since then i haven't been able to budge the banks in each case. They refer to the FOS decision (because it favoured them) and say they cannot look into it any more.

 

what can i do with these accounts (with the FOS) as i don't want to take the banks to court (charges/PPI are over 6 years now) and i am losing thousands in total.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The FOS don't handle any money. They only instruct. Unless informed to the contrary, the company involved will use any award against your outstanding account if it's in arrears.

 

I've been through the whole system and it took over 2 years, but I wouldn't change a thing.

 

Can I be brutally honest without being ripped apart?

 

People expect far too much for nothing and don't help theirselves. Some put in claims for next to nothing on bank charges that they have had control over and expect an instant outcome in their favour. Others do it as part of a battle to save their homes and are tied into far more complex contracts.

 

Of course they are funded by the financial institutions. Who else would you expect to do it? They can't be truly independent and have the knowledge to deal with the level of complaints. Who can? Everyone has a connection with finances or would be open to *cough* bribes.

 

Please remember this is just my opinion but I do think a lot of the bank charges, and minor complaints results, have put a lot of people off going through the FOS for more important issues. It's not an easy solution, it's not a get rich quick scheme but with a bit of patience it can bring results. Obviously I had gripes at the time but looking back it was all done fairly, I was fully informed and they did everything they said they would.

 

On the form they ask what it is you want. All I put was, 'for the account to be properly conducted and to be treated fairly' . No amount of money could have made up for the losses. It worked, and I've no doubt by now I'd have lost my home if I hadn't have gone through the FOS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Unless informed to the contrary, the company involved will use any award against your outstanding account if it's in arrears.

 

And of there's no money owed to either the bank or the debt agency (to whom the account was sold) after the consumer has paid in full (including charges/PPI and associated interest) then who receives the refund?

 

In my case, it was the debt agency even though I showed proof of paying the debt(s) off in full. The FOS just didn't want to know. Another worrying thing i came across was that the bank can keep the refund towards its write off when it sold the debt, meaning even after i have paid the debt in full to the DCA, the bank can always show a write off balance.

 

In my case, it was either accept the offer to send the refund to the DCA (to whom i didn't owe anything) or let the bank put it towards its write off and the Ombudsman stated that "legal assignment to the DCA does not matter to me, the bank was still left with an upaid balance".

 

Totally unfair in my cases and i can't change the decision or take the banks to court (or even the DCA who got extra money from me because some banks sent them the refund anyway).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And of there's no money owed to either the bank or the debt agency (to whom the account was sold) after the consumer has paid in full (including charges/PPI and associated interest) then who receives the refund?

 

In my case, it was the debt agency even though I showed proof of paying the debt(s) off in full. The FOS just didn't want to know. Another worrying thing i came across was that the bank can keep the refund towards its write off when it sold the debt, meaning even after i have paid the debt in full to the DCA, the bank can always show a write off balance.

 

In my case, it was either accept the offer to send the refund to the DCA (to whom i didn't owe anything) or let the bank put it towards its write off and the Ombudsman stated that "legal assignment to the DCA does not matter to me, the bank was still left with an upaid balance".

 

Totally unfair in my cases and i can't change the decision or take the banks to court (or even the DCA who got extra money from me because some banks sent them the refund anyway).

 

The FOS decision is not legally binding on the consumer, only the company, so you must have signed to say that was acceptable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could prove that wrong but the story is far too long - it includes FOS changing "the truth the WHOLE truth" and made it "the truth, as given, if backed up by leaflets".

 

The fact an option was not advised but info was provided on what was advised meant I was fully informed (scratches head huh??)

 

Stating that due to a lack of evidence (info not sent by the bank. i might add) they had to make a decision on the likelyhood of what the bank would have done - found that the bank was more likely to get it right than wrong ---- four weeks later it published a league table and my bank was found to have mis-sold insurance in 86% of its cases (again scratches head - HUH ???)

 

This means that only 14 cases out of 100 were done correctly - and this means it is the most likely thing to happen ---- not by my old maths teacher it isnt.

 

I would really like to know how they worked that one out


HTH (Hope This Helps) RDM2006

 

THE FORCE (OF CAG) IS WITH YOU

;)

 

We've Helped You To Claim - Now Help Us Remain

A live Site - Make a Donation

 

All advice and opinions given by people on this site are personal, and are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, please seek qualified professional legal Help.

 

However, if you have found any advice you have been given helpful.

Why not show your gratitude And

Click the * on the post you found helpful.

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...