Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Paragraph 18 – you are still talking about Boston stolen items. About time this was fixed??? Paragraph 19  In any event, the claimant's PS5 gaming device was correctly declared and correctly valued. The defendant accepted it for carriage and was even prepared to earn extra money by selling sell insurance in case of its loss or damage. New paragraph 20 – this the defendant routinely sells insurance in respect of "no compensation" items (a secondary contract contrary to section 72 CRA 2015) new paragraph above paragraph 20 – the defendant purports to limit its liability in respect of lost or damaged items. This is contrary to section 57 of the consumer rights act 2015. The defendant offers to extend their liability if their customer purchases an insurance cover for an extra sum of money. This insurance is a secondary contract calculated to exclude or limit their liability for the defendants contractual breaches and is contrary to section 72 of the consumer rights act 2015. New paragraph below paragraph 42 – the defendant merely relies on "standard industry practice" You haven't pointed to the place in your bundle of the Telegraph newspaper extract. You have to jiggle the paragraphs around. Even though I have suggested new paragraph numbers, the order I have suggested is on your existing version 5. You will have to work it out for your next version. Good luck!   Let's see version 6 Separately, would you be kind enough to send me an unredacted to me at our admin email address.
    • i think theres been MORE than amble evidence of that and am astonished that criminal proceedings haven't begun.
    • Yep, those 'requirements' not met to shareholders satisfaction seem to me to be: 1. Not being allowed to increase customer bills by 40% (of which well over 50% of the new total would NOT be investment) 2. 1 plus regulators not agreeing to letting them do 'things in their own time (ie carry on regardless)
    • As already mentioned freely available "credit scores" are fairly useless. All lenders have their own "credit scoring" system, that for obvious reasons they don't divulge. And they're "scored" differently to the freely available ones. As soon as they could, we've always encouraged our two children to use credit cards responsibly... Pay off in full, etc, to generate good history. It's paid off. At quite young ages, they have both obtained loans for cars, mortgage and their credit card limits are through the roof. Personally, I have shifted debt around a lot on credit cards (even financed a house purchase once at 0% 😉) and I've only ever been refused a credit card once, sorry twice by the same company, over many years. They must have something very different in their lending criteria. You're a tight one, Mr Branson.
    • Hi DX - quick question, what is the bank likely to do when they get my letter of change of address ? also what is the worst they can do? thanks J1L
  • 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

Abbey SPO - want to set it aside


tifo
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4282 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

  • 2 months later...
  • Replies 131
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

update ....

 

it got passed to an adjudicator who said:

 

1. Mortgage arrears charges are NOT WITHIN THEIR REMIT TO INVESTIGATE, so he'll look at the overall treatment the bank handed out to me.

2. He considers arrears charges to be fair because they're set at a market rate.

3. The charges were considered fair by the test case last year (same principle).

4. He can't look at the mortgage being sold through the shadow banking system.

5. The bank treated me fairly because it's my fault i went into arrears.

6. He won't look at the legal fees or the solicitor's actions.

7. The FSA fines and report on GMAC/Kensington etc had no impact on my complaint as those companies were fined for mistreating customers and not for charging an arrears fee, and my bank (major high street bank) has not had any fines imposed or been investigated.

 

I didn't agree with his findings and asked him to explain:

 

1. How he can call the charges fair without having investigated their actual cost (with a breakdown), especially if he says they're outside his remit.

2. Where it says they can't look at arrears charges (he pointed me to the FSA Handbook).

3. When did the test case look at mortgage account T's and C's or investigate their fees.

4. The solicitor was instructed by the bank as an agent and thus the bank is responsible for their actions.

5. Why does the bank sign its letters with "as administrator". And for whom?

 

And that if the charges are outside their remit then he cannot refer to them in his decision, not a single point, since its not something he can look at and i don't want his personal opinion on these charges. That would make his decision a bit harder to write up since it all consists of arrears charges!

 

I didn't get any answers from him. He's now left the fos and it will be allocated to another adjudicator.

 

Any advice for me and others taking arrears charges to the FOS and faced with this sort of response?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh for goodness sake.

 

My gut feel is to say just take them to court, but I've flagged this up for the site team for ideas and opinions.

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

Yep I spotted after I posted that this had provoked some discussion there. Must confess - I'm confused by FOS too.

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'm confused by FOS too.

 

But what can i do about it?

 

Thankfully i didn't get a decision in writing though the adjudicator did call me many times to discuss his assessment. When i questioned everything he was saying he went back to look at it again and again, though he seemed to know what he was talking about by quoting various things. But thanks to this and other forums I'm not so naive on the matter as well!

 

His main statement was that the charges haven't been assessed and deemed unfair by a court so everything else doesn't apply, not the FSA, not UTCCRs, nothing.

 

Now i find out he's left so will have to wait for it to go to another adjudicator, who may or may not use the last one's assessment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if you get an assessment along the lines of what this guy has said, there are so many holes in it I would suggest an appeal, although there is still the option of court to claim charges.

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

there is still the option of court to claim charges.

 

I've been advised not to do that as the bank may be able to claim their legal fees, even if they concede and refund all charges, because it says so in the agreement. Unfair as it seems and possibly a clause to be assessed under UTCCR.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if you get an assessment along the lines of what this guy has said, there are so many holes in it I would suggest an appeal.

 

I'll have to wait and see. I waited many months for it to be allocated to an adjudicator and then assessed so may have to wait a while again, though of course its not my fault their adjudicator left.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been advised not to do that as the bank may be able to claim their legal fees, even if they concede and refund all charges, because it says so in the agreement. Unfair as it seems and possibly a clause to be assessed under UTCCR.

 

There is a risk with any court action, although if it's under £5k it will probably in the small claims track when each side bears their own costs. If they want to concede and keep legal fees then just carry on to court and let the judge decide.

 

If it's over £5k there is certainly the risk of costs should you lose, but the supreme court judgment on bank charges, as you know, had nothing at all to do with mortgage charges. If you win you can claim your own costs back.

 

It may be worth checking out the CPUT regulations to see if there's anything in them that would help your case.

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

It may be worth checking out the CPUT regulations to see if there's anything in them that would help your case.

 

Like many others, mine is just a normal case of a consumer wanting penalty charges refunded. Why is this successful for some and so hard for me?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

had a decision again from a second adjudicator (first one left) but it's much the same as before, except that the bank 'seems' to have provided a breakdown which shows their costs as £35+ a go (i'd like to see it!) and the charges are therefore fair.

 

no comment on FSA 12.4.1R, the FSA fines on some mortgage lenders' unfair treatment of customers and that the UTCCR reg 5 and 6 cannot be used on a price basis and that i agreed to the T's and C's.

 

i don't understand why mortgage arrears charges are being seen like personal current account overdraft charges and not like credit card default charges with which they bear a resemblance (being charged for not making an agreed monthly payment).

 

i don't know what the FOS are doing but it doesn't seem right.

Link to post
Share on other sites

should i now take this to the court or wait for an Ombudsman decision (which will probably not change much).

 

i can work out the charges from my statements but not the cumulative interest on each charge as there have been different interest rates over the years. The bank won't send me this info, not even through the FOS, and i am told to make a DSAR request with the bank. So i wouldn't know what amount to claim.

 

can anyone help me with a likely POC?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you read this by Bankfodder?

 

Yes, i read that, but the FOS say none of it applies to my complaint.

 

2 FOS adjudicators have said:

 

the charges are fair because:

 

1. the bank has provided a breakdown

2. i agreed to the T's and C's

3. the bank applied them because of my conduct of the account (i missed payments)

4. reg 5 and 6 of the UTCCR do not apply as i can't challenge the charges on price

5. i cannot use s.140 of CCA (unfair relationship)

6. the FSA fines on other lenders are not relevant as they haven't fined my lender

7. the test case on personal account overdraft charges said all such charges are fair

8. they're set at a market rate

9. initially they said they do not investigate arrears mortgage charges

 

and much more, but the above are the main points.

 

so how are others getting their arrears charges back through the FOS?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I don't think there's any new advice or info I can think of.

 

Just a few questions though -

 

Who is the lender?

 

Is this a first or second mortgage?

 

When was it taken out?

 

Do you know if it's regulated?

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

it's Abbey/Santander ....

Is this why you think it's been securitised?

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

Is this why you think it's been securitised?

 

No, not because of the bank name, but because I know. They sign all their letters with "as administrator". And I know they use the Holmes brand to securitise .....

 

But apart from that, I believe i'm still entitled to receive a refund of arrears fees UNLESS the bank's true costs are £35+ (and i don't believe they are).

 

And the litigation referral and monitoring fees which the bank and solicitor have BOTH been applying.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Must admit I haven't got my head around the whole securitisation issue. I'll see if I can find someone with more knowledge of this to take a look.

 

Regarding the charges, just because FOS have turned you down doesn't mean that this isn't something that you can't claim via the court.

 

What's happening at the moment regarding possession proceedings?

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

Must admit I haven't got my head around the whole securitisation issue. I'll see if I can find someone with more knowledge of this to take a look.

 

Regarding the charges, just because FOS have turned you down doesn't mean that this isn't something that you can't claim via the court.

 

What's happening at the moment regarding possession proceedings?

 

The securitisation issue's been well discussed and the general consensus is that it's legal in the UK and the bank do nothing wrong. It's been challenged in the 'Pender' case.

 

On charges, the FOS won't send me any info, not a list of charges or other fees, not the breakdown etc. They want me to do a DSAR request if i want any info.

 

I've asked the adjudicator to review his findings, especially on reg 5 and 6 of UTCCR. This is because i say that charges are not a subject matter of the contract or in return for any service by the bank but a penalty charge following a breach of contract (to pay the monthly mortgage payment) and that reg 6(2) does not exclude any assessment under reg 5 unless the contract is in PIL under reg 7(1) and/or the term was individually negotiated. Under reg 5(4) the bank would need to prove this. So he needs to assess the whole contract under PIL. This is how the test case of 2009 proceeded and why the banks changed their terms and conditions in 2008 for the PIL assessment.

 

But in the end the FOS might say the bank has provided a breakdown so the charges are fair.

 

Much of what else i asked to be looked at, such as the bank/solicitor making me pay arrears charges (whether fair or not) as part of the arrears balance and the litigation/monitoring fees, have not been looked at.

 

There's no proceedings at the moment as they're on hold while the complaint is at the FOS. When/if the bank issue these again, i would dispute the balance as being wrong because of arrears charges and litigation/monitoring fees and that the bank is to provide a breakdown, or to ask for the contract to be assessed under PIL and s.140A of CCA.

Edited by tifo
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I guess that's one benefit of the FOS taking their own sweet time.

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

Well I guess that's one benefit of the FOS taking their own sweet time.

 

As i see it, the bank owe me more in charges and fees than i owe them in arrears.

 

And they haven't charges any arrears charges or other fees while the case is at the FOS so if there's a true cost of £35+ per month (as they're saying), are they losing money by not charging me? Or are they being 'nice'?

 

They insist they're right and the FOS agrees with them so why haven't they continued charging until told otherwise?

Link to post
Share on other sites

There were arguments that until the legality of bank charges was decided they shouldn't be added. It didn't carry much weight but maybe they're waiting for the final outcome of FOS. I have no idea what they have to do extra each month you're apparently in arrears though.

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...