Advent Computer Training (Barclays Partner Finance)Info and discussion thread

[cashins]

Training firm goes bust leaving unemployed paying for non-existent qualifications - The Daily Record

 

Some things never change with banks and finance companies.

 

Just to the right of the article, (under google Ads) you will find:

 

'Instant Loan for Unemployed' - which brings you this:

 

Instant Loans Online | Instant Cash | Wonga.com® Official Site

 

Glad to know 'responsible lending' is alive and well, just as well as the APR is errrr - 2689%

 

David

Edited December 31, 2010 by HSBCrusher

[Bluedo]

Jeez there worse than Barclays and Wonga has loads of threads on this site too.

for £400 for 30days you pay back £525 .48 they're crooks these companies shouldn't be advertised.

[panliberski]

Training firm goes bust leaving unemployed paying for non-existent qualifications - The Daily Record

 

Some things never change with banks and finance companies.

 

Just to the right of the article, (under google Ads) you will find:

 

'Instant Loan for Unemployed' - which brings you this:

 

Instant Loans Online | Instant Cash | Wonga.com® Official Site

 

Glad to know 'responsible lending' is alive and well, just as well as the APR is errrr - 2689%

 

David

 

woooooooooooooot?

Edited December 31, 2010 by HSBCrusher

[Bluedo]

Theft (Amendment) Act 1996

 

1996 CHAPTER 62

 

Theft (Amendment) Act 1996 (c. 62)

[Fuzzbutt]

Hi Murdod

Here's a link to it murdod, Has anyone actually received any of this training they are saying has been provided? They keep saying it implying that we have been dealt with when in truth we have sod all no money no training nothing but grief and a whole lot of hassle.

 

"We refute any suggestion that our decision to end our partnership with some companies in the training sector led to their collapse.

"We have written to Mr Lindsay as we have sourced alternative training for him. We have found Mr Scott and Mr Druce alternative training."

My readers are left to take their cases to the Financial Ombudsman Service, who have already received 100 complaints about failed training fi rms and upheld the majority of the 50 cases they have looked at so far.

 

Training firm goes bust leaving unemployed paying for non-existent qualifications - The Daily Record

 

Ah, thanks Bluedo. I'd thought it was the Daily Mail on Sunday - no wonder I couldn't find it!

Well, at least the FOS is seeing merit in the complaints. That is good news.

[Bluedo]

Ah, thanks Bluedo. I'd thought it was the Daily Mail on Sunday - no wonder I couldn't find it!

Well, at least the FOS is seeing merit in the complaints. That is good news.

 

Hi Fuzz,

Yes it is good news, hopefully everyone will get the same outcome.

Barclay's when approached by any of these guys keep playing the we have provided another training company like there is no cause to answer they make me mad The Sunday Mail Judge usually fights your corner but like all the reports I've read Barclay's are denying anything is amiss unbelievable:eek:

[Mustard2243]

My case has gone for adjudication now with the FOS now. The world is changing and there is no place for bankers like these anymore.

[Fuzzbutt]

Let's face it....our case is solid and the FOS is beginning to agree now cases are being resolved and awarded in students favour.

 

There was a clear Breach of contract as there was a nearly 8 week gap before Barclays announced Computeach after Advent's collapse.

There is no 'like for like' and there is clear evidence for that (the legal team have my comparison notes and documentation when I did a bit of research into Computeach's web design course compared to the Advent brochure, just as one example).

There is also clear evidence of mis-selling by Advent salespeople which will undermine the contracts from the start - finance offered to unsuitable people who were not properly vetted (unemployed and part-time workers), false promises of job placements after your first qualification etc.

 

Barclays have dug themselves a big hole. I had to laugh when I read a copy of the reply Paul Noble (Barclays PF Managing Director) sent to Bristol Trading Standards when they took up my complaint. It was the same arrogant, oft repeated nonsense we received in all our letters from them (we have found a suitable provider etc etc)...the idiot couldn't even get my case details right yet had the audacity to write a pompous, dismissive letter to an officer of TS!

 

They'll be eating their words soon!

[Bluedo]

My case has gone for adjudication now with the FOS now. The world is changing and there is no place for bankers like these anymore.

 

Won't be long now Mustard and you can shout the good news and let us know what they say, we just hear about people getting a result but it'll mean more when we know you. Good Luck!!

[JuiceyBuns]

Got my fob off letter over the weekend taking my account off hold and setting up my DD. I canceled the DD and phoned up to find out why they had set it up again as I had not authorized it. The BPF rep apologized and canceled it at their end too, she advised that they didn't have authority to set it back up without permission as they didn't cancel it.

 

I then spoke to some dragon in their customer relations department that said the FSA rules don't count and I still need to pay, even if the account is in dispute, as they have provided an alternative. I told her that CompuTeach wasn't like for like and that they couldn't even get the course correct. She asked if I'd registered and verified my course with them. I said no as doing so I was accepting them as my new provider. She responded by saying that I would have to pay regardless of whether I accepted them or not. I just laughed at her and said that I'd confirmed this morning that my complaint is currently being dealt with by the FOS and a letter will be sent soon. I also advised that I had sought legal advise too. Go Class action!!!!!!

[Bluedo]

Thanks Fuzz that certainly put it all together and when you see it like that they don't have a leg to stand on. They are the most arrogant company I have ever had to deal with in fact I can't believe the audacity of trying their luck to continue to get people to pay overcharged costs for a course that was useless

and they deliberately set up people under false pretences ie getting you a job in 3months utter crap. I hope they get what's coming to them soon;)

[Fuzzbutt]

Yup, I think we will all be singing 'Who's sorry now' to BPF down the phonelines!

 

I for one fancy sending them an email to their customer relations dept with a big pictre of a wiggling bum dropping it's trousers and mooning, signed "kiss that...love Fuzzbutt!"

Must have a scout on the web for a suitable pic!

[Bluedo]

Yup, I think we will all be singing 'Who's sorry now' to BPF down the phonelines!

 

I for one fancy sending them an email to their customer relations dept with a big pictre of a wiggling bum dropping it's trousers and mooning! Must have a scout

on the web for a suitable pic!

 

 

Priceless post it up and we'll all do it. We could send them back all their fob off letters as well tell them to recycle them as Barclay's are endangering the planet

[Fuzzbutt]

Won't be long now Mustard and you can shout the good news and let us know what they say, we just hear about people getting a result but it'll mean more when we know you. Good Luck!!

 

Mine has gone to an adjudicator too now, but he did phone me and warn it won't be an immediate ruling but it is a step further down the line now.

 

I think the guys who have had a positive result must have been Access 2 students who got complaints in quickly, as they seem to just be getting round to Advent now.

[Fuzzbutt]

Priceless post it up and we'll all do it. We could send them back all their fob off letters as well tell them to recycle them as Barclay's are endangering the planet

 

Heh heh....will do, Bluedo. See if I can find one that has sound and animation, blowing a raspberry!

[Bluedo]

She responded by saying that I would have to pay regardless of whether I accepted them or not.

Hi Juiceybuns,

I would imagine they have been contacted by the FOS yet they STILL!! persist in repeating over and over you wil have to pay whether you accept them or not.

Why won't they get it through their head they are not the law they can't force people to accept this just because they say so.

[Tricla]

I got my final response letter from BPF this weekend. They are quite certain that they have done all that they can and that there is no recourse under S75.

 

The letter was just the standard fob off letter with a few amendments to include how Computurd do offer the same services as Advent did like local exams and resits at no extra cost etc.

 

It asks me to provide written proof that I was promised a job finding service, that the course was open ended and for any other differences that I have mentioned.

 

Seems that they are trying everything to con us.

 

Now that I've had a final response the FOS can take over hopefully. I'll be forwarding it to Fuzz's lawyer too.

[Boosh]

Hi not been on here for awhile, just trying to catch up, what does it mean when it goes to an adjudicator? Thanks

[Boosh]

I received this letter on Saturday

 

 

I have reviewed your letter and have noted our comments below

 

Where you state that advent consulting ltdofered you a local job placement I would require documentary evidence to back your claim. Our legal team has reveiwed both your egreements and nowhere on it does it state that advent would offer this service. Unless you can supply documentary evidence to back your claim I cannot investigate the matter further.

 

Where you state that computeach have given you a time limit to complete your training coursebut advent did not, please find enclosed a copy of your terms and conditions with advent. This clearly notes that you have two years from the start date to complete your training. By you signing the agreement you acknowledged you had read and understood it's terms and conditions and wished to be legally bound by them.

 

I have been in contact with Computeach who has confirmed there will be no charges for re-sits of exams. They have also advised that you can sit an exam at a local test centre. You will have to contact Computeach to arrange an exam voucher.

 

I would like to assure you that CT have met our stringent selection criteria and we are satisfied that they are a reputable company, capable of fulfilling your contract. We believe that the standard of service that is available to you from CT is as good as, if not better, than the service which would have been provided by Advent.

 

Our liability is to ensure that you are provided with the goods or services we have financed. When we received confirmation that Advent had ceased to trade and were no longer supporting your training needs, we immediately entered into negotiations with alternative training providers.

 

I am sure you will appreciate that this was a complex issue and whilst I understand it may have temporarily interrupted your training I am pleased to confirm that the new training provider is now in place.

 

To ensure you receive maximum support with your training and excellent customer service, we have contracted CT International as the new training provider.

 

Payments remain due blah blah

 

 

Has anyone else had a similar letter. I have a couple of problems with this

 

1. I can't prove the job placement sales tactic

 

2. I can't prove that advent allowed us to take as long as we like

 

3. The sales rep never left me a copy of my Advent contract or my credit agreement. I know have a copy of my credit agreement, but not a clue about the T&C's from advent.

 

4. This letter says 'please find enclosed a copy of your terms and conditions with advent'. This was not enclosed

 

I can't write back, cos I can't prove anything

 

Please help, any advice

[Bluedo]

Hi Boosh,

If like me you were lied to then this is misrepresentation at the time the contract was signed cause let's face it who would have signed unless they believed these clowns would get you a job in IT. On condition of the lies we were told we were induced to sign otherwise we would not have agreed to this.

They are saying nowhere in the contract does it say you would get a job well nowhere on the same contract does it say we need to accept incompucrap with a lawsuit trailing behind them.

Did you join the class action being taken if so then don't communicate with Barclays other than to tell them you are taking legal advice.

Anyone who is phoning them they will screw your head and bully you to pay so why give them that chance they are now saying CT are offering resits since when since they are moving the goalposts to suit themselves.

 

 

Misrepresentation is a contract law concept. It means a false statement of fact made by one party to another party, which has the effect of inducing that party into the contract. For example, under certain circumstances, false statements or promises made by a seller of goods regarding the quality or nature of the product that the seller has may constitute misrepresentation. A finding of misrepresentation allows for a remedy of rescission and sometimes damages depending on the type of misrepresentation.

According to Gordon v Selico (1986) 18 HLR 219 it is possible to make a misrepresentation either by words or by conduct, although not everything said or done is capable of constituting a misrepresentation. Generally, statements of opinion or intention are not statements of fact in the context of misrepresentation.[1] If one party claims specialist knowledge on the topic discussed, then it is more likely for the courts to hold a statement of opinion by that party as a statement of fact.[2]

[Fuzzbutt]

I got my final response letter from BPF this weekend. They are quite certain that they have done all that they can and that there is no recourse under S75.

 

The letter was just the standard fob off letter with a few amendments to include how Computurd do offer the same services as Advent did like local exams and resits at no extra cost etc.

 

It asks me to provide written proof that I was promised a job finding service, that the course was open ended and for any other differences that I have mentioned.

 

Seems that they are trying everything to con us.

 

Now that I've had a final response the FOS can take over hopefully. I'll be forwarding it to Fuzz's lawyer too.

 

Good one, Tricla. Any correspondence anyone receives now please save it and send a copy to Hausfeld.

[Fuzzbutt]

I received this letter on Saturday

 

 

I have reviewed your letter and have noted our comments below

 

Where you state that advent consulting ltdofered you a local job placement I would require documentary evidence to back your claim. Our legal team has reveiwed both your egreements and nowhere on it does it state that advent would offer this service. Unless you can supply documentary evidence to back your claim I cannot investigate the matter further.

 

Where you state that computeach have given you a time limit to complete your training coursebut advent did not, please find enclosed a copy of your terms and conditions with advent. This clearly notes that you have two years from the start date to complete your training. By you signing the agreement you acknowledged you had read and understood it's terms and conditions and wished to be legally bound by them.

 

I have been in contact with Computeach who has confirmed there will be no charges for re-sits of exams. They have also advised that you can sit an exam at a local test centre. You will have to contact Computeach to arrange an exam voucher.

 

I would like to assure you that CT have met our stringent selection criteria and we are satisfied that they are a reputable company, capable of fulfilling your contract. We believe that the standard of service that is available to you from CT is as good as, if not better, than the service which would have been provided by Advent.

 

Our liability is to ensure that you are provided with the goods or services we have financed. When we received confirmation that Advent had ceased to trade and were no longer supporting your training needs, we immediately entered into negotiations with alternative training providers.

 

I am sure you will appreciate that this was a complex issue and whilst I understand it may have temporarily interrupted your training I am pleased to confirm that the new training provider is now in place.

 

To ensure you receive maximum support with your training and excellent customer service, we have contracted CT International as the new training provider.

 

Payments remain due blah blah

 

 

Has anyone else had a similar letter. I have a couple of problems with this

 

1. I can't prove the job placement sales tactic

 

2. I can't prove that advent allowed us to take as long as we like

 

3. The sales rep never left me a copy of my Advent contract or my credit agreement. I know have a copy of my credit agreement, but not a clue about the T&C's from advent.

 

4. This letter says 'please find enclosed a copy of your terms and conditions with advent'. This was not enclosed

 

I can't write back, cos I can't prove anything

 

Please help, any advice

 

Boosch, please dont' worry.

They have nothing on us and please keep all the letters and emails and copy them to our legal team.

Thanks.

 

BPF are adapting their tactics now. They are fools, clutching at straws. Don't believe their lies and keep at 'em!

Edited May 10, 2010 by Fuzzbutt

[panliberski]

Have Anyone Received Any Response From Bpf In Regards Of section 11 Of The Contract With Advent? (term Extension) ??? I Can't Get Rid Of The Impression It's Being Treated As Sth Completely Non-existent Yet In My Opinion It Could Be A Silver Bullet Against Ct

[Fuzzbutt]

Hi Boosh,

If like me you were lied to then this is misrepresentation at the time the contract was signed cause let's face it who would have signed unless they believed these clowns would get you a job in IT. On condition of the lies we were told we were induced to sign otherwise we would not have agreed to this.

They are saying nowhere in the contract does it say you would get a job well nowhere on the same contract does it say we need to accept incompucrap with a lawsuit trailing behind them.

Did you join the class action being taken if so then don't communicate with Barclays other than to tell them you are taking legal advice.

Anyone who is phoning them they will screw your head and bully you to pay so why give them that chance they are now saying CT are offering resits since when since they are moving the goalposts to suit themselves.

 

 

Misrepresentation is a contract law concept. It means a false statement of fact made by one party to another party, which has the effect of inducing that party into the contract. For example, under certain circumstances, false statements or promises made by a seller of goods regarding the quality or nature of the product that the seller has may constitute misrepresentation. A finding of misrepresentation allows for a remedy of rescission and sometimes damages depending on the type of misrepresentation.

According to Gordon v Selico (1986) 18 HLR 219 it is possible to make a misrepresentation either by words or by conduct, although not everything said or done is capable of constituting a misrepresentation. Generally, statements of opinion or intention are not statements of fact in the context of misrepresentation.[1] If one party claims specialist knowledge on the topic discussed, then it is more likely for the courts to hold a statement of opinion by that party as a statement of fact.[2]

 

Well put, Bluedo. !!!

We were mis-led and now they are moving the goal posts! Everyone save your emails and letters and pass them as evidence of BPF deceit to Hausfeld.

[sburymozza]

any news guys i got me letter fom fos saying they reciverd my stuff, what did every1 send to them